Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Answer my question... you completely dodged itSo to be clear, if the CIA has a man inside the Russian gov or if they have tapped into their communications you think it's a smart thing to release that information to the public? Do you have any worries about compromising those assets?Do you honestly think they should release the evidence to the public if it compromises their intelligence assets? Do you understand or respect to reasons for classification?Where the evidence?
Hell yes they should. Just as they should have released the proof of weapons of mass destruction under W. See where this is going?
After all of the govt lies is iraq war, syria, Benghazi, obamacare, you think I'm going to take them at their word?
WowINSTEAD OF POSTING A MONTH AND A HALF OLD ARTICLE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ALLEGATIONS AGAINST RUSSIA, WHY DON'T YOU READ YESTERDAY'S REPORT YOURSELF YOU DUMB FUCKING RUBE:What are you implying? Sounds like you're saying that the intelligence report was manufactured for political reasons and not based on real intelligence... is that what you think?The "intelligence report" cum swallower?
Anyone can use a word processor to manufacture an "intelligence report".
Why didn't the whitehouse rely on the "intelligence report" before declaring
" we remained confident in the overall integrity of electoral infrastructure, a confidence that was borne out on election day. As a result, we believe our elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective."
Shut the fuck you . stop toeing the party line
THE "INTELLIGENCE REPORT" WAS MANUFACTURED
Show me where they say that they have HARD EVIDENCE OF CYBERATTACKS
The "intelligence report" is based on "conclusions"
The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.
con·clu·sion
kənˈklo͞oZHən/
noun
- 2.
a judgment or decision reached by reasoning.
"each research group came to a similar conclusion"
synonyms: deduction, inference, interpretation, reasoning; More
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections
Because I don't like FICTION
.
My response to you is the same as I've been posting that others are dodging... hard evidence is classified, which means to make it public they would be compromising those assets... do you want them to say, "we got this intel from John smith who is an agent we have in the inside" or "Vladimir Fuckoff, is a high level informant we have in the inside who fed us documents" or "we are monitoring the Russians intelligence communications and got these documents that prove xyz"You didn't read the question. I asked:An intelligence report from our top 3 agencies IS evidence and is stronger than the petty partisan opinions and baseless accusations of a Trump overthrow that you spew out. You go ahead with your paranoid conspiracy theories and the majority of us will stick to realistic conversationYes, the left is trying to take Trump's win away. They would throw him out of office or lock him up if they could. You are full of shit.You are completely missing the point. Nobody is trying to take Trumps win away... it's over, he is president. Though there is a political spin on the left that implies a negative narrative towards the support Russia showed Trump, the entire point of the intelligence report is aimed at malicious interference by Russia. Trump is playing politics trying to dismiss these actions but that is entirely because of his ego, his attitude is not making America safer, it is leaving us open to continued attacks by Russia, which will eventually bite Trump in the Ass.
If Clinton or Obama were acting like Trump after these actions by Russia, y'all would be throwing out terms like feckless and weak... don't be a hypocrite, it's ok to be critical of your goldenboy. He is far from perfect.
Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome.
Everything else you say is an attempt to avoid it.
"Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome."
That's exactly what I'm saying. they information that doesn't expose intelligence is released. Evidence that would expose intelligence is classified.It's we
Answer my question... you completely dodged itSo to be clear, if the CIA has a man inside the Russian gov or if they have tapped into their communications you think it's a smart thing to release that information to the public? Do you have any worries about compromising those assets?Do you honestly think they should release the evidence to the public if it compromises their intelligence assets? Do you understand or respect to reasons for classification?
Hell yes they should. Just as they should have released the proof of weapons of mass destruction under W. See where this is going?
After all of the govt lies is iraq war, syria, Benghazi, obamacare, you think I'm going to take them at their word?
I hope youre not saying that the only way our govt can offer proof is to expose intelligence. Surely, you're not saying that.
You didn't read the question. I asked:An intelligence report from our top 3 agencies IS evidence and is stronger than the petty partisan opinions and baseless accusations of a Trump overthrow that you spew out. You go ahead with your paranoid conspiracy theories and the majority of us will stick to realistic conversationYes, the left is trying to take Trump's win away. They would throw him out of office or lock him up if they could. You are full of shit.You are completely missing the point. Nobody is trying to take Trumps win away... it's over, he is president. Though there is a political spin on the left that implies a negative narrative towards the support Russia showed Trump, the entire point of the intelligence report is aimed at malicious interference by Russia. Trump is playing politics trying to dismiss these actions but that is entirely because of his ego, his attitude is not making America safer, it is leaving us open to continued attacks by Russia, which will eventually bite Trump in the Ass.
If Clinton or Obama were acting like Trump after these actions by Russia, y'all would be throwing out terms like feckless and weak... don't be a hypocrite, it's ok to be critical of your goldenboy. He is far from perfect.
Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome.
Everything else you say is an attempt to avoid it.
"Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome."
But they didn't say they had hard evidence, you made that up. They said they had confidence in their conclusions. That means they have no direct evidence linking Russia to the DNC hacks nor evidence it altered any outcome by revealing Democrat corruption (which would be a good thing anyway).My response to you is the same as I've been posting that others are dodging... hard evidence is classified, which means to make it public they would be compromising those assets... do you want them to say, "we got this intel from John smith who is an agent we have in the inside" or "Vladimir Fuckoff, is a high level informant we have in the inside who fed us documents" or "we are monitoring the Russians intelligence communications and got these documents that prove xyz"You didn't read the question. I asked:An intelligence report from our top 3 agencies IS evidence and is stronger than the petty partisan opinions and baseless accusations of a Trump overthrow that you spew out. You go ahead with your paranoid conspiracy theories and the majority of us will stick to realistic conversationYes, the left is trying to take Trump's win away. They would throw him out of office or lock him up if they could. You are full of shit.You are completely missing the point. Nobody is trying to take Trumps win away... it's over, he is president. Though there is a political spin on the left that implies a negative narrative towards the support Russia showed Trump, the entire point of the intelligence report is aimed at malicious interference by Russia. Trump is playing politics trying to dismiss these actions but that is entirely because of his ego, his attitude is not making America safer, it is leaving us open to continued attacks by Russia, which will eventually bite Trump in the Ass.
If Clinton or Obama were acting like Trump after these actions by Russia, y'all would be throwing out terms like feckless and weak... don't be a hypocrite, it's ok to be critical of your goldenboy. He is far from perfect.
Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome.
Everything else you say is an attempt to avoid it.
"Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome."
Is that what you are looking for? Do you see the negative effects to our national security if we reveal and compromise these assets?
It would help if they said they had such evidence.That's exactly what I'm saying. they information that doesn't expose intelligence is released. Evidence that would expose intelligence is classified.It's we
Answer my question... you completely dodged itSo to be clear, if the CIA has a man inside the Russian gov or if they have tapped into their communications you think it's a smart thing to release that information to the public? Do you have any worries about compromising those assets?Hell yes they should. Just as they should have released the proof of weapons of mass destruction under W. See where this is going?
After all of the govt lies is iraq war, syria, Benghazi, obamacare, you think I'm going to take them at their word?
I hope youre not saying that the only way our govt can offer proof is to expose intelligence. Surely, you're not saying that.
What exactly would you like for them to say that would appease you but also not compromise assets?
My response to you is the same as I've been posting that others are dodging... hard evidence is classified, which means to make it public they would be compromising those assets... do you want them to say, "we got this intel from John smith who is an agent we have in the inside" or "Vladimir Fuckoff, is a high level informant we have in the inside who fed us documents" or "we are monitoring the Russians intelligence communications and got these documents that prove xyz"You didn't read the question. I asked:An intelligence report from our top 3 agencies IS evidence and is stronger than the petty partisan opinions and baseless accusations of a Trump overthrow that you spew out. You go ahead with your paranoid conspiracy theories and the majority of us will stick to realistic conversationYes, the left is trying to take Trump's win away. They would throw him out of office or lock him up if they could. You are full of shit.You are completely missing the point. Nobody is trying to take Trumps win away... it's over, he is president. Though there is a political spin on the left that implies a negative narrative towards the support Russia showed Trump, the entire point of the intelligence report is aimed at malicious interference by Russia. Trump is playing politics trying to dismiss these actions but that is entirely because of his ego, his attitude is not making America safer, it is leaving us open to continued attacks by Russia, which will eventually bite Trump in the Ass.
If Clinton or Obama were acting like Trump after these actions by Russia, y'all would be throwing out terms like feckless and weak... don't be a hypocrite, it's ok to be critical of your goldenboy. He is far from perfect.
Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome.
Everything else you say is an attempt to avoid it.
"Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome."
Is that what you are looking for? Do you see the negative effects to our national security if we reveal and compromise these assets?
I suggest you come out of orbit now, dear.Just as soon as you get hired to work in the highest classified position in the intelligence network, we will give it to you.What are you implying? Sounds like you're saying that the intelligence report was manufactured for political reasons and not based on real intelligence... is that what you think?The "intelligence report" cum swallower?
Anyone can use a word processor to manufacture an "intelligence report".
Why didn't the whitehouse rely on the "intelligence report" before declaring
" we remained confident in the overall integrity of electoral infrastructure, a confidence that was borne out on election day. As a result, we believe our elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective."
Shut the fuck you . stop toeing the party line
THE "INTELLIGENCE REPORT" WAS MANUFACTURED
Show me where they say that they have HARD EVIDENCE OF CYBERATTACKS
The "intelligence report" is based on "conclusions"
The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.
con·clu·sion
kənˈklo͞oZHən/
noun
- 2.
a judgment or decision reached by reasoning.
"each research group came to a similar conclusion"
synonyms: deduction, inference, interpretation, reasoning; More
In 1967 I had a Top Secret Cosmic Clearance.
.
And I don't believe this is an entirely political move. I am upset that any foreign government is stealing and spying on our shit, and I'd like to see them at least get batted back when they're caught. As long as people continue to flatly deny that any of this is true, we won't see improvement in our security. I believe Trump has come to his senses on that. You should check it out.
It would help if they said they had such evidence.That's exactly what I'm saying. they information that doesn't expose intelligence is released. Evidence that would expose intelligence is classified.It's we
Answer my question... you completely dodged itSo to be clear, if the CIA has a man inside the Russian gov or if they have tapped into their communications you think it's a smart thing to release that information to the public? Do you have any worries about compromising those assets?
After all of the govt lies is iraq war, syria, Benghazi, obamacare, you think I'm going to take them at their word?
I hope youre not saying that the only way our govt can offer proof is to expose intelligence. Surely, you're not saying that.
What exactly would you like for them to say that would appease you but also not compromise assets?
U.S. Statement on Reliability of Election Results
Following is the full text of a statement from a senior administration official, issued to The New York Times on Friday in response to questions about the federal government’s investigation into the integrity of the Nov. 8 presidential election. The government issued the statement to The Times on the condition that it be attributable only to a senior official.
The Kremlin probably expected that publicity surrounding the disclosures that followed the Russian Government-directed compromises of e-mails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations, would raise questions about the integrity of the election process that could have undermined the legitimacy of the President-elect. Nevertheless, we stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people.
The Federal government did not observe any increased level of malicious cyber activity aimed at disrupting our electoral process on election day. As we have noted before, we remained confident in the overall integrity of electoral infrastructure, a confidence that was borne out on election day. As a result, we believe our elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective."
------________
But suddenly they changed their minds, an afterthought, in order to discredit the Trump administration
Me thinks motherfucking Clapper is LYING AGAIN
Americans DO NOT LET the butthurts interfere with the Trump Administration.
LET'S STAND OUR GROUND !!!!!!!!!!!
.
Take your apples and oranges and shove them up your dumb ass.
Russia interfered with out election to Trumps benefit.
Would Trump have won anyway? We'll never know.
But there will forever been an asterisk after his name as President. In every history book going forward, it will say, although Trump won, the results are controversial because of foreign involvement.
The more the dopey hairpiece talks about it and denies, the more people think he what was going to be leaked by wiki before it was leaked.
Remember Guilani?? He knew something was coming down before it happened.
But there will forever been an asterisk after his name as President. In every history book going forward, it will say, although Trump won, the results are controversial because of foreign involvement.
* The tradecraft standards for analytic products have been refined over the past ten years. These standards include describing sources (including their reliability and access to the information they provide), clearly expressing uncertainty, distinguishing between underlying information and analysts’ judgments and assumptions, exploring alternatives, demonstrating relevance to the customer, using strong and transparent logic, and explaining change or consistency in judgments over time.
* When Intelligence Community analysts use words such as “we assess” or “we judge,” they are conveying an analytic assessment or judgment.
* Some analytic judgments are based directly on collected information; others rest on previous judgments, which serve as building blocks in rigorous analysis. In either type of judgment, the tradecraft standards outlined above ensure that analysts have an appropriate basis for the judgment.
* Intelligence Community judgments often include two important elements: judgments of how likely it is that something has happened or will happen (using terms such as “likely” or “unlikely”) and confidence levels in those judgments (low, moderate, and high) that refer to the evidentiary basis, logic and reasoning, and precedents that underpin the judgments.
* An assessment of attribution usually is not a simple statement of who conducted an operation, but rather a series of judgments that describe whether it was an isolated incident, who was the likely perpetrator, that perpetrator’s possible motivations, and whether a foreign government had a role in ordering or leading the operation.
~ Page 2 and 3 of the release.
What does this mean without all the double speak? "We're guessing."
What exactly do you think gives them extremely high confidence in their conclusions if not direct evidence?But they didn't say they had hard evidence, you made that up. They said they had confidence in their conclusions. That means they have no direct evidence linking Russia to the DNC hacks nor evidence it altered any outcome by revealing Democrat corruption (which would be a good thing anyway).My response to you is the same as I've been posting that others are dodging... hard evidence is classified, which means to make it public they would be compromising those assets... do you want them to say, "we got this intel from John smith who is an agent we have in the inside" or "Vladimir Fuckoff, is a high level informant we have in the inside who fed us documents" or "we are monitoring the Russians intelligence communications and got these documents that prove xyz"You didn't read the question. I asked:An intelligence report from our top 3 agencies IS evidence and is stronger than the petty partisan opinions and baseless accusations of a Trump overthrow that you spew out. You go ahead with your paranoid conspiracy theories and the majority of us will stick to realistic conversationYes, the left is trying to take Trump's win away. They would throw him out of office or lock him up if they could. You are full of shit.You are completely missing the point. Nobody is trying to take Trumps win away... it's over, he is president. Though there is a political spin on the left that implies a negative narrative towards the support Russia showed Trump, the entire point of the intelligence report is aimed at malicious interference by Russia. Trump is playing politics trying to dismiss these actions but that is entirely because of his ego, his attitude is not making America safer, it is leaving us open to continued attacks by Russia, which will eventually bite Trump in the Ass.
If Clinton or Obama were acting like Trump after these actions by Russia, y'all would be throwing out terms like feckless and weak... don't be a hypocrite, it's ok to be critical of your goldenboy. He is far from perfect.
Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome.
Everything else you say is an attempt to avoid it.
"Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome."
Is that what you are looking for? Do you see the negative effects to our national security if we reveal and compromise these assets?
Another deflection... and you're getting angry... seems you lost the argumentMy response to you is the same as I've been posting that others are dodging... hard evidence is classified, which means to make it public they would be compromising those assets... do you want them to say, "we got this intel from John smith who is an agent we have in the inside" or "Vladimir Fuckoff, is a high level informant we have in the inside who fed us documents" or "we are monitoring the Russians intelligence communications and got these documents that prove xyz"You didn't read the question. I asked:An intelligence report from our top 3 agencies IS evidence and is stronger than the petty partisan opinions and baseless accusations of a Trump overthrow that you spew out. You go ahead with your paranoid conspiracy theories and the majority of us will stick to realistic conversationYes, the left is trying to take Trump's win away. They would throw him out of office or lock him up if they could. You are full of shit.You are completely missing the point. Nobody is trying to take Trumps win away... it's over, he is president. Though there is a political spin on the left that implies a negative narrative towards the support Russia showed Trump, the entire point of the intelligence report is aimed at malicious interference by Russia. Trump is playing politics trying to dismiss these actions but that is entirely because of his ego, his attitude is not making America safer, it is leaving us open to continued attacks by Russia, which will eventually bite Trump in the Ass.
If Clinton or Obama were acting like Trump after these actions by Russia, y'all would be throwing out terms like feckless and weak... don't be a hypocrite, it's ok to be critical of your goldenboy. He is far from perfect.
Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome.
Everything else you say is an attempt to avoid it.
"Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome."
Is that what you are looking for? Do you see the negative effects to our national security if we reveal and compromise these assets?
SHUT THE FUCK UP
THE CIA HAS BEEN IN SYRIA TRYING TO DEPOSE ASSAD FOR 4-5 YEARS.
NOW TRUMP, IS GOING TO ALLOW PUTIN TO KEEP ASSAD IN POWER.
BTW, WHY DOES THE CIA CARES WHO IS THE PRIME MINISTER OF SYRIA?
.
,
Like what? "We have an asset inside the Russian government who gave us this information? Is that something you think they should say if true? You don't think that careless /dangerous to make public?It would help if they said they had such evidence.That's exactly what I'm saying. they information that doesn't expose intelligence is released. Evidence that would expose intelligence is classified.It's we
Answer my question... you completely dodged itSo to be clear, if the CIA has a man inside the Russian gov or if they have tapped into their communications you think it's a smart thing to release that information to the public? Do you have any worries about compromising those assets?
After all of the govt lies is iraq war, syria, Benghazi, obamacare, you think I'm going to take them at their word?
I hope youre not saying that the only way our govt can offer proof is to expose intelligence. Surely, you're not saying that.
What exactly would you like for them to say that would appease you but also not compromise assets?
Why should he bother reading anything you wrote? All you do is whine, lie, and complain about Republicans, and Trump in particular. None of it is worth listening to.Exactly? Did you not read anything I wrote?
Another deflection... and you're getting angry... seems you lost the argumentMy response to you is the same as I've been posting that others are dodging... hard evidence is classified, which means to make it public they would be compromising those assets... do you want them to say, "we got this intel from John smith who is an agent we have in the inside" or "Vladimir Fuckoff, is a high level informant we have in the inside who fed us documents" or "we are monitoring the Russians intelligence communications and got these documents that prove xyz"You didn't read the question. I asked:An intelligence report from our top 3 agencies IS evidence and is stronger than the petty partisan opinions and baseless accusations of a Trump overthrow that you spew out. You go ahead with your paranoid conspiracy theories and the majority of us will stick to realistic conversationYes, the left is trying to take Trump's win away. They would throw him out of office or lock him up if they could. You are full of shit.
Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome.
Everything else you say is an attempt to avoid it.
"Instead of posturing non stop, post the evidence (not OPINION) that Russia hacked the DNC's servers and the email revelations of Democrat corruption swayed the election outcome."
Is that what you are looking for? Do you see the negative effects to our national security if we reveal and compromise these assets?
SHUT THE FUCK UP
THE CIA HAS BEEN IN SYRIA TRYING TO DEPOSE ASSAD FOR 4-5 YEARS.
NOW TRUMP, IS GOING TO ALLOW PUTIN TO KEEP ASSAD IN POWER.
BTW, WHY DOES THE CIA CARES WHO IS THE PRIME MINISTER OF SYRIA?
.
,
Why should he bother reading anything you wrote? All you do is whine, lie, and complain about Republicans, and Trump in particular. None of it is worth listening to.Exactly? Did you not read anything I wrote?
Thankfully, now we don't need to listen to that any more.
