Is anyone ready to discuss politics & stay grounded in reality?

[Thinker101]

That's ridiculous. THE SOUCE said Russia had nothing to do with it, but your claim is that it's more believable that they did because they do it all the time. Okay, when?

What started all this? Trump made a joke asking Russia during the debates to expose Hillary's emails; a joke. Then he made a semi-compliment to Putin. That's it.

So now, the left has turned this into a fake conspiracy, investigations, constant media attention, and for what, because Trump said a couple of things about Russia.

Then you wonder why he didn't give the left his tax returns??????

The FBI is the "left" now, is it?

Nope, but the MSM is.

You don't even understand what you write, do ya? <smh>

You said, "so now, the left has turned this into a fake conspiracy, investigations..."

Well, moron, it's the FBI that is investigating, not the media. And there is no "fake conspiracy" as it's also the FBI who believes some folks associated with Trump's campaign may have colluded with Russia to hack the election.

So when you say, "so now, the left has turned this into a fake conspiracy, investigations..." , you're speaking of the FBI.

No, I'm speaking of the arm of the Democrat party--the left wing MSM that's keeping this non-story alive.

It's not a non-story until the investigation is complete and we have conclusions. Until then, it's a story.

Seems you wacko lefties are already dreaming up your own conclusions.

 

[Coyote]

The FBI is the "left" now, is it?

Nope, but the MSM is.

You don't even understand what you write, do ya? <smh>

You said, "so now, the left has turned this into a fake conspiracy, investigations..."

Well, moron, it's the FBI that is investigating, not the media. And there is no "fake conspiracy" as it's also the FBI who believes some folks associated with Trump's campaign may have colluded with Russia to hack the election.

So when you say, "so now, the left has turned this into a fake conspiracy, investigations..." , you're speaking of the FBI.

No, I'm speaking of the arm of the Democrat party--the left wing MSM that's keeping this non-story alive.

It's not a non-story until the investigation is complete and we have conclusions. Until then, it's a story.

Seems you wacko lefties are already dreaming up your own conclusions.

I kind of think "you wacko" righties aren't reading what I post.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Now you're flat out lying. Comey never said that. What he said was that the Russian hacking did not alter votes that were cast.

So how is that different from what I said? And if you alter my post one more time, I'll report you to a moderator.

There's no question their hacking cost Hillary votes. I saw some on this forum even say they wouldn't vote for Hillary based on some of the dirt the Russians were dumping on the Internet.

Bull. Post a quote of somebody that said they were going to vote for Hil-Liar until they seen what was in the emails; quote, link to topic, and post number.

And despite all the inanities you managed to cram into that one post, there is still no doubt that Russia hacked the election.

No, they didn't hack anything, that's what you were brainwashed to believe. They "may" have hacked the DNC server, but the server is not the election. Wiki claimed that the information they got did not come from the Russians, and the information found on Rich Seth's computer makes that even more believable.

 

[Faun]

Now you're flat out lying. Comey never said that. What he said was that the Russian hacking did not alter votes that were cast.

So how is that different from what I said? And if you alter my post one more time, I'll report you to a moderator.

There's no question their hacking cost Hillary votes. I saw some on this forum even say they wouldn't vote for Hillary based on some of the dirt the Russians were dumping on the Internet.

Bull. Post a quote of somebody that said they were going to vote for Hil-Liar until they seen what was in the emails; quote, link to topic, and post number.

And despite all the inanities you managed to cram into that one post, there is still no doubt that Russia hacked the election.

No, they didn't hack anything, that's what you were brainwashed to believe. They "may" have hacked the DNC server, but the server is not the election. Wiki claimed that the information they got did not come from the Russians, and the information found on Rich Seth's computer makes that even more believable.

DNC cheats, gets caught,Bernie Supporters Say They're Voting For Trump now the consequences...

As far as your idiocy about nothing being hacked....

Russian Cyber Hacks on U.S. Electoral System Far Wider Than Previously Known

In Illinois, investigators found evidence that cyber intruders tried to delete or alter voter data. The hackers accessed software designed to be used by poll workers on Election Day, and in at least one state accessed a campaign finance database. Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter. In all, the Russian hackers hit systems in a total of 39 states, one of them said.

[...]

Illinois, which was among the states that gave the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security almost full access to investigate its systems, provides a window into the hackers’ successes and failures.

In early July 2016, a contractor who works two or three days a week at the state board of elections detected unauthorized data leaving the network, according to Ken Menzel, general counsel for the Illinois board of elections. The hackers had gained access to the state’s voter database, which contained information such as names, dates of birth, genders, driver’s licenses and partial Social Security numbers on 15 million people, half of whom were active voters. As many as 90,000 records were ultimately compromised.​

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

As to your link, it was about Bernie supporters (not Hillary supporters) who said they were switching to Trump. Nobody in the video provided by the OP said anything about the emails either.

 

[Faun]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

As to your link, it was about Bernie supporters (not Hillary supporters) who said they were switching to Trump. Nobody in the video provided by the OP said anything about the emails either.

The vast majority of Bernie supporters supported Hillary on Election Day. Some did not and some cited the hacking you lied and denied.

 

[Faun]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

Oh, by the way ... you want a named source who was in the government and has direct knowledge of the hacking...?

BURR: Do you have any doubt that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 elections?

COMEY: None.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the intrusions in the DNC and the DCCC systems, and the subsequent leaks of that information?

COMEY: No, no doubt.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the cyber intrusion in the state voter files?

COMEY: No.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that officials of the Russian government were fully aware of these activities?

COMEY: No doubt.​

Game, set, match.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

As to your link, it was about Bernie supporters (not Hillary supporters) who said they were switching to Trump. Nobody in the video provided by the OP said anything about the emails either.

The vast majority of Bernie supporters supported Hillary on Election Day. Some did not and some cited the hacking you lied and denied.

And yet you provided no proof of that which is what I asked for. Your claim is that USMB participants said they switched their vote because of the emails and you didn't provided any evidence of that either.

The truth is Hil-Liar was a flawed candidate since her server became known to the public. The very idea that people decided they were fine with a candidate under FBI investigation but didn't like the emails from the DNC is purely ridiculous. Most people don't even know what was in those emails, but they did know she wasn't supposed to have that server, she only went through the trouble an expense to be able to erase incriminating evidence, that she did indeed erase material subpoenaed by the US Congress, and that the server had classified information with minimal security is what most voters had a problem with.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

Oh, by the way ... you want a named source who was in the government and has direct knowledge of the hacking...?

BURR: Do you have any doubt that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 elections?

COMEY: None.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the intrusions in the DNC and the DCCC systems, and the subsequent leaks of that information?

COMEY: No, no doubt.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the cyber intrusion in the state voter files?

COMEY: No.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that officials of the Russian government were fully aware of these activities?

COMEY: No doubt.​

Game, set, match.

What game, set and match? None of the answers he provided said that Russians hacked the election.

Attempted to interfere is not interfering if stopped.

If they did hack the DNC computers, it only goes to show the incompetnecy of DumBama the Democrats.

State voter files being intruded did not change the outcome of the election or voting.

Russian government being "aware" of the activities didn't change the election results either.

 

[Faun]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

As to your link, it was about Bernie supporters (not Hillary supporters) who said they were switching to Trump. Nobody in the video provided by the OP said anything about the emails either.

The vast majority of Bernie supporters supported Hillary on Election Day. Some did not and some cited the hacking you lied and denied.

And yet you provided no proof of that which is what I asked for. Your claim is that USMB participants said they switched their vote because of the emails and you didn't provided any evidence of that either.

The truth is Hil-Liar was a flawed candidate since her server became known to the public. The very idea that people decided they were fine with a candidate under FBI investigation but didn't like the emails from the DNC is purely ridiculous. Most people don't even know what was in those emails, but they did know she wasn't supposed to have that server, she only went through the trouble an expense to be able to erase incriminating evidence, that she did indeed erase material subpoenaed by the US Congress, and that the server had classified information with minimal security is what most voters had a problem with.

I said I saw some on this forum even say that. When I looked for it, I found they were talking about it. Regardless of who said it, the hacking cost Hillary votes. You can deny that but you can also deny the sun will shine tomorrow; point being, your denials ring hollow. I posted a link of folks saying they wouldn't vote for Hillary because of the hacked emails. You can't deny that away.

As far as calling Hillary a liar, that's patently ridiculous given no one lies more than Trump. Ditto on pointing out Hillary was a "flawed" candidate. So was Trump.

 

[Faun]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

Oh, by the way ... you want a named source who was in the government and has direct knowledge of the hacking...?

BURR: Do you have any doubt that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 elections?

COMEY: None.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the intrusions in the DNC and the DCCC systems, and the subsequent leaks of that information?

COMEY: No, no doubt.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the cyber intrusion in the state voter files?

COMEY: No.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that officials of the Russian government were fully aware of these activities?

COMEY: No doubt.​

Game, set, match.

What game, set and match? None of the answers he provided said that Russians hacked the election.

Attempted to interfere is not interfering if stopped.

If they did hack the DNC computers, it only goes to show the incompetnecy of DumBama the Democrats.

State voter files being intruded did not change the outcome of the election or voting.

Russian government being "aware" of the activities didn't change the election results either.

I can't help your too fucking rightarded to understand English. <smh>

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the intrusions in the DNC and the DCCC systems, and the subsequent leaks of that information?

COMEY: No, no doubt.​

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

Oh, by the way ... you want a named source who was in the government and has direct knowledge of the hacking...?

BURR: Do you have any doubt that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 elections?

COMEY: None.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the intrusions in the DNC and the DCCC systems, and the subsequent leaks of that information?

COMEY: No, no doubt.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the cyber intrusion in the state voter files?

COMEY: No.

BURR: Do you have any doubt that officials of the Russian government were fully aware of these activities?

COMEY: No doubt.​

Game, set, match.

What game, set and match? None of the answers he provided said that Russians hacked the election.

Attempted to interfere is not interfering if stopped.

If they did hack the DNC computers, it only goes to show the incompetnecy of DumBama the Democrats.

State voter files being intruded did not change the outcome of the election or voting.

Russian government being "aware" of the activities didn't change the election results either.

I can't help your too fucking rightarded to understand English. <smh>

BURR: Do you have any doubt that the Russian government was behind the intrusions in the DNC and the DCCC systems, and the subsequent leaks of that information?

COMEY: No, no doubt.​

Even if they were (and there is no positive evidence of it) doesn't mean it had anything to do with the election or Trump.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

As to your link, it was about Bernie supporters (not Hillary supporters) who said they were switching to Trump. Nobody in the video provided by the OP said anything about the emails either.

The vast majority of Bernie supporters supported Hillary on Election Day. Some did not and some cited the hacking you lied and denied.

And yet you provided no proof of that which is what I asked for. Your claim is that USMB participants said they switched their vote because of the emails and you didn't provided any evidence of that either.

The truth is Hil-Liar was a flawed candidate since her server became known to the public. The very idea that people decided they were fine with a candidate under FBI investigation but didn't like the emails from the DNC is purely ridiculous. Most people don't even know what was in those emails, but they did know she wasn't supposed to have that server, she only went through the trouble an expense to be able to erase incriminating evidence, that she did indeed erase material subpoenaed by the US Congress, and that the server had classified information with minimal security is what most voters had a problem with.

I said I saw some on this forum even say that. When I looked for it, I found they were talking about it. Regardless of who said it, the hacking cost Hillary votes. You can deny that but you can also deny the sun will shine tomorrow; point being, your denials ring hollow. I posted a link of folks saying they wouldn't vote for Hillary because of the hacked emails. You can't deny that away.

As far as calling Hillary a liar, that's patently ridiculous given no one lies more than Trump. Ditto on pointing out Hillary was a "flawed" candidate. So was Trump.

Yes I can deny it because you didn't provide one post where people said they were going to vote for Hil-Liar but changed their vote because of the DNC information that was revealed. As I stated, you provided a link to a very short forum that talked about people switching their votes from Sanders to Trump. Here is a clue: Sanders is not Clinton.

 

[Faun]

Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter.

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

As to your link, it was about Bernie supporters (not Hillary supporters) who said they were switching to Trump. Nobody in the video provided by the OP said anything about the emails either.

The vast majority of Bernie supporters supported Hillary on Election Day. Some did not and some cited the hacking you lied and denied.

And yet you provided no proof of that which is what I asked for. Your claim is that USMB participants said they switched their vote because of the emails and you didn't provided any evidence of that either.

The truth is Hil-Liar was a flawed candidate since her server became known to the public. The very idea that people decided they were fine with a candidate under FBI investigation but didn't like the emails from the DNC is purely ridiculous. Most people don't even know what was in those emails, but they did know she wasn't supposed to have that server, she only went through the trouble an expense to be able to erase incriminating evidence, that she did indeed erase material subpoenaed by the US Congress, and that the server had classified information with minimal security is what most voters had a problem with.

I said I saw some on this forum even say that. When I looked for it, I found they were talking about it. Regardless of who said it, the hacking cost Hillary votes. You can deny that but you can also deny the sun will shine tomorrow; point being, your denials ring hollow. I posted a link of folks saying they wouldn't vote for Hillary because of the hacked emails. You can't deny that away.

As far as calling Hillary a liar, that's patently ridiculous given no one lies more than Trump. Ditto on pointing out Hillary was a "flawed" candidate. So was Trump.

Yes I can deny it because you didn't provide one post where people said they were going to vote for Hil-Liar but changed their vote because of the DNC information that was revealed. As I stated, you provided a link to a very short forum that talked about people switching their votes from Sanders to Trump. Here is a clue: Sanders is not Clinton.

Sure, keep denying the link I posted.

Here's more... deny this too....

Burning from leaked emails, these Sanders supporters won’t back Hillary

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ah yes, more anonymous sources again. And these so-called sources were people "with knowledge of US investigations?" Unless you're in the government, who else has knowledge of this?

As to your link, it was about Bernie supporters (not Hillary supporters) who said they were switching to Trump. Nobody in the video provided by the OP said anything about the emails either.

The vast majority of Bernie supporters supported Hillary on Election Day. Some did not and some cited the hacking you lied and denied.

And yet you provided no proof of that which is what I asked for. Your claim is that USMB participants said they switched their vote because of the emails and you didn't provided any evidence of that either.

The truth is Hil-Liar was a flawed candidate since her server became known to the public. The very idea that people decided they were fine with a candidate under FBI investigation but didn't like the emails from the DNC is purely ridiculous. Most people don't even know what was in those emails, but they did know she wasn't supposed to have that server, she only went through the trouble an expense to be able to erase incriminating evidence, that she did indeed erase material subpoenaed by the US Congress, and that the server had classified information with minimal security is what most voters had a problem with.

I said I saw some on this forum even say that. When I looked for it, I found they were talking about it. Regardless of who said it, the hacking cost Hillary votes. You can deny that but you can also deny the sun will shine tomorrow; point being, your denials ring hollow. I posted a link of folks saying they wouldn't vote for Hillary because of the hacked emails. You can't deny that away.

As far as calling Hillary a liar, that's patently ridiculous given no one lies more than Trump. Ditto on pointing out Hillary was a "flawed" candidate. So was Trump.

Yes I can deny it because you didn't provide one post where people said they were going to vote for Hil-Liar but changed their vote because of the DNC information that was revealed. As I stated, you provided a link to a very short forum that talked about people switching their votes from Sanders to Trump. Here is a clue: Sanders is not Clinton.

Sure, keep denying the link I posted.

Here's more... deny this too....

Burning from leaked emails, these Sanders supporters won’t back Hillary

Oh please, the article was about a couple of pissed of Bernie voters if anything. What they said about the emails is that it "confirmed" what they already suspected, not that it changed their vote. There was a hatred of Hillary among these people because of the DNC, not the emails. From your article:

"With 72 percent of Washington state caucusing for Sanders, and plenty of “bitching” by Washington delegates at the convention, it comes to no surprise that the revelations concerning Clinton leaves local Sanders loyalists with a bittersweet sense of vindication."

This is no different than the Republican side after Trump won the nomination. There were plenty of pissed off Republican voters that refused to vote for him.

 

[Faun]

The vast majority of Bernie supporters supported Hillary on Election Day. Some did not and some cited the hacking you lied and denied.

And yet you provided no proof of that which is what I asked for. Your claim is that USMB participants said they switched their vote because of the emails and you didn't provided any evidence of that either.

The truth is Hil-Liar was a flawed candidate since her server became known to the public. The very idea that people decided they were fine with a candidate under FBI investigation but didn't like the emails from the DNC is purely ridiculous. Most people don't even know what was in those emails, but they did know she wasn't supposed to have that server, she only went through the trouble an expense to be able to erase incriminating evidence, that she did indeed erase material subpoenaed by the US Congress, and that the server had classified information with minimal security is what most voters had a problem with.

I said I saw some on this forum even say that. When I looked for it, I found they were talking about it. Regardless of who said it, the hacking cost Hillary votes. You can deny that but you can also deny the sun will shine tomorrow; point being, your denials ring hollow. I posted a link of folks saying they wouldn't vote for Hillary because of the hacked emails. You can't deny that away.

As far as calling Hillary a liar, that's patently ridiculous given no one lies more than Trump. Ditto on pointing out Hillary was a "flawed" candidate. So was Trump.

Yes I can deny it because you didn't provide one post where people said they were going to vote for Hil-Liar but changed their vote because of the DNC information that was revealed. As I stated, you provided a link to a very short forum that talked about people switching their votes from Sanders to Trump. Here is a clue: Sanders is not Clinton.

Sure, keep denying the link I posted.

Here's more... deny this too....

Burning from leaked emails, these Sanders supporters won’t back Hillary

Oh please, the article was about a couple of pissed of Bernie voters if anything. What they said about the emails is that it "confirmed" what they already suspected, not that it changed their vote. There was a hatred of Hillary among these people because of the DNC, not the emails. From your article:

"With 72 percent of Washington state caucusing for Sanders, and plenty of “bitching” by Washington delegates at the convention, it comes to no surprise that the revelations concerning Clinton leaves local Sanders loyalists with a bittersweet sense of vindication."

This is no different than the Republican side after Trump won the nomination. There were plenty of pissed off Republican voters that refused to vote for him.

Sure, keep denying the facts... Burned from leaked emails, these Sanders supporters won't back Hillary

... it's what you do.

 

[dcbl]

it has become clear that Trump and his team did not collude with the Russians; which is no surprise as this whole narrative was always a wild conspiracy theory

member when people said that this statement disqualified me from being grounded in reality?

I member...

 

[danielpalos]

Why is a One Percenter getting away with making himself richer and the poor, poorer, via public policy?

Is the right abandoning their propaganda and rhetoric, that being poor, is Only the fault of the poor.