At TRUMPs very FIRST press conference he calls out CNN news. Trump says "CNN your VERY Fake News" I thought wow that's pretty rough of TRUMP to say that at his very first press conference, Well guess what folks he was 100% correct CNN admits on video to pushing Russia / Trump rumors is good for business $$$. CNN admits the story's are Bull $hit, LOL
Dummocrats eat these story's up like chicken wings and MSM is making a profit from it all while pushing these fake story's.
At TRUMPs very FIRST press conference he calls out CNN news. Trump says "CNN your VERY Fake News" I thought wow that's pretty rough of TRUMP to say that at his very first press conference, Well guess what folks he was 100% correct CNN admits on video to pushing Russia / Trump rumors is good for business $$$. CNN admits the story's are Bull $hit, LOL
Dummocrats eat these story's up like chicken wings and MSM is making a profit from it all while pushing these fake story's.
I've said most of it is just bull****. Look at Trump though. He pushed the Obama birther movement forever too. Wanna talk fake news, look no further than Trump.
Oh and the story was retracted not because the story was untrue but because editorial process was not followed, they published when they only had 1 anonymous source.
Oh and the story was retracted not because the story was untrue but because editorial process was not followed, they published when they only had 1 anonymous source.
Well 3 CNN journalists resigned over the one story. They do not retract stories for not follow an editorial process. They retract them because they are untrue and can set them up for major lawsuits.
I've said most of it is just bull****. Look at Trump though. He pushed the Obama birther movement forever too. Wanna talk fake news, look no further than Trump.
Well someone should tell trump because he is tweeting that Obama knew about Russian meddling but did nothing about it?
Obama did know. Matter of fact democrat Senators were talking about it in September before the elections. Schiff and Feinstein are both California democrats.
"I think the Obama administration should have done a lot more when it became clear that not only was Russia intervening, but it was being directed at the highest levels of the Kremlin," Schiff said on CNN's State of the Union. Back in September, Schiff and Senator Dianne Feinstein, also a California Democrat and the ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee, issued a joint statement saying Russian interference in the U.S. election was being directed by the “very senior levels” of the Russian government—a thinly veiled reference to President Vladimir Putin. “We call on President Putin to immediately order a halt to this activity,” Schiff and Feinstein wrote. “Americans will not stand for any foreign government trying to influence our election. We hope all Americans will stand together and reject the Russian effort.”
We certainly know that if Hillary says it, half of America will vote for it...
To put that in perspective the other less than half voted for an infantile moron with an apparent genetic disposition to lie even when it's not productive.
At TRUMPs very FIRST press conference he calls out CNN news. Trump says "CNN your VERY Fake News" I thought wow that's pretty rough of TRUMP to say that at his very first press conference, Well guess what folks he was 100% correct CNN admits on video to pushing Russia / Trump rumors is good for business $$$. CNN admits the story's are Bull $hit, LOL
He sure has spent a lot of time effort and tweeting to make it go away. And...in the long run it will probably be the cover-up that he trips over.
Obama did know. Matter of fact democrat Senators were talking about it in September before the elections. Schiff and Feinstein are both California democrats.
"I think the Obama administration should have done a lot more when it became clear that not only was Russia intervening, but it was being directed at the highest levels of the Kremlin," Schiff said on CNN's State of the Union. Back in September, Schiff and Senator Dianne Feinstein, also a California Democrat and the ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee, issued a joint statement saying Russian interference in the U.S. election was being directed by the “very senior levels” of the Russian government—a thinly veiled reference to President Vladimir Putin. “We call on President Putin to immediately order a halt to this activity,” Schiff and Feinstein wrote. “Americans will not stand for any foreign government trying to influence our election. We hope all Americans will stand together and reject the Russian effort.”
100% correct. So why did Trump say until very recently the Russia story is fake news?
100% correct. So why did Trump say until very recently the Russia story is fake news?
Because it is fake news that he is involved. That whole story line is blowing up in CNN's face. They are first trying to say Trump colluded and then they moved it to he his trying to interfere with the investigations. The Democrats knew about this since at least last September if not earlier. They did nothing about it. They did not touch it because they thought Hillary was winning.
In other news, it turns out some think tank says around 3 million illegals voting in America the last election? I know they are rationalizing by statistics, however California has increased it's Democrat/ Republican split by a large margin. California also has automatic voter registration with licensing and gives illegals drivers license. Where there is smoke.......
To put that in perspective the other less than half voted for an infantile moron with an apparent genetic disposition to lie even when it's not productive.
Sticks and stones. only thing that got Clinton over the majority was California's new extra margin from illegals voting. Sounds like you have voters remorse.....
Dummacrats love anything Anti TRUMP and your MSM is feeding you all the Anti TRUMP media you LibraTards will digest much more $ in feeding you dumb a$$'s what you wanna hear. Keep sucking it up fill your brains with garbage and make sure you keep up the Marches and Protests and please keep Nanci Pelocie as your Speaker!
How ever many post in to this thread and NO ONE has made a coment on the video. Ya know where the TOP CNN producer is saying on hidden camera that THEY as in CNN knows the Russian Trump story is BS but their is more money and higher ratings in pushing a story that they "CNN" knows is BS! How many other New sources are chasing the dollar feeding you LibraTards on BS news that you eat up. Try some mustard with the crow you have to eat it will take the edge off. Winning !!!!!
Because it is fake news that he is involved. That whole story line is blowing up in CNN's face. They are first trying to say Trump colluded and then they moved it to he his trying to interfere with the investigations. The Democrats knew about this since at least last September if not earlier. They did nothing about it. They did not touch it because they thought Hillary was winning.
In other news, it turns out some think tank says around 3 million illegals voting in America the last election? I know they are rationalizing by statistics, however California has increased it's Democrat/ Republican split by a large margin. California also has automatic voter registration with licensing and gives illegals drivers license. Where there is smoke.......
That is false. 3 people made an error and didn't follow guidelines. It pertained to a Trump backer's dealing with a Russian bank. That doesn't mean the "whole story line is blowing up in CNN's face". That would be akin to saying that when FoxNews' and Brett Baier released a headline that an "FBI indictment was inevitable for Hillary Clinton" (and then they had to issue a public retraction) last summer meant the whole server issue was "fake news".
If 3 million illegals voted, it would be impossible to hide. Give me a freaking break.
That is false. 3 people made an error and didn't follow guidelines. It pertained to a Trump backer's dealing with a Russian bank. That doesn't mean the "whole story line is blowing up in CNN's face". That would be akin to saying that when FoxNews' and Brett Baier released a headline that an "FBI indictment was inevitable for Hillary Clinton" (and then they had to issue a public retraction) last summer meant the whole server issue was "fake news".
If 3 million illegals voted, it would be impossible to hide. Give me a freaking break.
Liberals are either ignorant or evil.
Wake there should be more heads flying then just the 3. The top of CNN did it for the money and power. Listen to the tape . Your f-in liberal dogma theories are so easy to debunk. Do you remember the story CNN the fake news team put out there about Trump sleeping with 3 Russian prostitutes when this all broke out. As far as illegals voting there are studies out there between 1.5 and 7 million. The motive and evidence have already been delivered. Done.Finished. No more discussion need. Now if you want to open up a investigation that will have some meaning and better our Country to be more fair and just lets open some real investigation to your hero's illegal activities.
Liberals are either ignorant or evil.
Wake there should be more heads flying then just the 3. The top of CNN did it for the money and power. Listen to the tape . Your f-in liberal dogma theories are so easy to debunk. Do you remember the story CNN the fake news team put out there about Trump sleeping with 3 Russian prostitutes when this all broke out. As far as illegals voting there are studies out there between 1.5 and 7 million. The motive and evidence have already been delivered. Done.Finished. No more discussion need. Now if you want to open up a investigation that will have some meaning and better our Country to be more fair and just lets open some real investigation to your hero's illegal activities.
The fact that you think CNN is all of a sudden the king of lies is ****ing hysterical. Fox news has been at the front of that for years.
Thank You Project Veritas . These are real journalist. After exposing CNN releasing fake news only to increase profits and viewers we need to do a real investigation about something that matters since we already have laws in place that can stop the fake news. Many of the less educated or fortunate watch CNN and believe what they say.
Thank You Project Veritas . These are real journalist. After exposing CNN releasing fake news only to increase profits and viewers we need to do a real investigation about something that matters since we already have laws in place that can stop the fake news. Many of the less educated or fortunate watch CNN and believe what they say.
I'll gladly go into the topic of education with you.
How does it make you Libral Dummocrats feel? That you essentially have been puppets for profit? Is it like fining out No tooth Fary? No Santa Clause?
The DNC lied and cheated you with favoring Hillary
Your Fake Media
Your Fake outrage
Your Fake protesters (paid for)
Your Fake narratives
Your Fake Hollywood spokes people
I understand your Horse lost, your upset you want to vent you want these fake story's to be true. You want to watch late night TV where the Host's make fun of TRUMP for almost their entire monologue. As long as you know they are doing it for profit & your feeding them. Nothing different then National Enquirer or other Gosip rags, News has reached a for "entertainment only" level.
That is false. 3 people made an error and didn't follow guidelines. It pertained to a Trump backer's dealing with a Russian bank. That doesn't mean the "whole story line is blowing up in CNN's face". That would be akin to saying that when FoxNews' and Brett Baier released a headline that an "FBI indictment was inevitable for Hillary Clinton" (and then they had to issue a public retraction) last summer meant the whole server issue was "fake news".
If 3 million illegals voted, it would be impossible to hide. Give me a freaking break.
There were no guidelines from what I understand. Places like CNN do not retract stories and the certainly do not retract stories due to what you say amounts to a clerical error. That is huge. We will just have to disagree on that.
I see your point on the Fox example except that sounds like an opinion piece lead in where they either discuss a topic. Biased for sure but it could have had some factual discussion points. However in the case with CNN a person fabricated a whole story because a Russian big wig went up to the American and simply introduced himself from what I understand. Then came a whole story on how that was a smoking gun on collusion. Very suspect. It is narrative based reporting and they had to retract it. They could be sued for it however the person who the article was about said they are fine with the retraction and the apology.
Regardless, I think the whole Russian deal is blowing up in their face. It was completely a fabricated story line in collusion with the DNC. You can say that about every election because that is what the Russians do. So do the Chinese, French, Israel, Iran and so on. All of them do it every election. It is good business to have the Americans on your team for world affairs. I would be more shocked if someone reported that another country was not trying to influence our elections.
On voting, it would be easy to go unnoticed for illegals to vote. In California you can simply register. People do it on the street all the time. There is no ID required for voting. Matter fact I am on the voting roll twice. I made them mark it out. We are also influenced by mass illegal immigration by millions. Their children vote pretty much straight ticket democrat.
Actually, I do have a question. Why are people freaking out over Russian influence but are completely silent on millions of illegals flooding the country and influencing our elections either by illegal voting or definitely within 18 years with their children voting straight ticket democrat? All this is done under the cover of the democrat party trying to protect them from being deported. Why isn't anyone upset about that collusion?
Actually, I do have a question. Why are people freaking out over Russian influence but are completely silent on millions of illegals flooding the country and influencing our elections either by illegal voting or definitely within 18 years with their children voting straight ticket democrat? All this is done under the cover of the democrat party trying to protect them from being deported. Why isn't anyone upset about that collusion?
Because nobody is allowed to ask that question. If you try to then your are shouted down by the commie hoodlums as a racist.
My personal opinion is that the tide is starting to change. The lefts anti-America agenda is being exposed, race baiting and other liberal ridicule tactics are being exposed for what they are. Total BS. News media like CNN NBC and CBS are all being exposed for not being the impartial news agencies they claim to be
Actually, I do have a question. Why are people freaking out over Russian influence but are completely silent on millions of illegals flooding the country and influencing our elections either by illegal voting or definitely within 18 years with their children voting straight ticket democrat? All this is done under the cover of the democrat party trying to protect them from being deported. Why isn't anyone upset about that collusion?
Because Obama deported more people than any other president in history. FACT. And influx of illegals is offset by illegals leaving at the moment. We are at net zero for immigration of illegals. FACT.
People should be concerned about Russian interference. I don't think Trump colluded with them, but the fact he seems to not care about it is rather worrying to me.
Grant, is there a list of Russia stories that that CNN producer is responsible for that you could point us to?
For those arguing that Obama dropped the ball on Russia, you've gotta admit that he was in a damned-if-i-do-damned-if-i-don't situation. He could call it out and ring all of the alarm bells and then seem like he's using the force of the government to impugn Trump (if only by implication, as a third party beneficiary of Russia's meddling) and seemingly rig the election for Hillary, or he could do what he did... which we can now argue with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight was not enough.
So in a perfect world if you could go back to August 2016, what would you have done differently if you were Obama?
Because Obama deported more people than any other president in history. FACT. And influx of illegals is offset by illegals leaving at the moment. We are at net zero for immigration of illegals. FACT.
People should be concerned about Russian interference. I don't think Trump colluded with them, but the fact he seems to not care about it is rather worrying to me.
not sure you know that because I am not aware of a ticket taker at the border. However, democrat governors and many large democrat ran cities continue to push a sanctuary city approach. Illegal immigration has forever morphed the california voter landscape. So much so it now has a super majority in the california senate.
I don't know how you can say Trump does not care about Russia's involvement. Best they can do is investigate and report. What could Trump even do? hell, we allowed them to steal the atomic bomb from us and get away with it. What do you think some hackers are really going to get?
Because Obama deported more people than any other president in history. FACT. And influx of illegals is offset by illegals leaving at the moment. We are at net zero for immigration of illegals. FACT.
People should be concerned about Russian interference. I don't think Trump colluded with them, but the fact he seems to not care about it is rather worrying to me.
Real Wake get over it while your side is still ahead. Is in fact the reason you want Trump to investigate more is so that they will throw Hillary and more of the lefts swamp people in prison so you can replace them with someone who will destroy this country worse? Do you want to know what i think? I think that it is better for Trump if those people stay in power for their side.
Yes Real Wake Trump is a very kind leader. Maybe too kind. Much kinder then Obama who was a two faced liar according to you. Deported the poor kind hearted beleaguered masses only looking to join and blend in with our American Society. Tell me why Obama was great? When the wall is finished he will probably be the President that deported the fewest people ever, and so will be known as the kindest President of our generation. How does that make you feel Real Wake?
Grant, is there a list of Russia stories that that CNN producer is responsible for that you could point us to?
None. He isnt part of the political CNN machine. He is a medical producer for cnn http://heavy.com/news/2017/06/john-b...oject-veritas/
It was his opinion. Who would disagree? Think CNN, MSNBC, FOX are not the biggest winners and all are in it for the ratings/$$?
Grant, is there a list of Russia stories that that CNN producer is responsible for that you could point us to?
For those arguing that Obama dropped the ball on Russia, you've gotta admit that he was in a damned-if-i-do-damned-if-i-don't situation. He could call it out and ring all of the alarm bells and then seem like he's using the force of the government to impugn Trump (if only by implication, as a third party beneficiary of Russia's meddling) and seemingly rig the election for Hillary, or he could do what he did... which we can now argue with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight was not enough.
So in a perfect world if you could go back to August 2016, what would you have done differently if you were Obama?
I appreciate the question and I am going to give the answer to Obama that I believe. I think his hands were tied to a certain degree. However I don't believe Clinton email leak was the Russians. I believe someone in her circle or DNC leaked them. Even Wiki Leaks said it was not the Russians and even offered a big reward for the killer of not the leaker dude. Why would they care to offer a reward for a random guy? Obama probably believed Hillary could clean up the Russia stuff without anyone getting their hand slapped.
At the end of the day, you can not say that Trump should have done this or that when the people in charge from Obama to the security council in congress knew of the accused Russian involvement. Both the president and congress have authority to act. Neither did. So why would they not act? We see Washington is highly political. One side or the other would love to fry the other side and we all know it.
You have to ask your self why? Thoughts:
1) The information really not an issue so they could not make a big deal about it? Like I said, I would be most shocked if they said they were not trying already.
2) It would hurt Hillary if it got out? You know dang well if it hurt Trump it would have been out. The republicans and the democrats would have given up that info early to stop Trump.
3) I think you don't bring up potential involvement during an election cycle because for some reason a certain party is absolutely against bringing an ID to vote. Talk of fake votes would make those arguments for voter ID's more valid.
But Delta it was DEFINITELY "brought up". This was a subject of the debates, in fact. Who can forget "I'm not a puppet, you're a puppet." The existence of Russian meddling was completely poo poo'd and denied by Trump before and after the election. Now there's this begrudging, "well if it happened it's Obama's fault."
So if you were Obama in August 2016 (or just "the President..." you don't have to be Obama if you don't want) and you knew about Russian meddling efforts, what would you have done differently?
But Delta it was DEFINITELY "brought up". This was a subject of the debates, in fact. Who can forget "I'm not a puppet, you're a puppet." The existence of Russian meddling was completely poo poo'd and denied by Trump before and after the election. Now there's this begrudging, "well if it happened it's Obama's fault."
So if you were Obama in August 2016 (or just "the President..." you don't have to be Obama if you don't want) and you knew about Russian meddling efforts, what would you have done differently?
If you believed it to be significant, you investigate if you are on the up and up. The president did not have to investigate. The president through his justice department were certainly colluding with the DNC in trying to shape the wording of the investigation to illegal emails as to not make Hillary look guilty. That sounds like collusion. The FBI could investigate and they were. Congress can order it. The intelligence committee knew about it. My guess is there was nothing to the whole Russian business. If they wanted, they can bring in any daily activity of the Russians, Chinese and other players and tell the public that "here is the smoking gun". They could do that with any days activities and frame the evidence any way that want because it always is going on.
That is why I believe the whole thing is a smoke screen. Hillary and the DNC were saying and doing some some nasty crap, had run afoul of classified document handling and they colluded against the socialist Sanders. They got outed by in insider from the DNC or her campaign to wikileaks. As any good campaign planner does, they tried to frame the Russians as working with Trump as the range chicken to try and save Hillary's campaign.
not sure you know that because I am not aware of a ticket taker at the border. However, democrat governors and many large democrat ran cities continue to push a sanctuary city approach. Illegal immigration has forever morphed the california voter landscape. So much so it now has a super majority in the california senate.
I don't know how you can say Trump does not care about Russia's involvement. Best they can do is investigate and report. What could Trump even do? hell, we allowed them to steal the atomic bomb from us and get away with it. What do you think some hackers are really going to get?
The fact he eased sanctions afterwords says as much.
There were no guidelines from what I understand. Places like CNN do not retract stories and the certainly do not retract stories due to what you say amounts to a clerical error. That is huge. We will just have to disagree on that.
I see your point on the Fox example except that sounds like an opinion piece lead in where they either discuss a topic. Biased for sure but it could have had some factual discussion points. However in the case with CNN a person fabricated a whole story because a Russian big wig went up to the American and simply introduced himself from what I understand. Then came a whole story on how that was a smoking gun on collusion. Very suspect. It is narrative based reporting and they had to retract it. They could be sued for it however the person who the article was about said they are fine with the retraction and the apology.
Delta, the specific language in the statement from CNN concerning the firing, is that the 3 violated company policy. It would be damn hard to fire someone if "there were no guidelines".
This is Baier's response when called out on making the claim that an "indictment was inevitable" a few days before the election. Baier's show is not a "opinion" driven, commentary-type show.
If you believed it to be significant, you investigate if you are on the up and up. The president did not have to investigate. The president through his justice department were certainly colluding with the DNC in trying to shape the wording of the investigation to illegal emails as to not make Hillary look guilty. That sounds like collusion. The FBI could investigate and they were. Congress can order it. The intelligence committee knew about it. My guess is there was nothing to the whole Russian business. If they wanted, they can bring in any daily activity of the Russians, Chinese and other players and tell the public that "here is the smoking gun". They could do that with any days activities and frame the evidence any way that want because it always is going on.
That is why I believe the whole thing is a smoke screen. Hillary and the DNC were saying and doing some some nasty crap, had run afoul of classified document handling and they colluded against the socialist Sanders. They got outed by in insider from the DNC or her campaign to wikileaks. As any good campaign planner does, they tried to frame the Russians as working with Trump as the range chicken to try and save Hillary's campaign.
The fantasy in the last paragraph of your post would almost be believable if every freaking US intelligence agency wouldn't have commented that they are "without a doubt, 100% sure that the Russians meddled in the 2016 election". Hell, even the GOP and Trump are admitting it.
Obama not mentioning or investigating the Russian claims leading up to the election is one of two things (maybe a mixture of both):
1. They were concerned that a formal investigation could look like a political ploy to divert attention away from Hillary's server investigation.
2. They assumed Hillary was ahead by a safe margin.
Delta, the specific language in the statement from CNN concerning the firing, is that the 3 violated company policy. It would be damn hard to fire someone if "there were no guidelines".
This is Baier's response when called out on making the claim that an "indictment was inevitable" a few days before the election. Baier's show is not a "opinion" driven, commentary-type show.
Actually from the reports I read, they resigned and were not fired. I just read a report this morning that CNN was facing a 100 million law suit if they did not back away from the report.
Baier (I would assume since I don't watch that stuff) is a show on FOX and not the news correct? If it is a show, it is opinion. The news is the news. They are different unfortunately. It is still commentary with an opinion. I assume they gathered their team of "experts" and came to the same opinion that a indictment was inevitable. If it were you and me, we would be in prison right now for less than what she did. That should be the travesty that you and I should be worried about.
The fantasy in the last paragraph of your post would almost be believable if every freaking US intelligence agency wouldn't have commented that they are "without a doubt, 100% sure that the Russians meddled in the 2016 election". Hell, even the GOP and Trump are admitting it.
Obama not mentioning or investigating the Russian claims leading up to the election is one of two things (maybe a mixture of both):
1. They were concerned that a formal investigation could look like a political ploy to divert attention away from Hillary's server investigation.
2. They assumed Hillary was ahead by a safe margin.
You can have both set of issues happening at the same time from my statement. The Russians screw with us every day. Has anyone not been paying attention to the last 100 years? The Chinese do it. The French. Germans and so on. Hell we do it. They are all probing and have active spies in the US just like we have them in other countries. So yes. Everyone has to admit it is true because it has never not been true.
One the second line, Hillary got caught saying and doing messed up things. Not a single person took responsibility and said they messed up did they? No. They said the Russians did it. they did not have proof that the Russians released her emails. If her emails were on a secure server like they should have, they would not have got taken or the server was secure and someone inside released the emails.
Let me ask you this. Why did the DNC refuse to let the NSA or FBI help them with their server attack investigation?
deltahoosier
(shawndoggy)Join Date: Nov 2009
06-29-2017, 10:20 AM
You can have both set of issues happening at the same time from my statement. The Russians screw with us every day. Has anyone not been paying attention to the last 100 years? The Chinese do it. The French. Germans and so on. Hell we do it. They are all probing and have active spies in the US just like we have them in other countries. So yes. Everyone has to admit it is true because it has never not been true.
One the second line, Hillary got caught saying and doing messed up things. Not a single person took responsibility and said they messed up did they? No. They said the Russians did it. they did not have proof that the Russians released her emails. If her emails were on a secure server like they should have, they would not have got taken or the server was secure and someone inside released the emails.
Let me ask you this. Why did the DNC refuse to let the NSA or FBI help them with their server attack investigation?
What clinton e-mails were released as a result of DNC server hacking? None as far as I know.
You are conflating three different and distinct batches of e-mails:
1. Actual clinton e-mails from her private server which were turned over as part of behghazi investigation
2. DNC e-mails which were released by wikileaks (AFAIK none from HRC herself)
3. Podesta's phished gmail account e-mails which were released by wikileaks (AFAIK none from HRC herself)
You can have both set of issues happening at the same time from my statement. The Russians screw with us every day. Has anyone not been paying attention to the last 100 years? The Chinese do it. The French. Germans and so on. Hell we do it. They are all probing and have active spies in the US just like we have them in other countries. So yes. Everyone has to admit it is true because it has never not been true.
One the second line, Hillary got caught saying and doing messed up things. Not a single person took responsibility and said they messed up did they? No. They said the Russians did it. they did not have proof that the Russians released her emails. If her emails were on a secure server like they should have, they would not have got taken or the server was secure and someone inside released the emails.
Let me ask you this. Why did the DNC refuse to let the NSA or FBI help them with their server attack investigation?
Come on, Delta. The Russians have never "screwed with us" to the extent they did leading up to November. This goes beyond "spies". This was a massive cyber-attack meant to sway the election in favor of Trump. Now you need to ask yourself as to why Russia was so hellbent on getting Trump elected. Russians weren't hacking Hillary's email, they were hacking the DNC. Besides, at that point, Hillary was 4 years removed as Sec. of State and had no reason to use a "secure server".
Actually from the reports I read, they resigned and were not fired. I just read a report this morning that CNN was facing a 100 million law suit if they did not back away from the report.
Baier (I would assume since I don't watch that stuff) is a show on FOX and not the news correct? If it is a show, it is opinion. The news is the news. They are different unfortunately. It is still commentary with an opinion. I assume they gathered their team of "experts" and came to the same opinion that a indictment was inevitable. If it were you and me, we would be in prison right now for less than what she did. That should be the travesty that you and I should be worried about.
No Delta, the "indictment was inevitable" came from Baier's anonymous source with the FBI. Fox had as a "Breaking News" announcement. If someone is simply offering an opinion, then there is no need for a formal retraction if they're wrong.
Come on, Delta. The Russians have never "screwed with us" to the extent they did leading up to November. This goes beyond "spies". This was a massive cyber-attack meant to sway the election in favor of Trump. Now you need to ask yourself as to why Russia was so hellbent on getting Trump elected. Russians weren't hacking Hillary's email, they were hacking the DNC. Besides, at that point, Hillary was 4 years removed as Sec. of State and had no reason to use a "secure server".
In what way did the Russians "screw us"? Wikileaks says the information was not from the Russians and even offered a reward for the murdered DNC insider who "didn't leak the information yet was killed in a professional style hit". It is speculation that Russia outed Hillary. Besides at the end of the day, the Russians did not sink Hillary. Hillary and the DNC sunk Hillary. If they did not put such crappy opinions about their potential voters into writing or even think such things, there would not even be an issue. If she had not had illegal classified information in emials she would have been ok. If Anthony Weener was not flashing his d$%K Picts everywhere to minors, the authorities would not have seized the computers of Hillary's right hand woman and found out more of this stuff. Hillary and her supporters need to take some personal responsibility. She is a horrible person in general and even worse candidate.
Still begs the question. If everyone is sticking to their russians story, then why wont the DNC let the FBI or NSA look into their servers for information on who breached them? Pretty easy for an organization to throw out allegations of an illegal act by Russians when they will not let the authorities get to the truth.
No Delta, the "indictment was inevitable" came from Baier's anonymous source with the FBI. Fox had as a "Breaking News" announcement. If someone is simply offering an opinion, then there is no need for a formal retraction if they're wrong.
If it is a true source then the source is wrong or the source was right and politics (aka Bill Clinton) got to the FBI though the DOJ. Did Fox issue a formal retraction? I don't really follow it to be honest. If they did, then they did. They should be more careful. Just like CNN needs to be more careful. Dan Rather got shown the door in a heartbeat when he tried that gotya politics with Bush.
In what way did the Russians "screw us"? Wikileaks says the information was not from the Russians and even offered a reward for the murdered DNC insider who "didn't leak the information yet was killed in a professional style hit". It is speculation that Russia outed Hillary. Besides at the end of the day, the Russians did not sink Hillary. Hillary and the DNC sunk Hillary. If they did not put such crappy opinions about their potential voters into writing or even think such things, there would not even be an issue. If she had not had illegal classified information in emials she would have been ok. If Anthony Weener was not flashing his d$%K Picts everywhere to minors, the authorities would not have seized the computers of Hillary's right hand woman and found out more of this stuff. Hillary and her supporters need to take some personal responsibility. She is a horrible person in general and even worse candidate.
Still begs the question. If everyone is sticking to their russians story, then why wont the DNC let the FBI or NSA look into their servers for information on who breached them? Pretty easy for an organization to throw out allegations of an illegal act by Russians when they will not let the authorities get to the truth.
Delta, again you are not looking at the whole picture. If the Russians did not favor Trump, how come no damning emails came leaked came from any GOP sources? If you are going to say "because there was nothing negative to leak" from the Trump campaign, I would find that hard to believe considering he went through three different campaign managers.
And who cares what the DNC does or does not do? The heads of every intelligence agency in the US has publicly stated, in front of Congress, that Russians interfered in the election. That is not "fake news" or some sort of excuse.
"screw with us" is a direct quote from you in an earlier post.
Delta, again you are not looking at the whole picture. If the Russians did not favor Trump, how come no damning emails came leaked came from any GOP sources? If you are going to say "because there was nothing negative to leak" from the Trump campaign, I would find that hard to believe considering he went through three different campaign managers.
And who cares what the DNC does or does not do? The heads of every intelligence agency in the US has publicly stated, in front of Congress, that Russians interfered in the election. That is not "fake news" or some sort of excuse.
"screw with us" is a direct quote from you in an earlier post.
I get what you are trying to say and you have to bear with me. Do you really think with the likes of the Bill Gates and the Steve Jobs (RIP) of the world as solid democrats as well as the Google CEO and other high tech people very solidly democrat, that the DNC would have a server that the Russians could get into to? You really believe that the DNC does not have the best cyber security money could buy? Do we really believe the Hillary Clinton with the full power of the highest levels of the US government at her disposal would have a server that, A) the Russians knew about to look for B) could get into it, is a possibility? Seriously? Think about it for a minute. You also think that if some outside agent tried to get into anyone of these servers that they would not call the authorities or their security firms that would have flagged such an attack not taken action? Does anyone seriously believe they would not?
Lack of Trump information? You don't think for a second that there are not operatives trying to get Trump information? If they could get it, it would be out.
The reason you know about any of this is because it was all leaked from someone who had access. It is theorized that this person is now laying with the worms. Even the guy who published the information who has been on permanent lock down in an embassy because the US is going to arrest him says that he did not get the information from the Russians. What does he have to gain or lose?
Do I believe the Russians were poking around. Of course, they always are. So, yes I believe it when everyone is saying the interfered. They always do. That is not a direct connection to Clintons garbage. If there was a connection then why wouldn't the DNC allow the feds to check the servers to find who did it? Because it did not happen that's why. IF the Feds investigate and they say they found no evidence then this thing really turns into a Sh&t show for the democrats.
deltahoosier
(pesos)Join Date: Oct 2001Location: Texas
06-29-2017, 4:11 PM
What clinton e-mails were released as a result of DNC server hacking? None as far as I know.
You are conflating three different and distinct batches of e-mails:
1. Actual clinton e-mails from her private server which were turned over as part of behghazi investigation
2. DNC e-mails which were released by wikileaks (AFAIK none from HRC herself)
3. Podesta's phished gmail account e-mails which were released by wikileaks (AFAIK none from HRC herself)
Missed this whole post.
I think this is what I am saying. None of this if from the Russians and all of it helped put the nail Clinton's campaign. What I think I hear people trying to say is the Russians hacked the DNC servers and turned them over to wikileaks. There has been zero proof of that.
You clearly know nothing about network security nor the nature of such attacks.
Not enough no, however i believe they have the best resources on earth to help them keep them safe. You have to know the server in which to attack don't you? Even then you still have to know what you are looking for as far as I know in order to target information for an attack. I know just enough that under IPv4 you have to know the IP and the ports you have to go after and depends of how their firewall is setup for IP and port verifications. I know that is just the infant version. You can put in malware that will send out reports to outside parties and such. Easiest way is an employee simply plugs in an unknown memory stick that has been planted with the malware. Frankly I would love to know much more about because I do find it pretty cool.
I am just saying that it is much easier for a pissed off employee to leak information than for some organization to figure out where to attack and then see what kind of info they could get. Matter of fact I have had that echoed to me by security people.
deltahoosier
(pesos)Join Date: Oct 2001Location: Texas
06-29-2017, 4:28 PM
The initial entry is almost always social engineering. So you are correct in a sense when you say "someone on the inside" was likely involved - just not the way you think. When it comes to a system like email which is inherently insecure (built in the 70s when the "internet" was just a bunch of friendly people who mostly knew each other) it's trivial to determine the "where" and just as simple to figure out who to target. Once you have a basic level of access it's pretty easy for any script kiddie to poke around and becomes more about forensics than prevention. One thing's for sure is that both parties, and the gov't themselves, are woefully behind the times and this was probably far easier to pull off than it should have been. The big guns were only really brought in after the fact. Just like anything else, people don't spend enough money until they have to.
I think this is what I am saying. None of this if from the Russians and all of it helped put the nail Clinton's campaign. What I think I hear people trying to say is the Russians hacked the DNC servers and turned them over to wikileaks. There has been zero proof of that.
No man, that's not what you were saying at all.
You said:
Quote:
Hillary got caught saying and doing messed up things. Not a single person took responsibility and said they messed up did they? No. They said the Russians did it. they did not have proof that the Russians released her emails. If her emails were on a secure server like they should have, they would not have got taken or the server was secure and someone inside released the emails.
I'm asking you to please tell us what Clinton e-mails the Russians released (allegedly or not)??
I'm asking you to please tell us what Clinton e-mails the Russians released (allegedly or not)??
Facts do matter.
Looks to me that you are quoting me two times saying the same things. I know you are trying to nuance Clinton and the DNC, in either case I have continually said it was an inside job. Not sure where the descrepency is? Your side likes to say that the Russians did it. Maybe not you, however the vast majority of democrat fanboys are trying to stick with the Russians did meme.
Article hit today. I guess the New York Times retracted the story that all the intelligence agencies agreed the Russians did it. Turns out there are 3 that say it. Of those 3 none of them actaully investigated the DNC servers. They were handed a memo by the DNC security company saying that the Russians did it and Comey and his croanies signed off on it. Plot is thickening........
Looks to me that you are quoting me two times saying the same things. I know you are trying to nuance Clinton and the DNC, in either case I have continually said it was an inside job. Not sure where the descrepency is? Your side likes to say that the Russians did it. Maybe not you, however the vast majority of democrat fanboys are trying to stick with the Russians did meme.
Article hit today. I guess the New York Times retracted the story that all the intelligence agencies agreed the Russians did it. Turns out there are 3 that say it. Of those 3 none of them actaully investigated the DNC servers. They were handed a memo by the DNC security company saying that the Russians did it and Comey and his croanies signed off on it. Plot is thickening........
Please explain how Russian interference in an election would be of interest to: Army/Marine Corps/Navy/Air Force/Coast guard intelligence. The other agencies such as Dept of Energy, Treasury, and the DEA would also not have interest. It doesn't change anything about the story except that the NYT overstated the number of agencies involved.
Plot is thickening because the 3 agencies reportedly that did sign off on it only did so by signing off on a report by a independent security company hired by the DNC. None of the 3 agencies were allowed access to investigate the validity of the claim. So, the plot thickens. Why and how would they do that. Comey had to sign off on it and it already turns out he lied inorder to get a special prosecutor. Who turns out to be stacking the deck with Democrat operatives of Clinton. Plot thickens.
Also, the claim of all 17 agencies was quoted to help get a special prosecutor if I understand correctly.
Turns out that the CIA and the FBI do not agree on the hacking.
They had hacking activity of Republicans and Democrats
There is zero ties to wikileaks and the alleged hacking attempts.
Turns out that the CIA and the FBI do not agree on the hacking.
They had hacking activity of Republicans and Democrats
There is zero ties to wikileaks and the alleged hacking attempts.
Delta, you do realize that story is from December. A lot has changed since then.
Linear Mode
