OH SNAP! 'House Intelligence Chair: ‘No Proof’ Russians Were Trying To Get Trump Elected'

[Dot Com]

The intelligence community has no proof Russia hacked the 2016 presidential election to get Donald Trump elected, according to the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

“There’s no proof that we have from intelligence sources that I’ve seen that show that the Russians were directly trying to help Trump,” said Rep. Devin Nunes during an interview with the Washington Examiner’s “Examining Politics” podcast Monday. Nunes did not rule out that Russia possibly had a hand in the recent hacking of various political institutions."
-- HUGE difference between 'did hack' and 'did not rule it out'!

"In his role as chairman overseeing the intelligence community, Nunes has access to the nation’s most important secrets. He is also a member of the intelligence version of the Gang of Eight, a select group of congressional leaders who are given special access to national security information from the executive branch."


http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/03/house-intelligence-chair-no-proof-russians-were-trying-to-get-trump-elected/#ixzz4Und2Qxtk


'Russia Hacked The Election To Help Trump Win' 'Fake News' EXPOSED!'

'Snowflake Bubble Bursts!

THIS is why the CIA and other Intel agencies illegally ignored a Congressional Subpoena to come before congress and show them the 'evidence' they have - THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY!

THIS is why Barry hasn't released 'definitive' proof Russia 'hacked the election' - HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY.

THIS is why snowflakes on this board keep parroting liberal sources, Barry, and the Intel agencies yet not being able to post any 'evidence' it happened - THERE ISN'T ANY!

a Republican saying no shenanigans benefited a Repub and it was published by the resident Repub rag in DC- Wash times. And this is supposed to be a Shocker?

You really are a transparent hacktard/

 

[kwc57]

What I take exception with is that they actively interfered at all in America's political process.

as·sump·tion
əˈsəm(p)SH(ə)n/
noun

1. 1.
   a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

How is it an assumption when the FBI report specifically says that they did try to interfere in the election?

https://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296A_GRIZZLY STEPPE-2016-1229.pdf

GRIZZLY STEPPE – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity

This Joint Analysis Report (JAR) is the result of analytic efforts between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). This document
provides technical details regarding the tools and infrastructure used by the Russian civilian and
military intelligence Services (RIS) to compromise and exploit networks and endpoints
associated with the U.S. election,

'Russian... military intelligence Services to.... compromise with the U.S. election."

So you are saying that the FBI, Homeland Security and the CIA are all lying?

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

Trump will be President regardless- but why do you just not give a damn whether or not Russia tried to influence our election?

What do you not understand about the word "associated"? In this case, associated means phishing a private citizen working on a campaign to gain access to his emails that were then turned over to an organization who published them on the internet. Tell us how your reading Podesta's emails caused you to roll over on Hillary and vote for Trump. This should be interesting.

 

[Boss]

That's fine with me. I don't really care whether they acted to get Trump elected or whether they did it merely because they could. Why they acted is irrelevant to me. What I take exception with is that they actively interfered at all in America's political process.

So what do you call it when President Obama tells British citizens that if they vote for Brexit they can expect to be in the back of the line on trade deals? Or when he sends hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund a political activist group in opposition of Netanyahu in Israel's elections? Is that not interfering? Was he not trying to influence the elections?

There are at least 81 documented cases of the US actively attempting to influence or interfere with the election process of other countries abroad since 1948. We've sent troops, propped up coups, installed rulers, invaded countries, funded rebels.... all kinds of things to influence and interfere with the political process of others. It seems a tad sanctimonious to get on our high horse and suddenly object when someone does it to us. Especially when we have no evidence Russia was involved.

And here's another tid bit... The Saudi Arabian government donated $25 million to Hillary Clinton's campaign.... was that not an attempt to influence the election? Someone released a tape recording of a private conversation between Trump and Billy Bush where Trump talked about grabbing a woman's pussy... was that not an attempt to influence the election? When the media gave Hillary the questions for the debate, was that not an attempt to influence the election?

With all due respect for your exception taking, where do you draw this arbitrary line when it comes to influencing and interfering with the election?

 

[kwc57]

PEOTUS trusts accused rapist Julian Assange more than he does our own intelligence services. Also, he can't keep straight what intelligence briefing is supposed to occur on what day. Therefore he still "doesn't know something that we don't know."

So Assange is Trump's go to guy for intel. if so, what else is the PEOTUS not telling us.

Come on snowflake, answer the questions asked before trying to change the subject.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

EXACTLY..... Who said it was hacked?

THE FUCKING HACKING FINGER PRINTS ALL OVER SERVER YOU IDIOT.

Again for the truly slow and amazingly stupid, the program fingerprint is to an open source code available to anyone with a computer.

 

[kwc57]

That's fine with me. I don't really care whether they acted to get Trump elected or whether they did it merely because they could. Why they acted is irrelevant to me. What I take exception with is that they actively interfered at all in America's political process.

So what do you call it when President Obama tells British citizens that if they vote for Brexit they can expect to be in the back of the line on trade deals? Or when he sends hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund a political activist group in opposition of Netanyahu in Israel's elections? Is that not interfering? Was he not trying to influence the elections?

There are at least 81 documented cases of the US actively attempting to influence or interfere with the election process of other countries abroad since 1948. We've sent troops, propped up coups, installed rulers, invaded countries, funded rebels.... all kinds of things to influence and interfere with the political process of others. It seems a tad sanctimonious to get on our high horse and suddenly object when someone does it to us. Especially when we have no evidence Russia was involved.

And here's another tid bit... The Saudi Arabian government donated $25 million to Hillary Clinton's campaign.... was that not an attempt to influence the election? Someone released a tape recording of a private conversation between Trump and Billy Bush where Trump talked about grabbing a woman's pussy... was that not an attempt to influence the election? When the media gave Hillary the questions for the debate, was that not an attempt to influence the election?

With all due respect for your exception taking, where do you draw this arbitrary line when it comes to influencing and interfering with the election?

Now that's just unfair using logic and reason in an argument with a liberal. You have an unfair advantage.

 

[Tehon]

So you are saying that the FBI, Homeland Security and the CIA are all lying?

I wouldn't rule it out. They certainly covered their asses when they inserted this into the report.

DISCLAIMER: This report is provided “as is” for informational purposes only. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information contained within

 

[Tehon]

How is it an assumption when the FBI report specifically says that they did try to interfere in the election?

It is an assumption because you believe something without proof. That is what the definition was for, to explain it to you. There is no proof in the JAR.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What I take exception with is that they actively interfered at all in America's political process.

as·sump·tion
əˈsəm(p)SH(ə)n/
noun

1. 1.
   a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

How is it an assumption when the FBI report specifically says that they did try to interfere in the election?

https://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296A_GRIZZLY STEPPE-2016-1229.pdf

GRIZZLY STEPPE – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity

This Joint Analysis Report (JAR) is the result of analytic efforts between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). This document
provides technical details regarding the tools and infrastructure used by the Russian civilian and
military intelligence Services (RIS) to compromise and exploit networks and endpoints
associated with the U.S. election,

'Russian... military intelligence Services to.... compromise with the U.S. election."

So you are saying that the FBI, Homeland Security and the CIA are all lying?

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

Trump will be President regardless- but why do you just not give a damn whether or not Russia tried to influence our election?

The hack of DNC files did NOT HACK the election,there is absolutely ZERO evidence or anyone saying any voting machines were hacked, that any votes cast were interfered with. Every time you LIE and claim the election was hacked you play ito the hands of the liars and misinformers. Now as to interfering with the election be so kind as to post the law or regulation that prevents 3rd parties from releasing damaging info about Presidential candidates.

 

[AntonToo]

anyone saying any voting machines were hacked, that any votes cast were interfered with.

LOL, you are the still the only one claiming someone claimed it.

 

[AntonToo]

Especially when we have no evidence Russia was involved.

Do you not fucking get that anything and everything else you may say is entirely moot without establishing this point first?

I know to Trumpster koolaid drinkers American Intelligence unanimous findings are without merit but not to the rest of the world.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

anyone saying any voting machines were hacked, that any votes cast were interfered with.

LOL, you are the still the only one claiming someone claimed it.

Every time you claim the election was hacked YOU are claiming, the election was NOT hacked. EVER. Every time anyone claims the election was hacked they are LYING.

 

[AntonToo]

anyone saying any voting machines were hacked, that any votes cast were interfered with.

LOL, you are the still the only one claiming someone claimed it.

Every time you claim the election was hacked YOU are claiming, the election was NOT hacked. EVER. Every time anyone claims the election was hacked they are LYING.

WHERE has someone claimed that voting machines were hacked? Stop smoking crack.

This thread is about DNC and Podesta emails hacking, this what we are talking about, except for you of course.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

anyone saying any voting machines were hacked, that any votes cast were interfered with.

LOL, you are the still the only one claiming someone claimed it.

Every time you claim the election was hacked YOU are claiming, the election was NOT hacked. EVER. Every time anyone claims the election was hacked they are LYING.

WHERE has someone claimed that voting machines were hacked? Stop smoking crack.

This thread is about Russian email hacking, this what we are talking about, except for you of course.

RETARD, anytime YOU or anyone else makes the statement that the ELECTION was hacked you are implying it. Hacking the DNC had nothing to do with the election or its process, IN FACT it is American practice in elections to dig up by ANY MEANS possible any and all dirt to discredit and embarrass the side you oppose to INCLUDE third parties NOT associated with a specific candidate. Been going on since the third presidential election in this Country and ever since.

 

[Syriusly]

What I take exception with is that they actively interfered at all in America's political process.

as·sump·tion
əˈsəm(p)SH(ə)n/
noun

1. 1.
   a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

How is it an assumption when the FBI report specifically says that they did try to interfere in the election?

https://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296A_GRIZZLY STEPPE-2016-1229.pdf

GRIZZLY STEPPE – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity

This Joint Analysis Report (JAR) is the result of analytic efforts between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). This document
provides technical details regarding the tools and infrastructure used by the Russian civilian and
military intelligence Services (RIS) to compromise and exploit networks and endpoints
associated with the U.S. election,

'Russian... military intelligence Services to.... compromise with the U.S. election."

So you are saying that the FBI, Homeland Security and the CIA are all lying?

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

Trump will be President regardless- but why do you just not give a damn whether or not Russia tried to influence our election?

The hack of DNC files did NOT HACK the election,there is absolutely ZERO evidence or anyone saying any voting machines were hacked,.

Wow- great way not to address my post.

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

Trump will be President regardless- but why do you just not give a damn whether or not Russia tried to influence our election?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What I take exception with is that they actively interfered at all in America's political process.

as·sump·tion
əˈsəm(p)SH(ə)n/
noun

1. 1.
   a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

How is it an assumption when the FBI report specifically says that they did try to interfere in the election?

https://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296A_GRIZZLY STEPPE-2016-1229.pdf

GRIZZLY STEPPE – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity

This Joint Analysis Report (JAR) is the result of analytic efforts between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). This document
provides technical details regarding the tools and infrastructure used by the Russian civilian and
military intelligence Services (RIS) to compromise and exploit networks and endpoints
associated with the U.S. election,

'Russian... military intelligence Services to.... compromise with the U.S. election."

So you are saying that the FBI, Homeland Security and the CIA are all lying?

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

Trump will be President regardless- but why do you just not give a damn whether or not Russia tried to influence our election?

The hack of DNC files did NOT HACK the election,there is absolutely ZERO evidence or anyone saying any voting machines were hacked,.

Wow- great way not to address my post.

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

Trump will be President regardless- but why do you just not give a damn whether or not Russia tried to influence our election?

Perhaps you can answer me, what Law or regulation makes it illegal for a third party to release damaging information about a Presidential Candidate?

 

[Syriusly]

How is it an assumption when the FBI report specifically says that they did try to interfere in the election?

It is an assumption because you believe something without proof. That is what the definition was for, to explain it to you. There is no proof in the JAR.

I have the proof- which is the FBI report.

The FBI says that Russia tried to hack our election.

That is not an assumption- that is a statement of fact.

Now an assumption would be assuming that Russia did not try to hack the election.

 

[Tehon]

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

My concern right now is that my country is provoking Russia and has been now for a number of years. The supposed Russian hacking story could potentially just be more of the same, most likely is. And I consider myself to be on the left side of the spectrum thank you.

 

[Syriusly]

What I take exception with is that they actively interfered at all in America's political process.

as·sump·tion
əˈsəm(p)SH(ə)n/
noun

1. 1.
   a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

How is it an assumption when the FBI report specifically says that they did try to interfere in the election?

https://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296A_GRIZZLY STEPPE-2016-1229.pdf

GRIZZLY STEPPE – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity

This Joint Analysis Report (JAR) is the result of analytic efforts between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). This document
provides technical details regarding the tools and infrastructure used by the Russian civilian and
military intelligence Services (RIS) to compromise and exploit networks and endpoints
associated with the U.S. election,

'Russian... military intelligence Services to.... compromise with the U.S. election."

So you are saying that the FBI, Homeland Security and the CIA are all lying?

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

Trump will be President regardless- but why do you just not give a damn whether or not Russia tried to influence our election?

The hack of DNC files did NOT HACK the election,there is absolutely ZERO evidence or anyone saying any voting machines were hacked,.

Wow- great way not to address my post.

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

Trump will be President regardless- but why do you just not give a damn whether or not Russia tried to influence our election?

Perhaps you can answer me, what Law or regulation makes it illegal for a third party to release damaging information about a Presidential Candidate?

Wow- once again- you are desperately trying not to address my post.

Why don't any of your right wing nut jobs care whether Russia tried to hack our election?

Trump will be President regardless- but why do you just not give a damn whether or not Russia tried to influence our election?

 

[Campbell]

The intelligence community has no proof Russia hacked the 2016 presidential election to get Donald Trump elected, according to the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

“There’s no proof that we have from intelligence sources that I’ve seen that show that the Russians were directly trying to help Trump,” said Rep. Devin Nunes during an interview with the Washington Examiner’s “Examining Politics” podcast Monday. Nunes did not rule out that Russia possibly had a hand in the recent hacking of various political institutions."
-- HUGE difference between 'did hack' and 'did not rule it out'!

"In his role as chairman overseeing the intelligence community, Nunes has access to the nation’s most important secrets. He is also a member of the intelligence version of the Gang of Eight, a select group of congressional leaders who are given special access to national security information from the executive branch."


http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/03/house-intelligence-chair-no-proof-russians-were-trying-to-get-trump-elected/#ixzz4Und2Qxtk


'Russia Hacked The Election To Help Trump Win' 'Fake News' EXPOSED!'

'Snowflake Bubble Bursts!

THIS is why the CIA and other Intel agencies illegally ignored a Congressional Subpoena to come before congress and show them the 'evidence' they have - THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY!

THIS is why Barry hasn't released 'definitive' proof Russia 'hacked the election' - HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY.

THIS is why snowflakes on this board keep parroting liberal sources, Barry, and the Intel agencies yet not being able to post any 'evidence' it happened - THERE ISN'T ANY!

No proof that they weren't trying to get him elected either!