Last time. There is no collusion.

[Valerie]

Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election


"The Russian active measures campaign may have begun as early as 2015, when Russian intelligence services launched a series of spear fishing attacks designed to penetrate the computers of a broad array of Washington based Democratic and Republican party organizations, think tanks and other entities. This continued at least through the winter of 2016.

While at first the hacking may have been intended solely for the collection of foreign intelligence. In mid-2016 the Russians weapon eyes the stolen data and used platforms established by the Intel services, such as D.C. leaks in existing third-party channels like WikiLeaks to dump the documents. The stolen documents were almost uniformly damaging to the candidate Putin despised, Hillary Clinton. And by forcing her campaign to constantly respond to the daily drip of disclosures, the releases greatly benefited Donald Trump's campaign.

None of these facts is seriously in question. And they're reflected in the consensus conclusion of our intelligence agencies.

We will never know whether the Russian intervention was determinative in such a close election. Indeed, it is unknowable in a campaign to which so many small changes could have dictated a different result. More importantly, and for the purposes of our investigation, it simply does not matter.


What does matter is this, the Russians successfully meddled in our democracy and our intelligence agencies have concluded they will do so again. Ours is not the first democracy to be attacked by the Russians in this way. Russian intelligence has been simile interfering in the internal and political affairs of our European and other allies for decades.


SCHIFF: What is striking here is the degree to which the Russians were willing to undertake such an audacious and risky action against the most powerful nation on Earth. That ought to be a warning to us that if we thought that the Russians would not dare to so blatantly interfere in our affairs, we were wrong.

And if we do not do our very best to understand how the Russians accomplished this unprecedented attack on our democracy and what we need to do to protect ourselves in the future, we will only have ourselves to blame.

We know a lot about the Russian operation, about the way they amplified the damage their hacking and dumping of stolen documents was causing through the use of slick propaganda like R.T., the Kremlin's media arm. But there is a lot we don't know.

Most important, we do not yet know whether the Russians have the help of U.S. citizens including people associated with the Trump campaign. Many of the Trump's campaign personnel, including the president himself, have ties to Russia and Russian interests. This is of course no crime. On the other hand, if the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it aided or abetted the Russians, it would not only be a serious crime, it would also represent one of the most shocking betrayals of democracy in history."

 

[AntonToo]

These indictments are for people who have ZERO.

Lol dummy the investigation is ONGOING, and while true there are two indictments...there is also A GUILTY PLEA from a campaign manager who admitted to lying to FBI about his dealings with Russian solicitors.

 

[Lastamender]

Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election


"The Russian active measures campaign may have begun as early as 2015, when Russian intelligence services launched a series of spear fishing attacks designed to penetrate the computers of a broad array of Washington based Democratic and Republican party organizations, think tanks and other entities. This continued at least through the winter of 2016.

While at first the hacking may have been intended solely for the collection of foreign intelligence. In mid-2016 the Russians weapon eyes the stolen data and used platforms established by the Intel services, such as D.C. leaks in existing third-party channels like WikiLeaks to dump the documents. The stolen documents were almost uniformly damaging to the candidate Putin despised, Hillary Clinton. And by forcing her campaign to constantly respond to the daily drip of disclosures, the releases greatly benefited Donald Trump's campaign.

None of these facts is seriously in question. And they're reflected in the consensus conclusion of our intelligence agencies.

We will never know whether the Russian intervention was determinative in such a close election. Indeed, it is unknowable in a campaign to which so many small changes could have dictated a different result. More importantly, and for the purposes of our investigation, it simply does not matter.


What does matter is this, the Russians successfully meddled in our democracy and our intelligence agencies have concluded they will do so again. Ours is not the first democracy to be attacked by the Russians in this way. Russian intelligence has been simile interfering in the internal and political affairs of our European and other allies for decades.


SCHIFF: What is striking here is the degree to which the Russians were willing to undertake such an audacious and risky action against the most powerful nation on Earth. That ought to be a warning to us that if we thought that the Russians would not dare to so blatantly interfere in our affairs, we were wrong.

And if we do not do our very best to understand how the Russians accomplished this unprecedented attack on our democracy and what we need to do to protect ourselves in the future, we will only have ourselves to blame.

We know a lot about the Russian operation, about the way they amplified the damage their hacking and dumping of stolen documents was causing through the use of slick propaganda like R.T., the Kremlin's media arm. But there is a lot we don't know.

Most important, we do not yet know whether the Russians have the help of U.S. citizens including people associated with the Trump campaign. Many of the Trump's campaign personnel, including the president himself, have ties to Russia and Russian interests. This is of course no crime. On the other hand, if the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it aided or abetted the Russians, it would not only be a serious crime, it would also represent one of the most shocking betrayals of democracy in history."

Wow, how much do you get paid?

 

[edthecynic]

Opinion | NGO connected to Obama’s 2008 campaign used U.S. tax dollars trying to oust Netanyahu

Flake News already proven to be a lie in several threads on this messageboard.
Where have you been?????

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The real questions that needs to be answered are
1) Why would Loretta Lynch threaten to suppress an FBI informant?
2) If the Russians are so bad, and we are talking “collusion”, why would the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton even remotely want to be associated with striking a uranium deal with them that so happens to also include financial contributions to the Clinton Foundation?

Loretta Lynch didn't.

'Silenced' FBI Informant Called To Testify On Corrupt Russian Bribery Scheme Involving Hillary

SO is Trump's official legal defense going to be "bbbbut Hillary!" ?





FACT CHECK: Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?


FALSE

The Uranium One deal was not Clinton’s to veto or approve

Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating the transaction for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the Uranium One decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton herself “never intervened” in committee matters.

Despite transfer of ownership, the uranium remained in the U.S.

A key fact ignored in criticisms of Clinton’s supposed involvement in the deal is that the uranium was not — nor could it be — exported, and remained under the control of U.S.-based subsidiaries of Uranium One, according to a statement by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:

You can claim false, but then why did the previous administration go through all this effort to suppress an FBI informant if that was indeed the case? Don’t have an answer for that do you ? You see, this is the kind of question that tends to stump the progressive and they can’t provide an answer for. That’s why it pays to be current and up-to-date on the issue. Thank you for trying.

 

[Valerie]

Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election


"The Russian active measures campaign may have begun as early as 2015, when Russian intelligence services launched a series of spear fishing attacks designed to penetrate the computers of a broad array of Washington based Democratic and Republican party organizations, think tanks and other entities. This continued at least through the winter of 2016.

While at first the hacking may have been intended solely for the collection of foreign intelligence. In mid-2016 the Russians weapon eyes the stolen data and used platforms established by the Intel services, such as D.C. leaks in existing third-party channels like WikiLeaks to dump the documents. The stolen documents were almost uniformly damaging to the candidate Putin despised, Hillary Clinton. And by forcing her campaign to constantly respond to the daily drip of disclosures, the releases greatly benefited Donald Trump's campaign.

None of these facts is seriously in question. And they're reflected in the consensus conclusion of our intelligence agencies.

We will never know whether the Russian intervention was determinative in such a close election. Indeed, it is unknowable in a campaign to which so many small changes could have dictated a different result. More importantly, and for the purposes of our investigation, it simply does not matter.


What does matter is this, the Russians successfully meddled in our democracy and our intelligence agencies have concluded they will do so again. Ours is not the first democracy to be attacked by the Russians in this way. Russian intelligence has been simile interfering in the internal and political affairs of our European and other allies for decades.


SCHIFF: What is striking here is the degree to which the Russians were willing to undertake such an audacious and risky action against the most powerful nation on Earth. That ought to be a warning to us that if we thought that the Russians would not dare to so blatantly interfere in our affairs, we were wrong.

And if we do not do our very best to understand how the Russians accomplished this unprecedented attack on our democracy and what we need to do to protect ourselves in the future, we will only have ourselves to blame.

We know a lot about the Russian operation, about the way they amplified the damage their hacking and dumping of stolen documents was causing through the use of slick propaganda like R.T., the Kremlin's media arm. But there is a lot we don't know.

Most important, we do not yet know whether the Russians have the help of U.S. citizens including people associated with the Trump campaign. Many of the Trump's campaign personnel, including the president himself, have ties to Russia and Russian interests. This is of course no crime. On the other hand, if the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it aided or abetted the Russians, it would not only be a serious crime, it would also represent one of the most shocking betrayals of democracy in history."

Wow, how much do you get paid?

i guess i'll take that constant implication (as if i get paid to post) as some sort of compliment, but the answer is zero dollars.

 

[xotoxi]

These indictments are for people who have ZERO. anything to do with the 2016 Campaign, the election or the administration.

You keep believing this.

 

[Valerie]

The real questions that needs to be answered are
1) Why would Loretta Lynch threaten to suppress an FBI informant?
2) If the Russians are so bad, and we are talking “collusion”, why would the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton even remotely want to be associated with striking a uranium deal with them that so happens to also include financial contributions to the Clinton Foundation?

Loretta Lynch didn't.

'Silenced' FBI Informant Called To Testify On Corrupt Russian Bribery Scheme Involving Hillary

SO is Trump's official legal defense going to be "bbbbut Hillary!" ?





FACT CHECK: Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?


FALSE

The Uranium One deal was not Clinton’s to veto or approve

Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating the transaction for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the Uranium One decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton herself “never intervened” in committee matters.

Despite transfer of ownership, the uranium remained in the U.S.

A key fact ignored in criticisms of Clinton’s supposed involvement in the deal is that the uranium was not — nor could it be — exported, and remained under the control of U.S.-based subsidiaries of Uranium One, according to a statement by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:

You can claim false, but then why suppress an FBI informant if that was indeed the case? This is the kind of question that tends to stump the progressive and they can’t provide an answer for. That’s why it pays to be current and up-to-date on the issue. Thank you for trying.

no, i saw the current DISTRACTION STORY about someone suddenly claiming to have been somehow suppressed...

'false' is still the current status of those partisan claims, initiated to distract.

IF there is a case to be made against anyone for crimes against my country, then let's see the indictments proceed.

rethuglican assholes have been CONSTANTLY barking up all the wrong trees while putting party over country, it's disgusting.

 

[CowboyTed]

Thanks for the info, but I'll wait for the investigation to be over if you don't mind

The investigation is over for Trump/Russia collusion in the election. Mueller is onto something much bigger....The Podesta group and the Clinton foundation are the new target...Manafort hired the Podesta group...they worked for him.

I think you need to go for a wank or you might explode....

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The real questions that needs to be answered are
1) Why would Loretta Lynch threaten to suppress an FBI informant?
2) If the Russians are so bad, and we are talking “collusion”, why would the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton even remotely want to be associated with striking a uranium deal with them that so happens to also include financial contributions to the Clinton Foundation?

Loretta Lynch didn't.

'Silenced' FBI Informant Called To Testify On Corrupt Russian Bribery Scheme Involving Hillary

SO is Trump's official legal defense going to be "bbbbut Hillary!" ?





FACT CHECK: Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?


FALSE

The Uranium One deal was not Clinton’s to veto or approve

Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating the transaction for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the Uranium One decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton herself “never intervened” in committee matters.

Despite transfer of ownership, the uranium remained in the U.S.

A key fact ignored in criticisms of Clinton’s supposed involvement in the deal is that the uranium was not — nor could it be — exported, and remained under the control of U.S.-based subsidiaries of Uranium One, according to a statement by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:

You can claim false, but then why suppress an FBI informant if that was indeed the case? This is the kind of question that tends to stump the progressive and they can’t provide an answer for. That’s why it pays to be current and up-to-date on the issue. Thank you for trying.

no, i saw the current DISTRACTION STORY about someone suddenly claiming to have been somehow suppressed...

'false' is still the current status of those partisan claims, initiated to distract.

IF there is a case to be made against anyone for crimes against my country, then let's see the indictments proceed.

rethuglican assholes have been CONSTANTLY barking up all the wrong trees while putting party over country, it's disgusting.

Let me know when you can provide ACTUAL research, instead of relying on your “Cliff Notes” and think it’s current to include details surrounding the the suppressed FBI informant. Also Mullier’s indictment surrounding possible tax evasion between 1999 and 2014 you don’t need a special prosecutor for, you could just hand it over to the appropriate department for that. That’s like involving the FBI over a minor traffic violation. No proven case of obstruction, no facts involving Trump and ANY collusion, the DNC server itself was never turned over to the FBI to confirm evidence of Russian hacking. I can go on and on but I don’t want to make the left look too uniformed, but want you to do the research behind the issue. Let me know when you can provide those well researched linked facts,

 

[BULLDOG]

Link?

why? if he provides a link do you fold your tent and drop the liberal non-sense?...todays events were nothing but good news for trump and the russia collusion lie...NEXT

I've changed my mind before, and I'm sure I'll do it again. I never saw any use in arguing something I know not to be true. It takes credible proof though.

Fair enough, but my money says providing a link would not change anything...todays indictments/news showed a link to the clintons but not the russians

Your call. If you can't back up your claim, then it's not my fault.

no one blamed you, in fact you are the only one suggesting it may be your fault....and backing up any claim no matter how legit would defeat the purpose of responding in kind to those making bogus russian collusion claims

Got it. You're spouting crap, and you think that is a reasonable thing to do.

 

[Lastamender]

Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election


"The Russian active measures campaign may have begun as early as 2015, when Russian intelligence services launched a series of spear fishing attacks designed to penetrate the computers of a broad array of Washington based Democratic and Republican party organizations, think tanks and other entities. This continued at least through the winter of 2016.

While at first the hacking may have been intended solely for the collection of foreign intelligence. In mid-2016 the Russians weapon eyes the stolen data and used platforms established by the Intel services, such as D.C. leaks in existing third-party channels like WikiLeaks to dump the documents. The stolen documents were almost uniformly damaging to the candidate Putin despised, Hillary Clinton. And by forcing her campaign to constantly respond to the daily drip of disclosures, the releases greatly benefited Donald Trump's campaign.

None of these facts is seriously in question. And they're reflected in the consensus conclusion of our intelligence agencies.

We will never know whether the Russian intervention was determinative in such a close election. Indeed, it is unknowable in a campaign to which so many small changes could have dictated a different result. More importantly, and for the purposes of our investigation, it simply does not matter.


What does matter is this, the Russians successfully meddled in our democracy and our intelligence agencies have concluded they will do so again. Ours is not the first democracy to be attacked by the Russians in this way. Russian intelligence has been simile interfering in the internal and political affairs of our European and other allies for decades.


SCHIFF: What is striking here is the degree to which the Russians were willing to undertake such an audacious and risky action against the most powerful nation on Earth. That ought to be a warning to us that if we thought that the Russians would not dare to so blatantly interfere in our affairs, we were wrong.

And if we do not do our very best to understand how the Russians accomplished this unprecedented attack on our democracy and what we need to do to protect ourselves in the future, we will only have ourselves to blame.

We know a lot about the Russian operation, about the way they amplified the damage their hacking and dumping of stolen documents was causing through the use of slick propaganda like R.T., the Kremlin's media arm. But there is a lot we don't know.

Most important, we do not yet know whether the Russians have the help of U.S. citizens including people associated with the Trump campaign. Many of the Trump's campaign personnel, including the president himself, have ties to Russia and Russian interests. This is of course no crime. On the other hand, if the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it aided or abetted the Russians, it would not only be a serious crime, it would also represent one of the most shocking betrayals of democracy in history."

Wow, how much do you get paid?

i guess i'll take that constant implication (as if i get paid to post) as some sort of compliment, but the answer is zero dollars.

You are worth every penny.

 

[Valerie]

Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election


"The Russian active measures campaign may have begun as early as 2015, when Russian intelligence services launched a series of spear fishing attacks designed to penetrate the computers of a broad array of Washington based Democratic and Republican party organizations, think tanks and other entities. This continued at least through the winter of 2016.

While at first the hacking may have been intended solely for the collection of foreign intelligence. In mid-2016 the Russians weapon eyes the stolen data and used platforms established by the Intel services, such as D.C. leaks in existing third-party channels like WikiLeaks to dump the documents. The stolen documents were almost uniformly damaging to the candidate Putin despised, Hillary Clinton. And by forcing her campaign to constantly respond to the daily drip of disclosures, the releases greatly benefited Donald Trump's campaign.

None of these facts is seriously in question. And they're reflected in the consensus conclusion of our intelligence agencies.

We will never know whether the Russian intervention was determinative in such a close election. Indeed, it is unknowable in a campaign to which so many small changes could have dictated a different result. More importantly, and for the purposes of our investigation, it simply does not matter.


What does matter is this, the Russians successfully meddled in our democracy and our intelligence agencies have concluded they will do so again. Ours is not the first democracy to be attacked by the Russians in this way. Russian intelligence has been simile interfering in the internal and political affairs of our European and other allies for decades.


SCHIFF: What is striking here is the degree to which the Russians were willing to undertake such an audacious and risky action against the most powerful nation on Earth. That ought to be a warning to us that if we thought that the Russians would not dare to so blatantly interfere in our affairs, we were wrong.

And if we do not do our very best to understand how the Russians accomplished this unprecedented attack on our democracy and what we need to do to protect ourselves in the future, we will only have ourselves to blame.

We know a lot about the Russian operation, about the way they amplified the damage their hacking and dumping of stolen documents was causing through the use of slick propaganda like R.T., the Kremlin's media arm. But there is a lot we don't know.

Most important, we do not yet know whether the Russians have the help of U.S. citizens including people associated with the Trump campaign. Many of the Trump's campaign personnel, including the president himself, have ties to Russia and Russian interests. This is of course no crime. On the other hand, if the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it aided or abetted the Russians, it would not only be a serious crime, it would also represent one of the most shocking betrayals of democracy in history."

Wow, how much do you get paid?

i guess i'll take that constant implication (as if i get paid to post) as some sort of compliment, but the answer is zero dollars.

You are worth every penny.

aww shucks, thanks. i thought you were attacking me. lol i'm just so use to that here.

 

[Valerie]

Let me know when you can provide ACTUAL research, instead of relying on your “Cliff Notes” and think it’s current to include details surrounding the the suppressed FBI informant. Also Mullier’s indictment surrounding possible tax evasion between 1999 and 2014 you don’t need a special prosecutor for, you could just hand it over to the appropriate department for that. That’s like involving the FBI over a minor traffic violation. No proven case of obstruction, no facts involving Trump and ANY collusion, the DNC server itself was never turned over to the FBI to confirm evidence of Russian hacking. I can go on and on but I don’t want to make the left look too uniformed, but want you to do the research behind the issue. Let me know when you can provide those well researched linked facts,

the grand jury is going to be VERY well informed...you are SO worried and that is GREAT!

 

[Valerie]

ShaklesOfBigGov - please be sure to let me know when my posts come up in the grand jury investigation.

 

[WEATHER53]

In essence the liberal fly swarm which vowed to disrupt, disdain and dispute the election is continuing on with their clamour assisted by a wholly biased media
People that were in the Trump campaign may have taken actions neither directed by nor approved by Trump. This is a fact but we know emotionally addled Libbies shriek with glee over any innuendo
Because a guy sells pot in my company does not mean that I know about it, ordered it, or sell it myself but again that is a thinking issue rather than a feeling one

 

[Camp]

The excuses being provided by trump supporters for the criminal crap that went on with his staff and associates has gotten really pathetic and lame.

 

[g5000]

These indictments are for people who have ZERO. anything to do with the 2016 Campaign, the election or the administration.

Man, that is one seriously fucked up delusion you have, kid.

 

[WEATHER53]

I wonder how many businesses and business men converse with Russians on a daily basis? Thousands?
How that equates to altering an election is beyond me and Mueller has branched out into unrelated areas.
Hearing a Russian say they had dirt on Hillary just does not translate to fixing the election. You Libs need to look inward rather than outward for the causes of your demise. Blame game is for children and that is what you are

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

ShaklesOfBigGov - please be sure to let me know when my posts come up in the grand jury investigation.

The unfortunate truth for you, Valerie, despite the investigation having been pounded through every left wing media outlet since Trump won the electoral college, after two independent congressional investigations, that FBI investigation, and the free reign of a special council, the absolute BEST which can be provided is this indictment surrounds a possible “tax evasion” during the years 1999 to 2014. Despite all the media hype of where to look, where these facts MUST be, that’s what all your puffed up hot air has finally deflated itself into being ... as the most important piece of collusion evidence.

Yes obviously that’s your proof of Russian collusion you’re left with i- Bravo Inspector Clouseau

Now how about you allow the rest of us get back to reality, when there is an actual indictment over evidence that has at least SOMETHING to do with Russia. Looks like Hillary stands to gain the better opportunity to receive that one. Can we say “Karma is a bitch?”