He's Toast! Bob Mueller Agrees To Testify Before House Judiciary & Intel Committee July 17th

[Kilroy2]

Still you just repeat everything that I wrote but disagree on who started it.
The only point was Fusion GPS was hired by a republican to get dope on Trump and started the ball rolling once it starts rolling it expands
The beginning give you an understanding on where it began. ignoring it is just an inconvenient truth.

I'm curious...did any Republican pay Fusion GPS to create false "dope" on Trump? That's what the Clinton campaign paid them to do. It's a HUGE difference!

False dirt is in the eyes of the beholder

Steel dossier contain some information that was accurate and some which was not.

That didn't address my question, Kilroy. You point out that a Republican hired Fusion GPS to get "dope" on Trump...and I asked if that Republican paid Fusion GPS to create and put out phony "dossiers"?

Well as you know Trump got the nomination and at that point the information was no longer needed by repubs. The dossier was not phony as some information was verified to be true.

The dossier alleges:

· That Russia was responsible for the DNC email hacks[71][72][73]and the recent appearance of the stolen DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks,[71][74] and that the reason for using WikiLeaks was "plausible deniability".[75] (Dossier, pp. 7–8)

True

· That "the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team."[76][75] (Dossier, p. 8)

Well all we know for sure is Trump said " I hope Russia finds those missing emails and hours later there was a hacking attack on the DNC and other demos email accounts.

Trump tower meeting was set up to find dirt on Trump but it didn't pan out

After the emails were released, the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer informed the U.S. government that, in May 2016 at a London wine bar, Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos had told him that the Russian government had a large trove of Hillary Clinton emails that could potentially damage her presidential campaign.

· That after the emails were leaked to WikiLeaks, it was decided to not leak more, but to engage in misinformation: "Rather the tactics would be to spread rumours and misinformation about the content of what already had been leaked and make up new content."[77](Dossier, p. 15)

who knows but sounds reasonable. It is known that they had infiltrated the RNC servers but no information was every released by the hackers concerning republicans.

· That Trump's foreign policy adviser Carter Page had "conceived and promoted" the idea of "leaking the DNC e-mails to WikiLeaks during the Democratic Convention" "to swing supporters of Bernie SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP."[78][79][80] (Dossier, p. 17)

There was damning emails that made the DNC look bad especially when it concerned Bernie

· That the hacking of the DNC servers was performed by Romanian hackers ultimately controlled by Putin and paid by both Trump and Putin.[81][82] (Dossier, pp. 34–35)

well partial true with who did the hacking but I do not know if Putin or trump paid for it but obviously someone did

That Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague in August 2016,[71][83][84]where he arranged "deniable cash payments" to the hackers and sought "to cover up all traces of the hacking operation",[81][82] as well as "cover up ties between Trump and Russia, including Manafort's involvement in Ukraine

I believe that was false but I really do not know as I haven researched it.

So some of the dossier is True and some of it is false. But a dossier is nothing more than a collection of information during an investigation. The validity has to be verify by authorities if they are to be used in a court of law.

With all due respect...you have no more idea if it was the Russians who hacked the DNC servers or if it was someone who worked at the DNC and was outraged about the way the Clinton supporters in the DNC had treated Bernie Sanders. To be quite blunt...I lean towards the latter because it's the only reason I can think of why the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked servers. That person wouldn't have had to have been "paid" as you allege! They would have done so out of righteous anger. Tell me that there weren't a lot of pissed of Sanders people at that point of the campaign!

Your claim that Cohen had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague has been debunked long ago. Cohen has never BEEN to Prague and stated as such under oath. That's an example of Steele taking facts...like Cohen traveling to Europe...and then weaving that fact with lies...that Cohen met with Kremlin officials in Prague.

The dossiers were put out to compliant media outlets by Steele as legitimate. It wasn't until his ass was sued in British court by some of the people he'd defamed in the dossiers that Steele changed his tune and started saying that the dossiers were simply raw intelligence that hadn't been verified and shouldn't be taken at face value! Until he was put under oath, Steele was claiming what was in the dossiers was true...which of course is what he was PAID to do by the Clinton camp to smear Donald Trump right before the election!

It is well documented that it was the Russian. If you do not trust the US intelligences community then who do you trust the local spin masters who didn't investigate anything but have an opinion.

I never claimed or said that Cohen was in Praque as the dossier says. It appears to be false but hey I will admit that it appears to be inaccurate info and there is no verifiable truth to it. Cohen has denied it under oath so I do not have a problem with it. It is irrelevant .

I have said that SOME of the dossier points have been proven ie the Russian hacking of the DNC and Hillary associates. When you put this with the knowledge that the RNC was also hacked but no data was release it does make you go hmmmm.

Well that is his defense in a public court but people in the know do know what a dossier is. It's unsubstantial accounts. It is not a legal document that will hold up in court. Now if it defamed Russian then it is up to the court to decide.

 

[playtime]

That will be D-Day for Mueller. He's going to be ripped to shreds during cross examination by Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan, both American Patriots!



BREAKING: MUELLER AGREES TO TESTIFY PUBLICLY Before Joint Nadler and Schiff Led-Committees -- Hearing on July 17

i bet when donny heard that, he crapped his diaper....

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm curious...did any Republican pay Fusion GPS to create false "dope" on Trump? That's what the Clinton campaign paid them to do. It's a HUGE difference!

False dirt is in the eyes of the beholder

Steel dossier contain some information that was accurate and some which was not.

That didn't address my question, Kilroy. You point out that a Republican hired Fusion GPS to get "dope" on Trump...and I asked if that Republican paid Fusion GPS to create and put out phony "dossiers"?

Well as you know Trump got the nomination and at that point the information was no longer needed by repubs. The dossier was not phony as some information was verified to be true.

The dossier alleges:

· That Russia was responsible for the DNC email hacks[71][72][73]and the recent appearance of the stolen DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks,[71][74] and that the reason for using WikiLeaks was "plausible deniability".[75] (Dossier, pp. 7–8)

True

· That "the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team."[76][75] (Dossier, p. 8)

Well all we know for sure is Trump said " I hope Russia finds those missing emails and hours later there was a hacking attack on the DNC and other demos email accounts.

Trump tower meeting was set up to find dirt on Trump but it didn't pan out

After the emails were released, the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer informed the U.S. government that, in May 2016 at a London wine bar, Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos had told him that the Russian government had a large trove of Hillary Clinton emails that could potentially damage her presidential campaign.

· That after the emails were leaked to WikiLeaks, it was decided to not leak more, but to engage in misinformation: "Rather the tactics would be to spread rumours and misinformation about the content of what already had been leaked and make up new content."[77](Dossier, p. 15)

who knows but sounds reasonable. It is known that they had infiltrated the RNC servers but no information was every released by the hackers concerning republicans.

· That Trump's foreign policy adviser Carter Page had "conceived and promoted" the idea of "leaking the DNC e-mails to WikiLeaks during the Democratic Convention" "to swing supporters of Bernie SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP."[78][79][80] (Dossier, p. 17)

There was damning emails that made the DNC look bad especially when it concerned Bernie

· That the hacking of the DNC servers was performed by Romanian hackers ultimately controlled by Putin and paid by both Trump and Putin.[81][82] (Dossier, pp. 34–35)

well partial true with who did the hacking but I do not know if Putin or trump paid for it but obviously someone did

That Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague in August 2016,[71][83][84]where he arranged "deniable cash payments" to the hackers and sought "to cover up all traces of the hacking operation",[81][82] as well as "cover up ties between Trump and Russia, including Manafort's involvement in Ukraine

I believe that was false but I really do not know as I haven researched it.

So some of the dossier is True and some of it is false. But a dossier is nothing more than a collection of information during an investigation. The validity has to be verify by authorities if they are to be used in a court of law.

With all due respect...you have no more idea if it was the Russians who hacked the DNC servers or if it was someone who worked at the DNC and was outraged about the way the Clinton supporters in the DNC had treated Bernie Sanders. To be quite blunt...I lean towards the latter because it's the only reason I can think of why the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked servers. That person wouldn't have had to have been "paid" as you allege! They would have done so out of righteous anger. Tell me that there weren't a lot of pissed of Sanders people at that point of the campaign!

Your claim that Cohen had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague has been debunked long ago. Cohen has never BEEN to Prague and stated as such under oath. That's an example of Steele taking facts...like Cohen traveling to Europe...and then weaving that fact with lies...that Cohen met with Kremlin officials in Prague.

The dossiers were put out to compliant media outlets by Steele as legitimate. It wasn't until his ass was sued in British court by some of the people he'd defamed in the dossiers that Steele changed his tune and started saying that the dossiers were simply raw intelligence that hadn't been verified and shouldn't be taken at face value! Until he was put under oath, Steele was claiming what was in the dossiers was true...which of course is what he was PAID to do by the Clinton camp to smear Donald Trump right before the election!

It is well documented that it was the Russian. If you do not trust the US intelligences community then who do you trust the local spin masters who didn't investigate anything but have an opinion.

I never claimed or said that Cohen was in Praque as the dossier says. It appears to be false but hey I will admit that it appears to be inaccurate info and there is no verifiable truth to it. Cohen has denied it under oath so I do not have a problem with it. It is irrelevant .

I have said that SOME of the dossier points have been proven ie the Russian hacking of the DNC and Hillary associates. When you put this with the knowledge that the RNC was also hacked but no data was release it does make you go hmmmm.

Well that is his defense in a public court but people in the know do know what a dossier is. It's unsubstantial accounts. It is not a legal document that will hold up in court. Now if it defamed Russian then it is up to the court to decide.

I just proved that there is no such documentation.


2. The Hillary campaign screamed that they had been hacked, but refused to allow any government agencies to inspect the supposedly hacked servers

yet we know exact what happen. Russians operatives working for the Russian intelligence directorate, the GRU, sent dozens of targeted spearphishing emails in just five days to the work and personal accounts of Clinton Campaign employees and volunteers, as a way to break into the campaign’s computer systems. Using credentials that they stole they hacked into the DNC computers. Some 70 gigabytes of data were exfiltrated from Clinton’s campaign servers and some 300 gigabytes of data were obtained from the DNC’s network. Much of the information was eventually released thru various outlets including wikileak.

Still state your source where she denied for them to inspect the SUPPOSEDLY hacked servers. IT doen't make sense for her to not let them do their job especially when she was the victim of a crime.

Coincidence that they hack her computer and DNC computers within hours of Trump boasted that he hope Russian Finds those emails


. "Why wouldn’t the Democratic Committee allow the FBI to check their servers during the investigation of the DNC breaches during the 2016 election?

The DNC maintains there’s a simple answer to this question: According to the group, the FBI never asked to see their servers. But FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee back in January that the FBI did, in fact, issue “multiple requests at different levels” to the DNC to gain direct access to their computer systems and conduct their own forensic analysis.

....the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation. Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firm’s investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI.


.... 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



“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack



No hack possible!!!!!


And that's from the Liberal mag, The Nation......


"After studying Russian leadership for 40 years, focusing on Putin in particular, Cohen said it was hard for him believe that the Russian president would have done such a thing.

"I could find not one piece of factual evidence," he said. "The only evidence ever presented was a study hired by the Clintons -- the DNC -- to do an examination of their computers. They [Crowdstrike] concluded the Russians did it. Their report has fallen apart." He added, "Why didn't the FBI do their own investigation?"

Tucker pointed out that even Republicans say that seventeen U.S. intelligence agencies (including Coast Guard Intelligence!) have concluded that Russian intelligence was behind this.

"They say that, but it's bogus," Cohen argued. "When Clapper, the director of national intelligence, signed that report in January, technically he represents all seventeen. I'll bet you a dime to a nickel you couldn't get a guest on, unprepared, who could name ten of them. This figure -- seventeen -- is bogus!"
Prof. Cohen: Not One Piece of Factual Evidence That Russia 'Hacked the Election'

================================================

".... 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

===================================================



1. "Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told host Chuck Todd that he was not aware of evidence showing the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russian government to influence last November’s presidential election.

TODD: Well, that’s an important revelation at this point.

Let me ask you this, does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia officials?

CLAPPER: We did not include evidence in our report, and I say our, that’s NSA, FBI and CIA with my office, the director of national intelligence that had anything — that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was there no evidence of that including in our report.

TODD: I understand that, but does it exist?

CLAPPER: Not to my knowledge.

TODD: If it existed, it would have been in the report?

CLAPPER: This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government. But at the time, we had no evidence of such collusion.


TODD: But at this point, what’s not proven is the idea of collusion?

CLAPPER: that’s correct."
Fmr Obama DNI Clapper: Evidence of Trump-Russian Collusion Doesn't Exist to His 'Knowledge' - Breitbart









2. "While many Democrats frequently say Russia “hacked” the presidential election, National Security Administration Director Adm. Michael Rogers and FBI Director James Comey both confirmed today that Russian activities had no impact on tallying votes in states." FBI, NSA: 'No evidence' Russia manipulated US vote tallying - The American Mirror







3. Democrat Feinstein, too






7.Now for the technical proof that the Left lied.

“…decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate—the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed. Compounding this contradiction, Guccifer claimed to have run his hack from Romania, which, for numerous reasons technically called delivery overheads, would slow down the speed of a hack even further from maximum achievable speeds.

…a survey published August 3, 2016, by www.speedtest.net/reports is highly reliable and use it as their thumbnail index. It indicated that the highest average ISP speeds of first-half 2016 were achieved by Xfinity and Cox Communications. These speeds averaged 15.6 megabytes per second and 14.7 megabytes per second, respectively. Peak speeds at higher rates were recorded intermittently but still did not reach the required 22.7 megabytes per second.

“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack




Can't you stop yourself from lying????

What the heck are you.....a Liberal?????

 

[Oldstyle]

I'm curious...did any Republican pay Fusion GPS to create false "dope" on Trump? That's what the Clinton campaign paid them to do. It's a HUGE difference!

False dirt is in the eyes of the beholder

Steel dossier contain some information that was accurate and some which was not.

That didn't address my question, Kilroy. You point out that a Republican hired Fusion GPS to get "dope" on Trump...and I asked if that Republican paid Fusion GPS to create and put out phony "dossiers"?

Well as you know Trump got the nomination and at that point the information was no longer needed by repubs. The dossier was not phony as some information was verified to be true.

The dossier alleges:

· That Russia was responsible for the DNC email hacks[71][72][73]and the recent appearance of the stolen DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks,[71][74] and that the reason for using WikiLeaks was "plausible deniability".[75] (Dossier, pp. 7–8)

True

· That "the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team."[76][75] (Dossier, p. 8)

Well all we know for sure is Trump said " I hope Russia finds those missing emails and hours later there was a hacking attack on the DNC and other demos email accounts.

Trump tower meeting was set up to find dirt on Trump but it didn't pan out

After the emails were released, the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer informed the U.S. government that, in May 2016 at a London wine bar, Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos had told him that the Russian government had a large trove of Hillary Clinton emails that could potentially damage her presidential campaign.

· That after the emails were leaked to WikiLeaks, it was decided to not leak more, but to engage in misinformation: "Rather the tactics would be to spread rumours and misinformation about the content of what already had been leaked and make up new content."[77](Dossier, p. 15)

who knows but sounds reasonable. It is known that they had infiltrated the RNC servers but no information was every released by the hackers concerning republicans.

· That Trump's foreign policy adviser Carter Page had "conceived and promoted" the idea of "leaking the DNC e-mails to WikiLeaks during the Democratic Convention" "to swing supporters of Bernie SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP."[78][79][80] (Dossier, p. 17)

There was damning emails that made the DNC look bad especially when it concerned Bernie

· That the hacking of the DNC servers was performed by Romanian hackers ultimately controlled by Putin and paid by both Trump and Putin.[81][82] (Dossier, pp. 34–35)

well partial true with who did the hacking but I do not know if Putin or trump paid for it but obviously someone did

That Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague in August 2016,[71][83][84]where he arranged "deniable cash payments" to the hackers and sought "to cover up all traces of the hacking operation",[81][82] as well as "cover up ties between Trump and Russia, including Manafort's involvement in Ukraine

I believe that was false but I really do not know as I haven researched it.

So some of the dossier is True and some of it is false. But a dossier is nothing more than a collection of information during an investigation. The validity has to be verify by authorities if they are to be used in a court of law.

With all due respect...you have no more idea if it was the Russians who hacked the DNC servers or if it was someone who worked at the DNC and was outraged about the way the Clinton supporters in the DNC had treated Bernie Sanders. To be quite blunt...I lean towards the latter because it's the only reason I can think of why the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked servers. That person wouldn't have had to have been "paid" as you allege! They would have done so out of righteous anger. Tell me that there weren't a lot of pissed of Sanders people at that point of the campaign!

Your claim that Cohen had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague has been debunked long ago. Cohen has never BEEN to Prague and stated as such under oath. That's an example of Steele taking facts...like Cohen traveling to Europe...and then weaving that fact with lies...that Cohen met with Kremlin officials in Prague.

The dossiers were put out to compliant media outlets by Steele as legitimate. It wasn't until his ass was sued in British court by some of the people he'd defamed in the dossiers that Steele changed his tune and started saying that the dossiers were simply raw intelligence that hadn't been verified and shouldn't be taken at face value! Until he was put under oath, Steele was claiming what was in the dossiers was true...which of course is what he was PAID to do by the Clinton camp to smear Donald Trump right before the election!

It is well documented that it was the Russian. If you do not trust the US intelligences community then who do you trust the local spin masters who didn't investigate anything but have an opinion.

I never claimed or said that Cohen was in Praque as the dossier says. It appears to be false but hey I will admit that it appears to be inaccurate info and there is no verifiable truth to it. Cohen has denied it under oath so I do not have a problem with it. It is irrelevant .

I have said that SOME of the dossier points have been proven ie the Russian hacking of the DNC and Hillary associates. When you put this with the knowledge that the RNC was also hacked but no data was release it does make you go hmmmm.

Well that is his defense in a public court but people in the know do know what a dossier is. It's unsubstantial accounts. It is not a legal document that will hold up in court. Now if it defamed Russian then it is up to the court to decide.

Well documented where, Kilroy? Show me where that EVER took place! Do I trust an intelligence community led by Clapper, Comey and Brennan? No, as a matter of fact I DON'T trust them! They've all been shown to have lied under oath. Why would anyone trust them at this point?

As for the dossiers? (It's plural...something that seems to have escaped you!) Dossiers are a collection of information about a person or topic. In no way does dossier equate to "unsubstantial accounts" You've attempted to give it that definition to protect the veracity of Richard Steele! In this case the "dossiers" are a collection of phony information made up about a person!

 

[Kilroy2]

Well documented where, Kilroy? Show me where that EVER took place! Do I trust an intelligence community led by Clapper, Comey and Brennan? No, as a matter of fact I DON'T trust them! They've all been shown to have lied under oath. Why would anyone trust them at this point?

You do not trust the intelligence community yet you Trust Trump who has no experience or knowledge about how that can be done

The intelligence community is more that just 3 people and the research they do is reported to the head.

Yet Mueller indicted 12 Russian and if u read it they make the case for it. Still if u want trump to read it for you then good look with that
and I would imagine you don trust Mueller

if you are waiting for FOX to tell u then good luck with that

The only people who do not believe that the Russians were not involved are those who have a desire to believe in Trump

Still unscientific and read the above statements about Trumps ability to tell the truth

Do U trust intelligence community well Mueller pretty much confirmed that the Russians were involved with meddeling and hacking DNC and RNC.

As for the dossiers? (It's plural...something that seems to have escaped you!) Dossiers are a collection of information about a person or topic. In no way does dossier equate to "unsubstantial accounts" You've attempted to give it that definition to protect the veracity of Richard Steele! In this case the "dossiers" are a collection of phony information made up about a person!


Dossiers are a collection of information about a person or topic. In no way does dossier equate to "unsubstantial accounts"

okay so because someone says it then it must be factual

I am the person who has to go one step further and say unsubstantiated accounts is noting but hearsay, boasting, or lying but it could be the truth

Still to determine which it is you have to verify it using whatever means available to you. If you have no means then you just determine that you like that person and you believe him to be telling the truth

You could easily believe him to be lying or fudging the truth


Still if the truth is you goal for understanding then you have to verify what was said.

In a court of law it requires verification or a preponderance of evidence

He said , She said, Trump said, well if they all say the same thing you might believe them or if they all say different things then it might make you have to think

 

[PoliticalChic]

Well documented where, Kilroy? Show me where that EVER took place! Do I trust an intelligence community led by Clapper, Comey and Brennan? No, as a matter of fact I DON'T trust them! They've all been shown to have lied under oath. Why would anyone trust them at this point?

You do not trust the intelligence community yet you Trust Trump who has no experience or knowledge about how that can be done

The intelligence community is more that just 3 people and the research they do is reported to the head.

Yet Mueller indicted 12 Russian and if u read it they make the case for it. Still if u want trump to read it for you then good look with that
and I would imagine you don trust Mueller

if you are waiting for FOX to tell u then good luck with that

The only people who do not believe that the Russians were not involved are those who have a desire to believe in Trump

Still unscientific and read the above statements about Trumps ability to tell the truth

Do U trust intelligence community well Mueller pretty much confirmed that the Russians were involved with meddeling and hacking DNC and RNC.

As for the dossiers? (It's plural...something that seems to have escaped you!) Dossiers are a collection of information about a person or topic. In no way does dossier equate to "unsubstantial accounts" You've attempted to give it that definition to protect the veracity of Richard Steele! In this case the "dossiers" are a collection of phony information made up about a person!


Dossiers are a collection of information about a person or topic. In no way does dossier equate to "unsubstantial accounts"

okay so because someone says it then it must be factual

I am the person who has to go one step further and say unsubstantiated accounts is noting but hearsay, boasting, or lying but it could be the truth

Still to determine which it is you have to verify it using whatever means available to you. If you have no means then you just determine that you like that person and you believe him to be telling the truth

You could easily believe him to be lying or fudging the truth


Still if the truth is you goal for understanding then you have to verify what was said.

In a court of law it requires verification or a preponderance of evidence

He said , She said, Trump said, well if they all say the same thing you might believe them or if they all say different things then it might make you have to think

"You do not trust the intelligence community yet you Trust Trump who has no experience or knowledge about how that can be done."


I must stop saying "how stupid can you be?" as you seem to take it as a challenge.




The 'intelligence community,' the Deep State, is populated by Obamunists....

Here, from the former CIA Moscow Station head...


1. ".... the denizens of the Deep State that everyone in Washington likes to tell us doesn’t exist....made up of thousands of similarly credentialed, remarkably “un-diverse” civil servants and political appointees who saw themselves promoted rapidly during the eight years of the Obama administration. The appointees have left, but make no mistake — the progressive civil servants remain.


2. The present culture of the intelligence community and the shameless political shenanigans of the Obama administration combined to create this disaster. ....CIA leadership famously stood up to the Nixon administration when asked to domestically spy on Justice during Watergate, for example.

3. It seems that today we lack the character and the competence to ensure that the intelligence community honors the trust of the American people."
How the intel community was turned into a political weapon against President Trump



Please stop posting stupid stuff......and get Obama's shoe polish off your tongue.

Yechhhhh......

 

[SAYIT]

Sweet. All those redacted parts of his report can now be laid out to the public

So you think he will violate the law by revealing GJ info or are you just hoping he will?

I am so happy that he is going to do this. Say adios rumpy!

And you believe Mueller has evidence he forgot to put into the report?

I gotta tell you guys ... this Collusion Delusion was a scam from the start and that may well be Mueller's only significant July revelation.

BTW, we are just 10 days away from #900 of Trump's 1st term. I hope y'all are stocked up on tissues and valium ... there will be shortages.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sweet. All those redacted parts of his report can now be laid out to the public

So you think he will violate the law by revealing GJ info or are you just hoping he will?

I am so happy that he is going to do this. Say adios rumpy!

And you believe Mueller has evidence he forgot to put into the report?

I gotta tell you guys ... this Collusion Delusion was a scam from the start and that may well be Mueller's only significant July revelation.

BTW, we are just 10 days away from #900 of Trump's 1st term. I hope y'all are stocked up on tissues and valium ... there will be shortages.

I kinda like seeing the posts from those idiots, dripping with wishes that will never be fulfilled.


Reminds me of a book by a Japanese soldier who hid out in the Philippines for 30 years after the war was over.....

Funny in way, but really, really sad.

 

[Kilroy2]

False dirt is in the eyes of the beholder

Steel dossier contain some information that was accurate and some which was not.

That didn't address my question, Kilroy. You point out that a Republican hired Fusion GPS to get "dope" on Trump...and I asked if that Republican paid Fusion GPS to create and put out phony "dossiers"?

Well as you know Trump got the nomination and at that point the information was no longer needed by repubs. The dossier was not phony as some information was verified to be true.

The dossier alleges:

· That Russia was responsible for the DNC email hacks[71][72][73]and the recent appearance of the stolen DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks,[71][74] and that the reason for using WikiLeaks was "plausible deniability".[75] (Dossier, pp. 7–8)

True

· That "the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team."[76][75] (Dossier, p. 8)

Well all we know for sure is Trump said " I hope Russia finds those missing emails and hours later there was a hacking attack on the DNC and other demos email accounts.

Trump tower meeting was set up to find dirt on Trump but it didn't pan out

After the emails were released, the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer informed the U.S. government that, in May 2016 at a London wine bar, Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos had told him that the Russian government had a large trove of Hillary Clinton emails that could potentially damage her presidential campaign.

· That after the emails were leaked to WikiLeaks, it was decided to not leak more, but to engage in misinformation: "Rather the tactics would be to spread rumours and misinformation about the content of what already had been leaked and make up new content."[77](Dossier, p. 15)

who knows but sounds reasonable. It is known that they had infiltrated the RNC servers but no information was every released by the hackers concerning republicans.

· That Trump's foreign policy adviser Carter Page had "conceived and promoted" the idea of "leaking the DNC e-mails to WikiLeaks during the Democratic Convention" "to swing supporters of Bernie SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP."[78][79][80] (Dossier, p. 17)

There was damning emails that made the DNC look bad especially when it concerned Bernie

· That the hacking of the DNC servers was performed by Romanian hackers ultimately controlled by Putin and paid by both Trump and Putin.[81][82] (Dossier, pp. 34–35)

well partial true with who did the hacking but I do not know if Putin or trump paid for it but obviously someone did

That Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague in August 2016,[71][83][84]where he arranged "deniable cash payments" to the hackers and sought "to cover up all traces of the hacking operation",[81][82] as well as "cover up ties between Trump and Russia, including Manafort's involvement in Ukraine

I believe that was false but I really do not know as I haven researched it.

So some of the dossier is True and some of it is false. But a dossier is nothing more than a collection of information during an investigation. The validity has to be verify by authorities if they are to be used in a court of law.

With all due respect...you have no more idea if it was the Russians who hacked the DNC servers or if it was someone who worked at the DNC and was outraged about the way the Clinton supporters in the DNC had treated Bernie Sanders. To be quite blunt...I lean towards the latter because it's the only reason I can think of why the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked servers. That person wouldn't have had to have been "paid" as you allege! They would have done so out of righteous anger. Tell me that there weren't a lot of pissed of Sanders people at that point of the campaign!

Your claim that Cohen had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague has been debunked long ago. Cohen has never BEEN to Prague and stated as such under oath. That's an example of Steele taking facts...like Cohen traveling to Europe...and then weaving that fact with lies...that Cohen met with Kremlin officials in Prague.

The dossiers were put out to compliant media outlets by Steele as legitimate. It wasn't until his ass was sued in British court by some of the people he'd defamed in the dossiers that Steele changed his tune and started saying that the dossiers were simply raw intelligence that hadn't been verified and shouldn't be taken at face value! Until he was put under oath, Steele was claiming what was in the dossiers was true...which of course is what he was PAID to do by the Clinton camp to smear Donald Trump right before the election!

It is well documented that it was the Russian. If you do not trust the US intelligences community then who do you trust the local spin masters who didn't investigate anything but have an opinion.

I never claimed or said that Cohen was in Praque as the dossier says. It appears to be false but hey I will admit that it appears to be inaccurate info and there is no verifiable truth to it. Cohen has denied it under oath so I do not have a problem with it. It is irrelevant .

I have said that SOME of the dossier points have been proven ie the Russian hacking of the DNC and Hillary associates. When you put this with the knowledge that the RNC was also hacked but no data was release it does make you go hmmmm.

Well that is his defense in a public court but people in the know do know what a dossier is. It's unsubstantial accounts. It is not a legal document that will hold up in court. Now if it defamed Russian then it is up to the court to decide.

I just proved that there is no such documentation.


2. The Hillary campaign screamed that they had been hacked, but refused to allow any government agencies to inspect the supposedly hacked servers

yet we know exact what happen. Russians operatives working for the Russian intelligence directorate, the GRU, sent dozens of targeted spearphishing emails in just five days to the work and personal accounts of Clinton Campaign employees and volunteers, as a way to break into the campaign’s computer systems. Using credentials that they stole they hacked into the DNC computers. Some 70 gigabytes of data were exfiltrated from Clinton’s campaign servers and some 300 gigabytes of data were obtained from the DNC’s network. Much of the information was eventually released thru various outlets including wikileak.

Still state your source where she denied for them to inspect the SUPPOSEDLY hacked servers. IT doen't make sense for her to not let them do their job especially when she was the victim of a crime.

Coincidence that they hack her computer and DNC computers within hours of Trump boasted that he hope Russian Finds those emails


. "Why wouldn’t the Democratic Committee allow the FBI to check their servers during the investigation of the DNC breaches during the 2016 election?

The DNC maintains there’s a simple answer to this question: According to the group, the FBI never asked to see their servers. But FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee back in January that the FBI did, in fact, issue “multiple requests at different levels” to the DNC to gain direct access to their computer systems and conduct their own forensic analysis.

....the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation. Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firm’s investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI.


.... 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



“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack



No hack possible!!!!!


And that's from the Liberal mag, The Nation......


"After studying Russian leadership for 40 years, focusing on Putin in particular, Cohen said it was hard for him believe that the Russian president would have done such a thing.

"I could find not one piece of factual evidence," he said. "The only evidence ever presented was a study hired by the Clintons -- the DNC -- to do an examination of their computers. They [Crowdstrike] concluded the Russians did it. Their report has fallen apart." He added, "Why didn't the FBI do their own investigation?"

Tucker pointed out that even Republicans say that seventeen U.S. intelligence agencies (including Coast Guard Intelligence!) have concluded that Russian intelligence was behind this.

"They say that, but it's bogus," Cohen argued. "When Clapper, the director of national intelligence, signed that report in January, technically he represents all seventeen. I'll bet you a dime to a nickel you couldn't get a guest on, unprepared, who could name ten of them. This figure -- seventeen -- is bogus!"
Prof. Cohen: Not One Piece of Factual Evidence That Russia 'Hacked the Election'

================================================

".... 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

===================================================



1. "Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told host Chuck Todd that he was not aware of evidence showing the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russian government to influence last November’s presidential election.

TODD: Well, that’s an important revelation at this point.

Let me ask you this, does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia officials?

CLAPPER: We did not include evidence in our report, and I say our, that’s NSA, FBI and CIA with my office, the director of national intelligence that had anything — that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was there no evidence of that including in our report.

TODD: I understand that, but does it exist?

CLAPPER: Not to my knowledge.

TODD: If it existed, it would have been in the report?

CLAPPER: This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government. But at the time, we had no evidence of such collusion.


TODD: But at this point, what’s not proven is the idea of collusion?

CLAPPER: that’s correct."
Fmr Obama DNI Clapper: Evidence of Trump-Russian Collusion Doesn't Exist to His 'Knowledge' - Breitbart









2. "While many Democrats frequently say Russia “hacked” the presidential election, National Security Administration Director Adm. Michael Rogers and FBI Director James Comey both confirmed today that Russian activities had no impact on tallying votes in states." FBI, NSA: 'No evidence' Russia manipulated US vote tallying - The American Mirror







3. Democrat Feinstein, too






7.Now for the technical proof that the Left lied.

“…decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate—the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed. Compounding this contradiction, Guccifer claimed to have run his hack from Romania, which, for numerous reasons technically called delivery overheads, would slow down the speed of a hack even further from maximum achievable speeds.

…a survey published August 3, 2016, by www.speedtest.net/reports is highly reliable and use it as their thumbnail index. It indicated that the highest average ISP speeds of first-half 2016 were achieved by Xfinity and Cox Communications. These speeds averaged 15.6 megabytes per second and 14.7 megabytes per second, respectively. Peak speeds at higher rates were recorded intermittently but still did not reach the required 22.7 megabytes per second.

“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack




Can't you stop yourself from lying????

What the heck are you.....a Liberal?????

Can't you stop yourself from lying????

What the heck are you.....a Political Chic
?????

In the District Court Mueller team filed an indictment on 12 russians which contradicts what you posted

Unfortunately I am willing to believe in the intelligence agencies and those sworn to protect the US

If you believe in these stories that are floating around

In its analysis of the purported DNC hack, VIPS brought to bear the impressive talents of more than a dozen experienced, well-credentialed experts, including William Binney, a former NSA technical director and cofounder of the NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center; Edward Loomis, former NSA technical director for the Office of Signals Processing; and Skip Folden, a former IBM information technology manager. As the French would say, these are l’hommes serieux, as are the other computer-system designers, program architects, and analysts with whom they investigated the Clinton-DNC hack story.

As set forth in the article, VIPS’ investigative findings were nothing short of stunning.

First, VIPS concluded that the DNC data were not hacked by the Russians or anyone else accessing the server over the internet. Instead, the data were downloaded by means of a thumb drive or similar portable storage device physically attached to the DNC server.

My question is u say DNC did not even allow the FBI to look at there computers Yet VIPS was able to get this data

How did they get, they do not say but they did right a story

It is true that they did not allow the FBI to examine the computers instead they hired their on forensic experts

Yet this is what happen

Forensic evidence analyzed by several cybersecurity firms, CrowdStrike, Fidelis, and Mandiant (or FireEye), strongly indicates that two Russian intelligence agencies infiltrated the DNC computer systems. The American cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which removed the hacking programs, revealed a history of encounters with both groups and had already named them, calling one of them Cozy Bear and the other Fancy Bear, names which are used in the media

Still all what was discovered was turned over to the FBI and Comey in his testimony to Congress that it was acceptable and the FBI accepted their findings as being legitimate. There was no need for the FBI to investigate the servers as they knew that DNC and other agencies have been consistently hacked by Russians. The FBI accept the contractors forensic as being accurate.

The CIA said the foreign intelligence agents were Russian operatives previously known to the U.S.[6] CIA officials told U.S. Senators it was "quite clear" Russia's intentions were to help Trump.[36] Trump released a statement December 9, and disregarded the CIA conclusions.

Still why wasn't VIPS consulted and how did they get their information.

We may never know but the stories will continue and live on in repubs imagination.

Hmm who should I believe the US intelligent or a article well written but does not offer any supporting facts other than a few names of people
Still they had no access to the DNC unless it was clandestine

The think about your sources is how they just bounce back among themselves and never really tell you their source but hey I could be wrong

Mr. Mueller: Was the DNC Server Actually Hacked by the Russians? | The American Spectator | Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So you think he will violate the law by revealing GJ info or are you just hoping he will?

just hoping. far too much we do not know

 

[PoliticalChic]

That didn't address my question, Kilroy. You point out that a Republican hired Fusion GPS to get "dope" on Trump...and I asked if that Republican paid Fusion GPS to create and put out phony "dossiers"?

Well as you know Trump got the nomination and at that point the information was no longer needed by repubs. The dossier was not phony as some information was verified to be true.

The dossier alleges:

· That Russia was responsible for the DNC email hacks[71][72][73]and the recent appearance of the stolen DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks,[71][74] and that the reason for using WikiLeaks was "plausible deniability".[75] (Dossier, pp. 7–8)

True

· That "the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team."[76][75] (Dossier, p. 8)

Well all we know for sure is Trump said " I hope Russia finds those missing emails and hours later there was a hacking attack on the DNC and other demos email accounts.

Trump tower meeting was set up to find dirt on Trump but it didn't pan out

After the emails were released, the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer informed the U.S. government that, in May 2016 at a London wine bar, Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos had told him that the Russian government had a large trove of Hillary Clinton emails that could potentially damage her presidential campaign.

· That after the emails were leaked to WikiLeaks, it was decided to not leak more, but to engage in misinformation: "Rather the tactics would be to spread rumours and misinformation about the content of what already had been leaked and make up new content."[77](Dossier, p. 15)

who knows but sounds reasonable. It is known that they had infiltrated the RNC servers but no information was every released by the hackers concerning republicans.

· That Trump's foreign policy adviser Carter Page had "conceived and promoted" the idea of "leaking the DNC e-mails to WikiLeaks during the Democratic Convention" "to swing supporters of Bernie SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP."[78][79][80] (Dossier, p. 17)

There was damning emails that made the DNC look bad especially when it concerned Bernie

· That the hacking of the DNC servers was performed by Romanian hackers ultimately controlled by Putin and paid by both Trump and Putin.[81][82] (Dossier, pp. 34–35)

well partial true with who did the hacking but I do not know if Putin or trump paid for it but obviously someone did

That Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague in August 2016,[71][83][84]where he arranged "deniable cash payments" to the hackers and sought "to cover up all traces of the hacking operation",[81][82] as well as "cover up ties between Trump and Russia, including Manafort's involvement in Ukraine

I believe that was false but I really do not know as I haven researched it.

So some of the dossier is True and some of it is false. But a dossier is nothing more than a collection of information during an investigation. The validity has to be verify by authorities if they are to be used in a court of law.

With all due respect...you have no more idea if it was the Russians who hacked the DNC servers or if it was someone who worked at the DNC and was outraged about the way the Clinton supporters in the DNC had treated Bernie Sanders. To be quite blunt...I lean towards the latter because it's the only reason I can think of why the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked servers. That person wouldn't have had to have been "paid" as you allege! They would have done so out of righteous anger. Tell me that there weren't a lot of pissed of Sanders people at that point of the campaign!

Your claim that Cohen had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague has been debunked long ago. Cohen has never BEEN to Prague and stated as such under oath. That's an example of Steele taking facts...like Cohen traveling to Europe...and then weaving that fact with lies...that Cohen met with Kremlin officials in Prague.

The dossiers were put out to compliant media outlets by Steele as legitimate. It wasn't until his ass was sued in British court by some of the people he'd defamed in the dossiers that Steele changed his tune and started saying that the dossiers were simply raw intelligence that hadn't been verified and shouldn't be taken at face value! Until he was put under oath, Steele was claiming what was in the dossiers was true...which of course is what he was PAID to do by the Clinton camp to smear Donald Trump right before the election!

It is well documented that it was the Russian. If you do not trust the US intelligences community then who do you trust the local spin masters who didn't investigate anything but have an opinion.

I never claimed or said that Cohen was in Praque as the dossier says. It appears to be false but hey I will admit that it appears to be inaccurate info and there is no verifiable truth to it. Cohen has denied it under oath so I do not have a problem with it. It is irrelevant .

I have said that SOME of the dossier points have been proven ie the Russian hacking of the DNC and Hillary associates. When you put this with the knowledge that the RNC was also hacked but no data was release it does make you go hmmmm.

Well that is his defense in a public court but people in the know do know what a dossier is. It's unsubstantial accounts. It is not a legal document that will hold up in court. Now if it defamed Russian then it is up to the court to decide.

I just proved that there is no such documentation.


2. The Hillary campaign screamed that they had been hacked, but refused to allow any government agencies to inspect the supposedly hacked servers

yet we know exact what happen. Russians operatives working for the Russian intelligence directorate, the GRU, sent dozens of targeted spearphishing emails in just five days to the work and personal accounts of Clinton Campaign employees and volunteers, as a way to break into the campaign’s computer systems. Using credentials that they stole they hacked into the DNC computers. Some 70 gigabytes of data were exfiltrated from Clinton’s campaign servers and some 300 gigabytes of data were obtained from the DNC’s network. Much of the information was eventually released thru various outlets including wikileak.

Still state your source where she denied for them to inspect the SUPPOSEDLY hacked servers. IT doen't make sense for her to not let them do their job especially when she was the victim of a crime.

Coincidence that they hack her computer and DNC computers within hours of Trump boasted that he hope Russian Finds those emails


. "Why wouldn’t the Democratic Committee allow the FBI to check their servers during the investigation of the DNC breaches during the 2016 election?

The DNC maintains there’s a simple answer to this question: According to the group, the FBI never asked to see their servers. But FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee back in January that the FBI did, in fact, issue “multiple requests at different levels” to the DNC to gain direct access to their computer systems and conduct their own forensic analysis.

....the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation. Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firm’s investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI.


.... 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



“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack



No hack possible!!!!!


And that's from the Liberal mag, The Nation......


"After studying Russian leadership for 40 years, focusing on Putin in particular, Cohen said it was hard for him believe that the Russian president would have done such a thing.

"I could find not one piece of factual evidence," he said. "The only evidence ever presented was a study hired by the Clintons -- the DNC -- to do an examination of their computers. They [Crowdstrike] concluded the Russians did it. Their report has fallen apart." He added, "Why didn't the FBI do their own investigation?"

Tucker pointed out that even Republicans say that seventeen U.S. intelligence agencies (including Coast Guard Intelligence!) have concluded that Russian intelligence was behind this.

"They say that, but it's bogus," Cohen argued. "When Clapper, the director of national intelligence, signed that report in January, technically he represents all seventeen. I'll bet you a dime to a nickel you couldn't get a guest on, unprepared, who could name ten of them. This figure -- seventeen -- is bogus!"
Prof. Cohen: Not One Piece of Factual Evidence That Russia 'Hacked the Election'

================================================

".... 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

===================================================



1. "Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told host Chuck Todd that he was not aware of evidence showing the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russian government to influence last November’s presidential election.

TODD: Well, that’s an important revelation at this point.

Let me ask you this, does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia officials?

CLAPPER: We did not include evidence in our report, and I say our, that’s NSA, FBI and CIA with my office, the director of national intelligence that had anything — that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was there no evidence of that including in our report.

TODD: I understand that, but does it exist?

CLAPPER: Not to my knowledge.

TODD: If it existed, it would have been in the report?

CLAPPER: This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government. But at the time, we had no evidence of such collusion.


TODD: But at this point, what’s not proven is the idea of collusion?

CLAPPER: that’s correct."
Fmr Obama DNI Clapper: Evidence of Trump-Russian Collusion Doesn't Exist to His 'Knowledge' - Breitbart









2. "While many Democrats frequently say Russia “hacked” the presidential election, National Security Administration Director Adm. Michael Rogers and FBI Director James Comey both confirmed today that Russian activities had no impact on tallying votes in states." FBI, NSA: 'No evidence' Russia manipulated US vote tallying - The American Mirror







3. Democrat Feinstein, too






7.Now for the technical proof that the Left lied.

“…decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate—the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed. Compounding this contradiction, Guccifer claimed to have run his hack from Romania, which, for numerous reasons technically called delivery overheads, would slow down the speed of a hack even further from maximum achievable speeds.

…a survey published August 3, 2016, by www.speedtest.net/reports is highly reliable and use it as their thumbnail index. It indicated that the highest average ISP speeds of first-half 2016 were achieved by Xfinity and Cox Communications. These speeds averaged 15.6 megabytes per second and 14.7 megabytes per second, respectively. Peak speeds at higher rates were recorded intermittently but still did not reach the required 22.7 megabytes per second.

“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack




Can't you stop yourself from lying????

What the heck are you.....a Liberal?????

Can't you stop yourself from lying????

What the heck are you.....a Political Chic
?????

In the District Court Mueller team filed an indictment on 12 russians which contradicts what you posted

Unfortunately I am willing to believe in the intelligence agencies and those sworn to protect the US

If you believe in these stories that are floating around

In its analysis of the purported DNC hack, VIPS brought to bear the impressive talents of more than a dozen experienced, well-credentialed experts, including William Binney, a former NSA technical director and cofounder of the NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center; Edward Loomis, former NSA technical director for the Office of Signals Processing; and Skip Folden, a former IBM information technology manager. As the French would say, these are l’hommes serieux, as are the other computer-system designers, program architects, and analysts with whom they investigated the Clinton-DNC hack story.

As set forth in the article, VIPS’ investigative findings were nothing short of stunning.

First, VIPS concluded that the DNC data were not hacked by the Russians or anyone else accessing the server over the internet. Instead, the data were downloaded by means of a thumb drive or similar portable storage device physically attached to the DNC server.

My question is u say DNC did not even allow the FBI to look at there computers Yet VIPS was able to get this data

How did they get, they do not say but they did right a story

It is true that they did not allow the FBI to examine the computers instead they hired their on forensic experts

Yet this is what happen

Forensic evidence analyzed by several cybersecurity firms, CrowdStrike, Fidelis, and Mandiant (or FireEye), strongly indicates that two Russian intelligence agencies infiltrated the DNC computer systems. The American cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which removed the hacking programs, revealed a history of encounters with both groups and had already named them, calling one of them Cozy Bear and the other Fancy Bear, names which are used in the media

Still all what was discovered was turned over to the FBI and Comey in his testimony to Congress that it was acceptable and the FBI accepted their findings as being legitimate. There was no need for the FBI to investigate the servers as they knew that DNC and other agencies have been consistently hacked by Russians. The FBI accept the contractors forensic as being accurate.

The CIA said the foreign intelligence agents were Russian operatives previously known to the U.S.[6] CIA officials told U.S. Senators it was "quite clear" Russia's intentions were to help Trump.[36] Trump released a statement December 9, and disregarded the CIA conclusions.

Still why wasn't VIPS consulted and how did they get their information.

We may never know but the stories will continue and live on in repubs imagination.

Hmm who should I believe the US intelligent or a article well written but does not offer any supporting facts other than a few names of people
Still they had no access to the DNC unless it was clandestine

The think about your sources is how they just bounce back among themselves and never really tell you their source but hey I could be wrong

Mr. Mueller: Was the DNC Server Actually Hacked by the Russians? | The American Spectator | Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

Where's the lie?

Can't find any?

 

[PoliticalChic]

So you think he will violate the law by revealing GJ info or are you just hoping he will?

just hoping. far too much we do not know

"far too much we do not know"


Speaking for yourself, of course.

 

[SAYIT]

Sweet. All those redacted parts of his report can now be laid out to the public

So you think he will violate the law by revealing GJ info or are you just hoping he will?

I am so happy that he is going to do this. Say adios rumpy!

And you believe Mueller has evidence he forgot to put into the report?

I gotta tell you guys ... this Collusion Delusion was a scam from the start and that may well be Mueller's only significant July revelation.

BTW, we are just 10 days away from #900 of Trump's 1st term. I hope y'all are stocked up on tissues and valium ... there will be shortages.

I kinda like seeing the posts from those idiots, dripping with wishes that will never be fulfilled.


Reminds me of a book by a Japanese soldier who hid out in the Philippines for 30 years after the war was over.....

Funny in way, but really, really sad.

They remind me of how tenaciously the 9/11 conspiracy theorists clung to that religion and how - after years of hysteria - they gave up and quietly slithered away. If nothing else they were passionate and entertaining as well as desperately gullible and very stupid.

 

[Kilroy2]

Well as you know Trump got the nomination and at that point the information was no longer needed by repubs. The dossier was not phony as some information was verified to be true.

The dossier alleges:

· That Russia was responsible for the DNC email hacks[71][72][73]and the recent appearance of the stolen DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks,[71][74] and that the reason for using WikiLeaks was "plausible deniability".[75] (Dossier, pp. 7–8)

True

· That "the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team."[76][75] (Dossier, p. 8)

Well all we know for sure is Trump said " I hope Russia finds those missing emails and hours later there was a hacking attack on the DNC and other demos email accounts.

Trump tower meeting was set up to find dirt on Trump but it didn't pan out

After the emails were released, the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer informed the U.S. government that, in May 2016 at a London wine bar, Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos had told him that the Russian government had a large trove of Hillary Clinton emails that could potentially damage her presidential campaign.

· That after the emails were leaked to WikiLeaks, it was decided to not leak more, but to engage in misinformation: "Rather the tactics would be to spread rumours and misinformation about the content of what already had been leaked and make up new content."[77](Dossier, p. 15)

who knows but sounds reasonable. It is known that they had infiltrated the RNC servers but no information was every released by the hackers concerning republicans.

· That Trump's foreign policy adviser Carter Page had "conceived and promoted" the idea of "leaking the DNC e-mails to WikiLeaks during the Democratic Convention" "to swing supporters of Bernie SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP."[78][79][80] (Dossier, p. 17)

There was damning emails that made the DNC look bad especially when it concerned Bernie

· That the hacking of the DNC servers was performed by Romanian hackers ultimately controlled by Putin and paid by both Trump and Putin.[81][82] (Dossier, pp. 34–35)

well partial true with who did the hacking but I do not know if Putin or trump paid for it but obviously someone did

That Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague in August 2016,[71][83][84]where he arranged "deniable cash payments" to the hackers and sought "to cover up all traces of the hacking operation",[81][82] as well as "cover up ties between Trump and Russia, including Manafort's involvement in Ukraine

I believe that was false but I really do not know as I haven researched it.

So some of the dossier is True and some of it is false. But a dossier is nothing more than a collection of information during an investigation. The validity has to be verify by authorities if they are to be used in a court of law.

With all due respect...you have no more idea if it was the Russians who hacked the DNC servers or if it was someone who worked at the DNC and was outraged about the way the Clinton supporters in the DNC had treated Bernie Sanders. To be quite blunt...I lean towards the latter because it's the only reason I can think of why the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked servers. That person wouldn't have had to have been "paid" as you allege! They would have done so out of righteous anger. Tell me that there weren't a lot of pissed of Sanders people at that point of the campaign!

Your claim that Cohen had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague has been debunked long ago. Cohen has never BEEN to Prague and stated as such under oath. That's an example of Steele taking facts...like Cohen traveling to Europe...and then weaving that fact with lies...that Cohen met with Kremlin officials in Prague.

The dossiers were put out to compliant media outlets by Steele as legitimate. It wasn't until his ass was sued in British court by some of the people he'd defamed in the dossiers that Steele changed his tune and started saying that the dossiers were simply raw intelligence that hadn't been verified and shouldn't be taken at face value! Until he was put under oath, Steele was claiming what was in the dossiers was true...which of course is what he was PAID to do by the Clinton camp to smear Donald Trump right before the election!

It is well documented that it was the Russian. If you do not trust the US intelligences community then who do you trust the local spin masters who didn't investigate anything but have an opinion.

I never claimed or said that Cohen was in Praque as the dossier says. It appears to be false but hey I will admit that it appears to be inaccurate info and there is no verifiable truth to it. Cohen has denied it under oath so I do not have a problem with it. It is irrelevant .

I have said that SOME of the dossier points have been proven ie the Russian hacking of the DNC and Hillary associates. When you put this with the knowledge that the RNC was also hacked but no data was release it does make you go hmmmm.

Well that is his defense in a public court but people in the know do know what a dossier is. It's unsubstantial accounts. It is not a legal document that will hold up in court. Now if it defamed Russian then it is up to the court to decide.

I just proved that there is no such documentation.


2. The Hillary campaign screamed that they had been hacked, but refused to allow any government agencies to inspect the supposedly hacked servers

yet we know exact what happen. Russians operatives working for the Russian intelligence directorate, the GRU, sent dozens of targeted spearphishing emails in just five days to the work and personal accounts of Clinton Campaign employees and volunteers, as a way to break into the campaign’s computer systems. Using credentials that they stole they hacked into the DNC computers. Some 70 gigabytes of data were exfiltrated from Clinton’s campaign servers and some 300 gigabytes of data were obtained from the DNC’s network. Much of the information was eventually released thru various outlets including wikileak.

Still state your source where she denied for them to inspect the SUPPOSEDLY hacked servers. IT doen't make sense for her to not let them do their job especially when she was the victim of a crime.

Coincidence that they hack her computer and DNC computers within hours of Trump boasted that he hope Russian Finds those emails


. "Why wouldn’t the Democratic Committee allow the FBI to check their servers during the investigation of the DNC breaches during the 2016 election?

The DNC maintains there’s a simple answer to this question: According to the group, the FBI never asked to see their servers. But FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee back in January that the FBI did, in fact, issue “multiple requests at different levels” to the DNC to gain direct access to their computer systems and conduct their own forensic analysis.

....the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation. Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firm’s investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI.


.... 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



“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack



No hack possible!!!!!


And that's from the Liberal mag, The Nation......


"After studying Russian leadership for 40 years, focusing on Putin in particular, Cohen said it was hard for him believe that the Russian president would have done such a thing.

"I could find not one piece of factual evidence," he said. "The only evidence ever presented was a study hired by the Clintons -- the DNC -- to do an examination of their computers. They [Crowdstrike] concluded the Russians did it. Their report has fallen apart." He added, "Why didn't the FBI do their own investigation?"

Tucker pointed out that even Republicans say that seventeen U.S. intelligence agencies (including Coast Guard Intelligence!) have concluded that Russian intelligence was behind this.

"They say that, but it's bogus," Cohen argued. "When Clapper, the director of national intelligence, signed that report in January, technically he represents all seventeen. I'll bet you a dime to a nickel you couldn't get a guest on, unprepared, who could name ten of them. This figure -- seventeen -- is bogus!"
Prof. Cohen: Not One Piece of Factual Evidence That Russia 'Hacked the Election'

================================================

".... 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

===================================================



1. "Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told host Chuck Todd that he was not aware of evidence showing the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russian government to influence last November’s presidential election.

TODD: Well, that’s an important revelation at this point.

Let me ask you this, does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia officials?

CLAPPER: We did not include evidence in our report, and I say our, that’s NSA, FBI and CIA with my office, the director of national intelligence that had anything — that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was there no evidence of that including in our report.

TODD: I understand that, but does it exist?

CLAPPER: Not to my knowledge.

TODD: If it existed, it would have been in the report?

CLAPPER: This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government. But at the time, we had no evidence of such collusion.


TODD: But at this point, what’s not proven is the idea of collusion?

CLAPPER: that’s correct."
Fmr Obama DNI Clapper: Evidence of Trump-Russian Collusion Doesn't Exist to His 'Knowledge' - Breitbart









2. "While many Democrats frequently say Russia “hacked” the presidential election, National Security Administration Director Adm. Michael Rogers and FBI Director James Comey both confirmed today that Russian activities had no impact on tallying votes in states." FBI, NSA: 'No evidence' Russia manipulated US vote tallying - The American Mirror







3. Democrat Feinstein, too






7.Now for the technical proof that the Left lied.

“…decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate—the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed. Compounding this contradiction, Guccifer claimed to have run his hack from Romania, which, for numerous reasons technically called delivery overheads, would slow down the speed of a hack even further from maximum achievable speeds.

…a survey published August 3, 2016, by www.speedtest.net/reports is highly reliable and use it as their thumbnail index. It indicated that the highest average ISP speeds of first-half 2016 were achieved by Xfinity and Cox Communications. These speeds averaged 15.6 megabytes per second and 14.7 megabytes per second, respectively. Peak speeds at higher rates were recorded intermittently but still did not reach the required 22.7 megabytes per second.

“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack




Can't you stop yourself from lying????

What the heck are you.....a Liberal?????

Can't you stop yourself from lying????

What the heck are you.....a Political Chic
?????

In the District Court Mueller team filed an indictment on 12 russians which contradicts what you posted

Unfortunately I am willing to believe in the intelligence agencies and those sworn to protect the US

If you believe in these stories that are floating around

In its analysis of the purported DNC hack, VIPS brought to bear the impressive talents of more than a dozen experienced, well-credentialed experts, including William Binney, a former NSA technical director and cofounder of the NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center; Edward Loomis, former NSA technical director for the Office of Signals Processing; and Skip Folden, a former IBM information technology manager. As the French would say, these are l’hommes serieux, as are the other computer-system designers, program architects, and analysts with whom they investigated the Clinton-DNC hack story.

As set forth in the article, VIPS’ investigative findings were nothing short of stunning.

First, VIPS concluded that the DNC data were not hacked by the Russians or anyone else accessing the server over the internet. Instead, the data were downloaded by means of a thumb drive or similar portable storage device physically attached to the DNC server.

My question is u say DNC did not even allow the FBI to look at there computers Yet VIPS was able to get this data

How did they get, they do not say but they did right a story

It is true that they did not allow the FBI to examine the computers instead they hired their on forensic experts

Yet this is what happen

Forensic evidence analyzed by several cybersecurity firms, CrowdStrike, Fidelis, and Mandiant (or FireEye), strongly indicates that two Russian intelligence agencies infiltrated the DNC computer systems. The American cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which removed the hacking programs, revealed a history of encounters with both groups and had already named them, calling one of them Cozy Bear and the other Fancy Bear, names which are used in the media

Still all what was discovered was turned over to the FBI and Comey in his testimony to Congress that it was acceptable and the FBI accepted their findings as being legitimate. There was no need for the FBI to investigate the servers as they knew that DNC and other agencies have been consistently hacked by Russians. The FBI accept the contractors forensic as being accurate.

The CIA said the foreign intelligence agents were Russian operatives previously known to the U.S.[6] CIA officials told U.S. Senators it was "quite clear" Russia's intentions were to help Trump.[36] Trump released a statement December 9, and disregarded the CIA conclusions.

Still why wasn't VIPS consulted and how did they get their information.

We may never know but the stories will continue and live on in repubs imagination.

Hmm who should I believe the US intelligent or a article well written but does not offer any supporting facts other than a few names of people
Still they had no access to the DNC unless it was clandestine

The think about your sources is how they just bounce back among themselves and never really tell you their source but hey I could be wrong

Mr. Mueller: Was the DNC Server Actually Hacked by the Russians? | The American Spectator | Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

Where's the lie?

Can't find any?

Of course you can't when there are no sources then u just got to believe what is being read.

 

[SAYIT]

So you think he will violate the law by revealing GJ info or are you just hoping he will?

just hoping. far too much we do not know

"far too much we do not know"


Speaking for yourself, of course.

 

[Kilroy2]

Well documented where, Kilroy? Show me where that EVER took place! Do I trust an intelligence community led by Clapper, Comey and Brennan? No, as a matter of fact I DON'T trust them! They've all been shown to have lied under oath. Why would anyone trust them at this point?

You do not trust the intelligence community yet you Trust Trump who has no experience or knowledge about how that can be done

The intelligence community is more that just 3 people and the research they do is reported to the head.

Yet Mueller indicted 12 Russian and if u read it they make the case for it. Still if u want trump to read it for you then good look with that
and I would imagine you don trust Mueller

if you are waiting for FOX to tell u then good luck with that

The only people who do not believe that the Russians were not involved are those who have a desire to believe in Trump

Still unscientific and read the above statements about Trumps ability to tell the truth

Do U trust intelligence community well Mueller pretty much confirmed that the Russians were involved with meddeling and hacking DNC and RNC.

As for the dossiers? (It's plural...something that seems to have escaped you!) Dossiers are a collection of information about a person or topic. In no way does dossier equate to "unsubstantial accounts" You've attempted to give it that definition to protect the veracity of Richard Steele! In this case the "dossiers" are a collection of phony information made up about a person!


Dossiers are a collection of information about a person or topic. In no way does dossier equate to "unsubstantial accounts"

okay so because someone says it then it must be factual

I am the person who has to go one step further and say unsubstantiated accounts is noting but hearsay, boasting, or lying but it could be the truth

Still to determine which it is you have to verify it using whatever means available to you. If you have no means then you just determine that you like that person and you believe him to be telling the truth

You could easily believe him to be lying or fudging the truth


Still if the truth is you goal for understanding then you have to verify what was said.

In a court of law it requires verification or a preponderance of evidence

He said , She said, Trump said, well if they all say the same thing you might believe them or if they all say different things then it might make you have to think

"You do not trust the intelligence community yet you Trust Trump who has no experience or knowledge about how that can be done."


I must stop saying "how stupid can you be?" as you seem to take it as a challenge.




The 'intelligence community,' the Deep State, is populated by Obamunists....

Here, from the former CIA Moscow Station head...


1. ".... the denizens of the Deep State that everyone in Washington likes to tell us doesn’t exist....made up of thousands of similarly credentialed, remarkably “un-diverse” civil servants and political appointees who saw themselves promoted rapidly during the eight years of the Obama administration. The appointees have left, but make no mistake — the progressive civil servants remain.


2. The present culture of the intelligence community and the shameless political shenanigans of the Obama administration combined to create this disaster. ....CIA leadership famously stood up to the Nixon administration when asked to domestically spy on Justice during Watergate, for example.

3. It seems that today we lack the character and the competence to ensure that the intelligence community honors the trust of the American people."
How the intel community was turned into a political weapon against President Trump



Please stop posting stupid stuff......and get Obama's shoe polish off your tongue.

Yechhhhh......

Except who is the one head of the Deep State now

A guy who wants to be a politician but is finding out that it is harder than being a liar. when everyone sticks a microphone in ur face and are force to say something intelligent.

 

[PoliticalChic]

With all due respect...you have no more idea if it was the Russians who hacked the DNC servers or if it was someone who worked at the DNC and was outraged about the way the Clinton supporters in the DNC had treated Bernie Sanders. To be quite blunt...I lean towards the latter because it's the only reason I can think of why the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked servers. That person wouldn't have had to have been "paid" as you allege! They would have done so out of righteous anger. Tell me that there weren't a lot of pissed of Sanders people at that point of the campaign!

Your claim that Cohen had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague has been debunked long ago. Cohen has never BEEN to Prague and stated as such under oath. That's an example of Steele taking facts...like Cohen traveling to Europe...and then weaving that fact with lies...that Cohen met with Kremlin officials in Prague.

The dossiers were put out to compliant media outlets by Steele as legitimate. It wasn't until his ass was sued in British court by some of the people he'd defamed in the dossiers that Steele changed his tune and started saying that the dossiers were simply raw intelligence that hadn't been verified and shouldn't be taken at face value! Until he was put under oath, Steele was claiming what was in the dossiers was true...which of course is what he was PAID to do by the Clinton camp to smear Donald Trump right before the election!

It is well documented that it was the Russian. If you do not trust the US intelligences community then who do you trust the local spin masters who didn't investigate anything but have an opinion.

I never claimed or said that Cohen was in Praque as the dossier says. It appears to be false but hey I will admit that it appears to be inaccurate info and there is no verifiable truth to it. Cohen has denied it under oath so I do not have a problem with it. It is irrelevant .

I have said that SOME of the dossier points have been proven ie the Russian hacking of the DNC and Hillary associates. When you put this with the knowledge that the RNC was also hacked but no data was release it does make you go hmmmm.

Well that is his defense in a public court but people in the know do know what a dossier is. It's unsubstantial accounts. It is not a legal document that will hold up in court. Now if it defamed Russian then it is up to the court to decide.

I just proved that there is no such documentation.


2. The Hillary campaign screamed that they had been hacked, but refused to allow any government agencies to inspect the supposedly hacked servers

yet we know exact what happen. Russians operatives working for the Russian intelligence directorate, the GRU, sent dozens of targeted spearphishing emails in just five days to the work and personal accounts of Clinton Campaign employees and volunteers, as a way to break into the campaign’s computer systems. Using credentials that they stole they hacked into the DNC computers. Some 70 gigabytes of data were exfiltrated from Clinton’s campaign servers and some 300 gigabytes of data were obtained from the DNC’s network. Much of the information was eventually released thru various outlets including wikileak.

Still state your source where she denied for them to inspect the SUPPOSEDLY hacked servers. IT doen't make sense for her to not let them do their job especially when she was the victim of a crime.

Coincidence that they hack her computer and DNC computers within hours of Trump boasted that he hope Russian Finds those emails


. "Why wouldn’t the Democratic Committee allow the FBI to check their servers during the investigation of the DNC breaches during the 2016 election?

The DNC maintains there’s a simple answer to this question: According to the group, the FBI never asked to see their servers. But FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee back in January that the FBI did, in fact, issue “multiple requests at different levels” to the DNC to gain direct access to their computer systems and conduct their own forensic analysis.

....the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation. Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firm’s investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI.


.... 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



“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack



No hack possible!!!!!


And that's from the Liberal mag, The Nation......


"After studying Russian leadership for 40 years, focusing on Putin in particular, Cohen said it was hard for him believe that the Russian president would have done such a thing.

"I could find not one piece of factual evidence," he said. "The only evidence ever presented was a study hired by the Clintons -- the DNC -- to do an examination of their computers. They [Crowdstrike] concluded the Russians did it. Their report has fallen apart." He added, "Why didn't the FBI do their own investigation?"

Tucker pointed out that even Republicans say that seventeen U.S. intelligence agencies (including Coast Guard Intelligence!) have concluded that Russian intelligence was behind this.

"They say that, but it's bogus," Cohen argued. "When Clapper, the director of national intelligence, signed that report in January, technically he represents all seventeen. I'll bet you a dime to a nickel you couldn't get a guest on, unprepared, who could name ten of them. This figure -- seventeen -- is bogus!"
Prof. Cohen: Not One Piece of Factual Evidence That Russia 'Hacked the Election'

================================================

".... 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

===================================================



1. "Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told host Chuck Todd that he was not aware of evidence showing the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russian government to influence last November’s presidential election.

TODD: Well, that’s an important revelation at this point.

Let me ask you this, does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia officials?

CLAPPER: We did not include evidence in our report, and I say our, that’s NSA, FBI and CIA with my office, the director of national intelligence that had anything — that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was there no evidence of that including in our report.

TODD: I understand that, but does it exist?

CLAPPER: Not to my knowledge.

TODD: If it existed, it would have been in the report?

CLAPPER: This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government. But at the time, we had no evidence of such collusion.


TODD: But at this point, what’s not proven is the idea of collusion?

CLAPPER: that’s correct."
Fmr Obama DNI Clapper: Evidence of Trump-Russian Collusion Doesn't Exist to His 'Knowledge' - Breitbart









2. "While many Democrats frequently say Russia “hacked” the presidential election, National Security Administration Director Adm. Michael Rogers and FBI Director James Comey both confirmed today that Russian activities had no impact on tallying votes in states." FBI, NSA: 'No evidence' Russia manipulated US vote tallying - The American Mirror







3. Democrat Feinstein, too






7.Now for the technical proof that the Left lied.

“…decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate—the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed. Compounding this contradiction, Guccifer claimed to have run his hack from Romania, which, for numerous reasons technically called delivery overheads, would slow down the speed of a hack even further from maximum achievable speeds.

…a survey published August 3, 2016, by www.speedtest.net/reports is highly reliable and use it as their thumbnail index. It indicated that the highest average ISP speeds of first-half 2016 were achieved by Xfinity and Cox Communications. These speeds averaged 15.6 megabytes per second and 14.7 megabytes per second, respectively. Peak speeds at higher rates were recorded intermittently but still did not reach the required 22.7 megabytes per second.

“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack




Can't you stop yourself from lying????

What the heck are you.....a Liberal?????

Can't you stop yourself from lying????

What the heck are you.....a Political Chic
?????

In the District Court Mueller team filed an indictment on 12 russians which contradicts what you posted

Unfortunately I am willing to believe in the intelligence agencies and those sworn to protect the US

If you believe in these stories that are floating around

In its analysis of the purported DNC hack, VIPS brought to bear the impressive talents of more than a dozen experienced, well-credentialed experts, including William Binney, a former NSA technical director and cofounder of the NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center; Edward Loomis, former NSA technical director for the Office of Signals Processing; and Skip Folden, a former IBM information technology manager. As the French would say, these are l’hommes serieux, as are the other computer-system designers, program architects, and analysts with whom they investigated the Clinton-DNC hack story.

As set forth in the article, VIPS’ investigative findings were nothing short of stunning.

First, VIPS concluded that the DNC data were not hacked by the Russians or anyone else accessing the server over the internet. Instead, the data were downloaded by means of a thumb drive or similar portable storage device physically attached to the DNC server.

My question is u say DNC did not even allow the FBI to look at there computers Yet VIPS was able to get this data

How did they get, they do not say but they did right a story

It is true that they did not allow the FBI to examine the computers instead they hired their on forensic experts

Yet this is what happen

Forensic evidence analyzed by several cybersecurity firms, CrowdStrike, Fidelis, and Mandiant (or FireEye), strongly indicates that two Russian intelligence agencies infiltrated the DNC computer systems. The American cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which removed the hacking programs, revealed a history of encounters with both groups and had already named them, calling one of them Cozy Bear and the other Fancy Bear, names which are used in the media

Still all what was discovered was turned over to the FBI and Comey in his testimony to Congress that it was acceptable and the FBI accepted their findings as being legitimate. There was no need for the FBI to investigate the servers as they knew that DNC and other agencies have been consistently hacked by Russians. The FBI accept the contractors forensic as being accurate.

The CIA said the foreign intelligence agents were Russian operatives previously known to the U.S.[6] CIA officials told U.S. Senators it was "quite clear" Russia's intentions were to help Trump.[36] Trump released a statement December 9, and disregarded the CIA conclusions.

Still why wasn't VIPS consulted and how did they get their information.

We may never know but the stories will continue and live on in repubs imagination.

Hmm who should I believe the US intelligent or a article well written but does not offer any supporting facts other than a few names of people
Still they had no access to the DNC unless it was clandestine

The think about your sources is how they just bounce back among themselves and never really tell you their source but hey I could be wrong

Mr. Mueller: Was the DNC Server Actually Hacked by the Russians? | The American Spectator | Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

Where's the lie?

Can't find any?

Of course you can't when there are no sources then u just got to believe what is being read.

You said I lied, but I just prove you are the liar.


But, for Leftists like you, that would be resume enhancement.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Well documented where, Kilroy? Show me where that EVER took place! Do I trust an intelligence community led by Clapper, Comey and Brennan? No, as a matter of fact I DON'T trust them! They've all been shown to have lied under oath. Why would anyone trust them at this point?

You do not trust the intelligence community yet you Trust Trump who has no experience or knowledge about how that can be done

The intelligence community is more that just 3 people and the research they do is reported to the head.

Yet Mueller indicted 12 Russian and if u read it they make the case for it. Still if u want trump to read it for you then good look with that
and I would imagine you don trust Mueller

if you are waiting for FOX to tell u then good luck with that

The only people who do not believe that the Russians were not involved are those who have a desire to believe in Trump

Still unscientific and read the above statements about Trumps ability to tell the truth

Do U trust intelligence community well Mueller pretty much confirmed that the Russians were involved with meddeling and hacking DNC and RNC.

As for the dossiers? (It's plural...something that seems to have escaped you!) Dossiers are a collection of information about a person or topic. In no way does dossier equate to "unsubstantial accounts" You've attempted to give it that definition to protect the veracity of Richard Steele! In this case the "dossiers" are a collection of phony information made up about a person!


Dossiers are a collection of information about a person or topic. In no way does dossier equate to "unsubstantial accounts"

okay so because someone says it then it must be factual

I am the person who has to go one step further and say unsubstantiated accounts is noting but hearsay, boasting, or lying but it could be the truth

Still to determine which it is you have to verify it using whatever means available to you. If you have no means then you just determine that you like that person and you believe him to be telling the truth

You could easily believe him to be lying or fudging the truth


Still if the truth is you goal for understanding then you have to verify what was said.

In a court of law it requires verification or a preponderance of evidence

He said , She said, Trump said, well if they all say the same thing you might believe them or if they all say different things then it might make you have to think

"You do not trust the intelligence community yet you Trust Trump who has no experience or knowledge about how that can be done."


I must stop saying "how stupid can you be?" as you seem to take it as a challenge.




The 'intelligence community,' the Deep State, is populated by Obamunists....

Here, from the former CIA Moscow Station head...


1. ".... the denizens of the Deep State that everyone in Washington likes to tell us doesn’t exist....made up of thousands of similarly credentialed, remarkably “un-diverse” civil servants and political appointees who saw themselves promoted rapidly during the eight years of the Obama administration. The appointees have left, but make no mistake — the progressive civil servants remain.


2. The present culture of the intelligence community and the shameless political shenanigans of the Obama administration combined to create this disaster. ....CIA leadership famously stood up to the Nixon administration when asked to domestically spy on Justice during Watergate, for example.

3. It seems that today we lack the character and the competence to ensure that the intelligence community honors the trust of the American people."
How the intel community was turned into a political weapon against President Trump



Please stop posting stupid stuff......and get Obama's shoe polish off your tongue.

Yechhhhh......

Except who is the one head of the Deep State now

A guy who wants to be a politician but is finding out that it is harder than being a liar. when everyone sticks a microphone in ur face and are force to say something intelligent.

You've served your purpose.....to be mocked and shown to be a buffoon.....Wounding you deeply was my pleasure. Now....why are you back?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So you think he will violate the law by revealing GJ info or are you just hoping he will?

just hoping. far too much we do not know

"far too much we do not know"


Speaking for yourself, of course.

unlike you, I am not a slave to the government so i do not blindly accept everything they tell me.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So you think he will violate the law by revealing GJ info or are you just hoping he will?

just hoping. far too much we do not know

"far too much we do not know"


Speaking for yourself, of course.

unlike you, I am not a slave to the government so i do not blindly accept everything they tell me.

What a stupid post.

I mean, really.