Crime Clinton Lawyer finally charged over Russia-gate hoax.

[giusti825]

No idea about the conspiracy theory, but the focus of serious people was on the hacking and the potential involvement with the Trump campaign, as well as possible exchanges related to it. That's exactly why propagandists keep trying to divert to the pee tape, which was more of a funny thing that added on.

C'mon dude. You have to deep down know that a hack didn't happen. When someone is a victim of a crime, they don't hide the evidence from the police. The FBI asked for the servers so they could investigate and the DNC said no. Why on earth would they prevent a criminal investigation if they were legitimately the victims of a crime?

Well, Trump was bizarrely deferential to Putin, which obviously is a concern. As was his longstanding attempt to get a huge bribe from Putin. Agreed that this was a sad fiasco. Also sad that to this day, you have hacks defending it or trying to deflect.

He wanted a cordial relationship with Russia rather than ramping up a cold war. He admires strongmen, a characteristic that should've had red flags going off in everyones head. He admired authoritarians, which is a characteristic that should disqualify him as a potential candidate for any voter. This isn't because he was "putin's puppet," it's because he has some serious character defects. That said, the American policy toward Russia under his presidency was especially harsh.

 

[giusti825]

If it was designed to sway the results why would Obama refuse Comey's request to make it public, because Obama was afraid it was too close to the election and was afraid it would appear too political?

Your theories are full of more holes than Swiss cheese.

I don't believe Obama was involved in any of this. This was all the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

 

[Jack V Savage]

C'mon dude. You have to deep down know that a hack didn't happen. When someone is a victim of a crime, they don't hide the evidence from the police. The FBI asked for the servers so they could investigate and the DNC said no. Why on earth would they prevent a criminal investigation if they were legitimately the victims of a crime?

They didn't prevent a criminal investigation (you're repeating a debunked claim from Trump--exactly the kind of thing I've pointed out that you keep doing, while you somehow deny being a hack), and of course a hack happened. That's a very well-established fact, and your refusal to acknowledge it shows either how dishonest you are or how deeply snowed you've been. IIRC, even Greenwald was reluctantly forced to acknowledge a hack.

He wanted a cordial relationship with Russia rather than ramping up a cold war. He admires strongmen, a characteristic that should've had red flags going off in everyones head. He admired authoritarians, which is a characteristic that should disqualify him as a potential candidate for any voter. This isn't because he was "putin's puppet," it's because he has some serious character defects. That said, the American policy toward Russia under his presidency was especially harsh.

He had a cordial relationship with Russia. They literally committed crimes against Americans to help him win. He's been working on a tower in Moscow, which would have given him a nine-figure payout (and he lied about that fact). So he was bending over backward for them (and LOL at your last claim). That's a great relationship, at least from their perspective. Not as great for the American people, but who cares, right? He's a Republican so he nothing he does is bad.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I don't believe Obama was involved in any of this. This was all the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

You're not answering his questions, which expose a huge flaw in your thinking.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Yeah, famously during the debates, where Hillary accused him, and Trump, without guile, went, "No Puppet! No Puppet! No, you're the puppet! No, you're the puppet!"

As I said, this stuff was going on before the election happened.

Also interesting how the guy isn't offended by Trump calling Clinton a puppet with no evidence at all. Massive double standard from these guys.

 

[Ichibanner]

He admired authoritarians, which is a characteristic that should disqualify him as a potential candidate for any voter.

Are you saying that authoritarians are bad? So you're not a fan of the current DNC with their vaccine mandates and passports which goes against freedom and body autonomy?

 

[giusti825]

You're not answering his questions, which expose a huge flaw in your thinking.

He asked, "why didn't obama publicize it?" I said, i don't believe obama was involved in it. He didn't pay for the dossier. He didn't leak the dossier. He probably thought going public with something like that, without credible physical evidence would be election tampering. Unlike the DNC and Hillary campaign, he didn't know the origin. If he was in on it, he likely would have jumped at the chance to publicize it.

 

[Jack V Savage]

He asked, "why didn't obama publicize it?" I said, i don't believe obama was involved in it. He didn't pay for the dossier. He didn't leak the dossier. He probably thought going public with something like that, without credible physical evidence would be election tampering. Unlike the DNC and Hillary campaign, he didn't know the origin. If he was in on it, he likely would have jumped at the chance to publicize it.

You said that the investigation was designed to influence election results. First, that would require Obama. But second, if so, why was it not publicized? Kind of defeats the purpose. Your theory is really dumb.

 

[Fluffernutter]

Anyone else getting an indictment?

 

[Whippy McGee]

Here's an excellent video on a Liberal realizing the truth on the matter.



The Leftists are brainwashed here. It's too bad they control the MSM and Big Tech.

 

[giusti825]

You said that the investigation was designed to influence election results. First, that would require Obama. But second, if so, why was it not publicized? Kind of defeats the purpose. Your theory is really dumb.

That wouldn't require obama, just a corrupt political campaign, a gullible and bias FBI and an MSM that never does their due diligence; you know, the normal stuff.

How do you know about it if it wasn't publicized?

 

[HereticBD]

That wouldn't require obama, just a corrupt political campaign, a gullible and bias FBI and an MSM that never does their due diligence; you know, the normal stuff.

How do you know about it if it wasn't publicized?

You are a very patient person.

 

[Jack V Savage]

That wouldn't require obama, just a corrupt political campaign, a gullible and bias FBI and an MSM that never does their due diligence; you know, the normal stuff.

How do you know about it if it wasn't publicized?

Came out after the election. Also how Obama wanted to do a joint thing with McConnell so it wouldn't be a partisan thing, but McConnell refused. But I'm sure you have some bullshit defense of his actions there...

 

[giusti825]

They didn't prevent a criminal investigation (you're repeating a debunked claim from Trump--exactly the kind of thing I've pointed out that you keep doing, while you somehow deny being a hack), and of course a hack happened. That's a very well-established fact, and your refusal to acknowledge it shows either how dishonest you are or how deeply snowed you've been. IIRC, even Greenwald was reluctantly forced to acknowledge a hack.

It was a leak. Unless the DNC has an internet connection over 4x faster than any other internet connection on earth, then forensic analysis concludes that the files were loaded to an external device that was connected to a server or a computer on the network. This clearly indicates that someone physically present in the DNC headquarters downloaded the data and blew the whistle to wikileaks.

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/

Key among the findings of the independent forensic investigations is the conclusion that the DNC data was copied onto a storage device at a speed that far exceeds an Internet capability for a remote hack.

He had a cordial relationship with Russia. They literally committed crimes against Americans to help him win. He's been working on a tower in Moscow, which would have given him a nine-figure payout (and he lied about that fact). So he was bending over backward for them (and LOL at your last claim). That's a great relationship, at least from their perspective. Not as great for the American people, but who cares, right? He's a Republican so he nothing he does is bad.

Do you have nightmares about putin? Do you check under your bed for him before you go to sleep? The man is not that powerful nor does he care to influence American presidential elections.

 

[giusti825]

Here's an excellent video on a Liberal realizing the truth on the matter.



The Leftists are brainwashed here. It's too bad they control the MSM and Big Tech.

There is a huge difference between a liberal and a leftist. I'd call Russel Brand more Leftist than Liberal. Russell Brand would say he is neither but believes in human compassion and cooperation.

 

[Whippy McGee]

There is a huge difference between a liberal and a leftist. I'd call Russel Brand more Leftist than Liberal. Russell Brand would say he is neither but believes in human compassion and cooperation.

I think you got it backwards.

Liberal: Jimmy Dore, Glenn Greenwald, Kystal Ball, Bill Maher.... Russel Brand

Leftist: Rachel Maddow, Don Lemon, all late night talk show hosts, except Gutfeld.

 

[giusti825]

I think you got it backwards.

Liberal: Jimmy Dore, Glenn Greenwald, Kystal Ball, Bill Maher.... Russel Brand

Leftist: Rachel Maddow, Don Lemon, all late night talk show hosts, except Gutfeld.

youre definitely the one who has it backwards. Lefties who advocate for policies of socialism, social democracy and democratic socialism are to the left of liberals, who tend to be staunch captialists, corporatists or corporatist apologists.

Leftist - Bernie/Gravel

Liberal - Clinton/Obama/Biden.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

It was a leak. Unless the DNC has an internet connection over 4x faster than any other internet connection on earth, then forensic analysis concludes that the files were loaded to an external device that was connected to a server or a computer on the network. This clearly indicates that someone physically present in the DNC headquarters downloaded the data and blew the whistle to wikileaks.

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/





Do you have nightmares about putin? Do you check under your bed for him before you go to sleep? The man is not that powerful nor does he care to influence American presidential elections.

Just curious.

Why continue the conversation?

Even when the facts are 100% in support of your argument, Jack won't ever concede. He's too invested in his political tribe.

Why waste your time trying to give the red pill of truth to those who will just spit it out and call it poison?

Jack is a time wasting fool who will leave no mark on the intellectual history of humanity.

That's also his purpose. Time wasted trying to correct Jack is time you DIDN'T spend trying to rationalize with someone who actually wants to be rational.

Our time on this Earth is limited. Spend it helping those who actually want to be helped.

Travel well friend.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It was a leak. Unless the DNC has an internet connection over 4x faster than any other internet connection on earth, then forensic analysis concludes that the files were loaded to an external device that was connected to a server or a computer on the network.

That just indicates that it was transferred at some time, which Russia obviously did. There's no serious debate about it being a hack. Look into this more. Your whole world view is about to get blown up.

Do you have nightmares about putin? Do you check under your bed for him before you go to sleep? The man is not that powerful nor does he care to influence American presidential elections.

So the reason you resort to such dishonest tactics is that you don't have an intelligent response and you lack the integrity to simply admit your mistake, right?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Just curious.

Why continue the conversation?

Even when the facts are 100% in support of your argument, Jack won't ever concede. He's too invested in his political tribe.

Why waste your time trying to give the red pill of truth to those who will just spit it out and call it poison?

Jack is a time wasting fool who will leave no mark on the intellectual history of humanity.

That's also his purpose. Time wasted trying to correct Jack is time you DIDN'T spend trying to rationalize with someone who actually wants to be rational.

Our time on this Earth is limited. Spend it helping those who actually want to be helped.

Travel well friend.

Note that you're now getting one of the most dishonest and hackish Republicans (who has literally described how his father abused him into hating the left) here trying to defend you. That's a good indicator of where you stand now, gius.