On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.
When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:44:18 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.

I must have missed something, when did Trump praise any of our
intelligence services?


When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 9:47:37 AM UTC-5, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:44:18 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.

I must have missed something, when did Trump praise any of our
intelligence services?


I didn't say he or the Trumpets praised any of them. Only that they
will cite them as evidence of something when it suits them, while
calling them idiots the rest of the time. In this case, BTJ is citing
Dir of National Inteligence Office as saying they have not concluded
that Russia was trying to help Trump. IDK what Trump himself has said,
if anything. And while you and I know it, for the peanut gallery,
the operative part here is "help Trump". DNI agrees that Russia was
meddling in the election. The finer point remains as to whether it
was specifically to help Trump win or if it was just to deligitamize
and disrupt the elections overall. And you're right, I have not heard
Trump say anything nice about US intel agencies, only to heap scorn on
them. Must be nice to be working there, with your life on the line.

And of course Trump is totally tone deaf, as usual. He just picked
Rex, who has substantial ties to Russia, as sec of state. I would
not be surprised to see that one go down the tubes before he even
gets to the Senate. Apparently Trump wants to hear more about Russia,
their involvement in the election, go through all that, when there
are other, more qualified choices.

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:44:18 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.
When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

A am still not sure what we are accusing them of? Telling us the
truth? Nobody at the DNC has denied what they leaked. After all, the
leaks only said that the DNC was making a conscious effort to dump
Bernie and that Hillary was given debate questions before the debates
.... like there were some shocking questions.

If they got the same type of thing from the RNC and it was "dump
Trump" it would not be news anyway.

I also wonder what grounds we have to be outraged. It is not like the
US has never influenced elections around the world and in a far more
active way than simply telling the truth about the campaign.

trader_4 expressed precisely :
On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.
When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

As usual, the subject line is misleading.

What that article is actually saying is that there is disagreement
about the *motive* of the Russians. That being to help Trump as opposed
to just that of stopping Hillary. I heard that Putin really doesn't
like Hillary. I suspect the motive was to avoid having Hillary as
President. IMO, that's the motive. I'm not ready to believe that Trump
has anything to do with the hacking, but as usual we need evidence
before drawing conclusions about motive.

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:44:18 -0800 (PST)
trader_4




WH spokesman claims €˜China hacked election

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/con...cked-election/


LOL

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 10:32:14 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:44:18 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.
When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

A am still not sure what we are accusing them of? Telling us the
truth?

No, illegally hacking, a felony, to meddle with the US election.
And if the CIA is right, to help Trump win over Hillary. CIA believes
they hacked the GOP too, but didn't release whatever they found there.
Hard to imagine that if the Russians wanted to find dirt on Trump,
there was none to be found.


Nobody at the DNC has denied what they leaked. After all, the
leaks only said that the DNC was making a conscious effort to dump
Bernie and that Hillary was given debate questions before the debates
... like there were some shocking questions.

If they got the same type of thing from the RNC and it was "dump
Trump" it would not be news anyway.


I disagree. There is bipartisan recognition that this needs to be
fully investigated, regardless of who it benefited or harmed. Many
leading Republicans are calling for a full investigation, McConnell,
McCain, Graham, Rubio and there will be one.



I also wonder what grounds we have to be outraged. It is not like the
US has never influenced elections around the world and in a far more
active way than simply telling the truth about the campaign.

So, we should just accept Russia doing it, welcome it? What will they
do next time?

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:09:32 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:


I must have missed something, when did Trump praise any of our
intelligence services?


I didn't say he or the Trumpets praised any of them. Only that they
will cite them as evidence of something when it suits them, while
calling them idiots the rest of the time. In this case, BTJ is citing

"Praise" was a poor choice of words on my behalf. I was curious if
you can provide examples of when Trump has cited any of our
intelligence agencies in support of any of his positions? Having said
information would be very valuable for me.

As for BTJ, I have been encountering him for a long. I ignore
everything he posts as it is usually vile and filled with hatred. I
have yet to witness him having a logical, cogent or civil discussion
with anyone.


Dir of National Inteligence Office as saying they have not concluded
that Russia was trying to help Trump. IDK what Trump himself has said,
if anything. And while you and I know it, for the peanut gallery,
the operative part here is "help Trump". DNI agrees that Russia was
meddling in the election. The finer point remains as to whether it
was specifically to help Trump win or if it was just to deligitamize
and disrupt the elections overall. And you're right, I have not heard
Trump say anything nice about US intel agencies, only to heap scorn on
them. Must be nice to be working there, with your life on the line.

As you are a thorough reader of posts in this group, I think you might
remember my position, all along, has been that Russia has meddled, in
numerous way, in our election process. At this point, I am less
concerned with their motives than I am with the meddling representing
an act of war.

It is painfully obvious the POTUS elect is deathly afraid of the
Russian meddling story gaining traction as it will derail his attempts
to 'innocently' and without suspicion, dance to the tune of his puppet
master, Vladimir Putin.


And of course Trump is totally tone deaf, as usual. He just picked
Rex, who has substantial ties to Russia, as sec of state. I would
not be surprised to see that one go down the tubes before he even
gets to the Senate. Apparently Trump wants to hear more about Russia,
their involvement in the election, go through all that, when there
are other, more qualified choices.

Trump is not tone deaf, if he were, he would not be fighting the story
like a junk yard dog on a chain. Any rational POTUS elect would
acknowledge the story and promise a full and thorough investigation
once he takes office.

As for Tillerson, he was personally selected by Putin and Trump is
dancing like the Russian marionette he really is. Tillerson is
indebted to the thug, Putin, and will not question or object to any of
Trump's partiality to a nation which is an obvious enemy, not only of
the USA but of freedom and liberty everywhere.

Russia is the new Mafia, only this Mafia has nuclear weapons and
complete control of the incoming president of the United States of
America.

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 10:46:51 AM UTC-5, FromTheRafters wrote:
trader_4 expressed precisely :
On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.
When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

As usual, the subject line is misleading.

What that article is actually saying is that there is disagreement
about the *motive* of the Russians. That being to help Trump as opposed
to just that of stopping Hillary. I heard that Putin really doesn't
like Hillary. I suspect the motive was to avoid having Hillary as
President. IMO, that's the motive. I'm not ready to believe that Trump
has anything to do with the hacking, but as usual we need evidence
before drawing conclusions about motive.

I agree it's probably unlikely that Trump had anything to do with the
actual hacking. But I would not be surprised if some people in his
campaign had some contact with Russians that might be involved in
screwing with the US.

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:59:10 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 10:46:51 AM UTC-5, FromTheRafters wrote:
trader_4 expressed precisely :
On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.
When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

As usual, the subject line is misleading.

What that article is actually saying is that there is disagreement
about the *motive* of the Russians. That being to help Trump as opposed
to just that of stopping Hillary. I heard that Putin really doesn't
like Hillary. I suspect the motive was to avoid having Hillary as
President. IMO, that's the motive. I'm not ready to believe that Trump
has anything to do with the hacking, but as usual we need evidence
before drawing conclusions about motive.

I agree it's probably unlikely that Trump had anything to do with the
actual hacking. But I would not be surprised if some people in his
campaign had some contact with Russians that might be involved in
screwing with the US.

The concept of Trump being without culpability in the Russian meddling
would be akin to considering me young and spry. His stated
encouragement for Russia to "hack" Clinton's email is damning all by
itself.

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 10:58:43 AM UTC-5, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:09:32 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:


I must have missed something, when did Trump praise any of our
intelligence services?


I didn't say he or the Trumpets praised any of them. Only that they
will cite them as evidence of something when it suits them, while
calling them idiots the rest of the time. In this case, BTJ is citing

"Praise" was a poor choice of words on my behalf. I was curious if
you can provide examples of when Trump has cited any of our
intelligence agencies in support of any of his positions? Having said
information would be very valuable for me.

I thought about it awhile, and I can't say I know of a single case
where Trump has cited any of the agencies. Much of the stuff he
throws out, eg the cost of AF1, he just gives a number and doesn't
say where he pulled it from, what it's based on, etc. It's a bizarre
and dangerous game he's playing. He's said our generals don't know
WTF they are doing, he's ridiculed the CIA. How demoralizing that must be.





As for BTJ, I have been encountering him for a long. I ignore
everything he posts as it is usually vile and filled with hatred. I
have yet to witness him having a logical, cogent or civil discussion
with anyone.


+1



Dir of National Inteligence Office as saying they have not concluded
that Russia was trying to help Trump. IDK what Trump himself has said,
if anything. And while you and I know it, for the peanut gallery,
the operative part here is "help Trump". DNI agrees that Russia was
meddling in the election. The finer point remains as to whether it
was specifically to help Trump win or if it was just to deligitamize
and disrupt the elections overall. And you're right, I have not heard
Trump say anything nice about US intel agencies, only to heap scorn on
them. Must be nice to be working there, with your life on the line.

As you are a thorough reader of posts in this group, I think you might
remember my position, all along, has been that Russia has meddled, in
numerous way, in our election process. At this point, I am less
concerned with their motives than I am with the meddling representing
an act of war.

It is painfully obvious the POTUS elect is deathly afraid of the
Russian meddling story gaining traction as it will derail his attempts
to 'innocently' and without suspicion, dance to the tune of his puppet
master, Vladimir Putin.


And of course Trump is totally tone deaf, as usual. He just picked
Rex, who has substantial ties to Russia, as sec of state. I would
not be surprised to see that one go down the tubes before he even
gets to the Senate. Apparently Trump wants to hear more about Russia,
their involvement in the election, go through all that, when there
are other, more qualified choices.

Trump is not tone deaf, if he were, he would not be fighting the story
like a junk yard dog on a chain. Any rational POTUS elect would
acknowledge the story and promise a full and thorough investigation
once he takes office.


What you describe is my definition of tone deaf. He doesn't acknowledge
the obvious problem, the legitimate concerns of many American, including
Republicans, and just goes on shouting his own tune, that there is no
problem, etc.


As for Tillerson, he was personally selected by Putin and Trump is
dancing like the Russian marionette he really is. Tillerson is
indebted to the thug, Putin, and will not question or object to any of
Trump's partiality to a nation which is an obvious enemy, not only of
the USA but of freedom and liberty everywhere.

Russia is the new Mafia, only this Mafia has nuclear weapons and
complete control of the incoming president of the United States of
America.

I doubt anyone has complete control of Trump. But Trump has obvious,
serious defects that all our enemies will be tempted to use against us.

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:56:23 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 10:32:14 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:44:18 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.
When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

A am still not sure what we are accusing them of? Telling us the
truth?

No, illegally hacking, a felony, to meddle with the US election.
And if the CIA is right, to help Trump win over Hillary. CIA believes
they hacked the GOP too, but didn't release whatever they found there.
Hard to imagine that if the Russians wanted to find dirt on Trump,
there was none to be found.



Spying on "sources" is an American tradition, again where is the
shock. Nobody went to jail when Ellsberg stole Pentagon documents and
the New York Times had no problem publishing them.
I am also not sure there were any bomb shells in the RNC emails. It
was no secret that they wanted to Dump Trump and every Trump brain
fart was tweeted out in real time.

Nobody at the DNC has denied what they leaked. After all, the
leaks only said that the DNC was making a conscious effort to dump
Bernie and that Hillary was given debate questions before the debates
... like there were some shocking questions.

If they got the same type of thing from the RNC and it was "dump
Trump" it would not be news anyway.


I disagree. There is bipartisan recognition that this needs to be
fully investigated, regardless of who it benefited or harmed. Many
leading Republicans are calling for a full investigation, McConnell,
McCain, Graham, Rubio and there will be one.

Do you think anything will come out of it? It just sounds like a lot
of flash with no heat.
These are all Trump Dumpers. Maybe they just want their Emails,
confirming that, released and make it sound like it was the russian's
fault.


I also wonder what grounds we have to be outraged. It is not like the
US has never influenced elections around the world and in a far more
active way than simply telling the truth about the campaign.

So, we should just accept Russia doing it, welcome it? What will they
do next time?

We are still not really sure the russians did it. The Israelis had far
more incentive to get Trump elected. Did you see Netanyahu on 60
minutes? He was giddy about Trump.
Their hackers certainly have the skill to leave russian IP addresses
in hack stream.

I really do not have a dog in this fight, I voted for Gary. I just
have a problem with our feigned outrage when our government has done
far worse in elections around the world.
Our CIA has simply worked to have prospective leaders killed if we did
not like them.

trader_4 has brought this to us :
On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 10:46:51 AM UTC-5, FromTheRafters wrote:
trader_4 expressed precisely :
On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.
When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

As usual, the subject line is misleading.

What that article is actually saying is that there is disagreement
about the *motive* of the Russians. That being to help Trump as opposed
to just that of stopping Hillary. I heard that Putin really doesn't
like Hillary. I suspect the motive was to avoid having Hillary as
President. IMO, that's the motive. I'm not ready to believe that Trump
has anything to do with the hacking, but as usual we need evidence
before drawing conclusions about motive.

I agree it's probably unlikely that Trump had anything to do with the
actual hacking. But I would not be surprised if some people in his
campaign had some contact with Russians that might be involved in
screwing with the US.

I agree. My position is partly due to the lack of any "hacks" and leaks
of evidence against the other republicans in his seeking the
nomination. Surely if the Russians had wanted Trump all along they
would have done things to increase his chances of winning the
nomination and not just the election.

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 11:33:50 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:56:23 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 10:32:14 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:44:18 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:05:06 AM UTC-5, burfordTjustice wrote:
Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking


http://reut.rs/2hrysSI

Funny how the "top spy agency" can be credible when it suits Trump
and the Trumpets, but totally incompetent and wrong when it does not.
When they concluded based on 11 intel agencies, that Russia was
indeed behind the hacking and
meddling in our election, Trump said they don't know WTF they are
doing, that it wasn't Russia. Now when they are not ready to accept
the next CIA conclusion, that Russia did it to help Trump, well,
now they are credible I guess. Go figure.

And of course all honest, fair Americans want a full investigation of
all of this, to find out to the fullest extent possible, what really
happened. That of course does not include Trump. Trump just picked
a good business friend of the Russians to be sec of state. Let's see
how that goes in the Senate.

A am still not sure what we are accusing them of? Telling us the
truth?

No, illegally hacking, a felony, to meddle with the US election.
And if the CIA is right, to help Trump win over Hillary. CIA believes
they hacked the GOP too, but didn't release whatever they found there.
Hard to imagine that if the Russians wanted to find dirt on Trump,
there was none to be found.



Spying on "sources" is an American tradition, again where is the
shock.

IDK what you mean by spying on "sources". Sure, the media cultivates
sources for information, but IDK of a case where they illegally hacked
into people's emails, into their computers, etc.


Nobody went to jail when Ellsberg stole Pentagon documents

Ellsberg was charged, he got lucky because the govt mishandled the
case, obtained evidence illegally, so it was dropped. Others have
gone to jail for doing similar, Bradley Manning, for example.
Snowden would too, if he ever comes back here.

and
the New York Times had no problem publishing them.
I am also not sure there were any bomb shells in the RNC emails. It
was no secret that they wanted to Dump Trump and every Trump brain
fart was tweeted out in real time.

Nobody at the DNC has denied what they leaked. After all, the
leaks only said that the DNC was making a conscious effort to dump
Bernie and that Hillary was given debate questions before the debates
... like there were some shocking questions.

If they got the same type of thing from the RNC and it was "dump
Trump" it would not be news anyway.


I disagree. There is bipartisan recognition that this needs to be
fully investigated, regardless of who it benefited or harmed. Many
leading Republicans are calling for a full investigation, McConnell,
McCain, Graham, Rubio and there will be one.

Do you think anything will come out of it? It just sounds like a lot
of flash with no heat.

Who knows? Chances are there won't be enough conclusive evidence to
prove anything, but it still should be investigated.


These are all Trump Dumpers. Maybe they just want their Emails,
confirming that, released and make it sound like it was the russian's
fault.


I don't think they are all Trump dumpers. I think every American that
believes our elections should be fair and free of foreign intervention
would want an investigation. People thought those that wanted to
investigate Watergate were just out to get Nixon too. But it turned out
there was real abuse and criminal acts there.




I also wonder what grounds we have to be outraged. It is not like the
US has never influenced elections around the world and in a far more
active way than simply telling the truth about the campaign.

So, we should just accept Russia doing it, welcome it? What will they
do next time?

We are still not really sure the russians did it.

Eleven US intel agencies say the Russians did it. But that's why we
should have a full investigation.


The Israelis had far
more incentive to get Trump elected. Did you see Netanyahu on 60
minutes? He was giddy about Trump.
Their hackers certainly have the skill to leave russian IP addresses
in hack stream.


Again, why we need an investigation. But I don't think Israel had
nearly as much to gain as the Russians. With Trump kissing up to them,
even saying he'd consider recognizing their annexation of Crimea,
it doesn't get better than that.



I really do not have a dog in this fight, I voted for Gary. I just
have a problem with our feigned outrage when our government has done
far worse in elections around the world.
Our CIA has simply worked to have prospective leaders killed if we did
not like them.

Not in recent decades, that's for sure. You'd have to go back 50 years.

Stormin' Norman submitted this idea :
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:09:32 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:


I must have missed something, when did Trump praise any of our
intelligence services?


I didn't say he or the Trumpets praised any of them. Only that they
will cite them as evidence of something when it suits them, while
calling them idiots the rest of the time. In this case, BTJ is citing

"Praise" was a poor choice of words on my behalf. I was curious if
you can provide examples of when Trump has cited any of our
intelligence agencies in support of any of his positions? Having said
information would be very valuable for me.

I think his ego prevents him from doing so. After all, he knows more
about ISIS than the generals and can't even 'remember' having a
position opposite to what he now claims is his position on *anything*
he has flip-flopped on despite all of the evidence to the contrary.

As for BTJ, I have been encountering him for a long. I ignore
everything he posts as it is usually vile and filled with hatred. I
have yet to witness him having a logical, cogent or civil discussion
with anyone.

+1

Were you familiar with him as the various other names like Bullwinkle
in the past? He doesn't appear to be very intelligent at all.

Dir of National Inteligence Office as saying they have not concluded
that Russia was trying to help Trump. IDK what Trump himself has said,
if anything. And while you and I know it, for the peanut gallery,
the operative part here is "help Trump". DNI agrees that Russia was
meddling in the election. The finer point remains as to whether it
was specifically to help Trump win or if it was just to deligitamize
and disrupt the elections overall. And you're right, I have not heard
Trump say anything nice about US intel agencies, only to heap scorn on
them. Must be nice to be working there, with your life on the line.

As you are a thorough reader of posts in this group, I think you might
remember my position, all along, has been that Russia has meddled, in
numerous way, in our election process. At this point, I am less
concerned with their motives than I am with the meddling representing
an act of war.

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/12/...ect-trump.html

It is painfully obvious the POTUS elect is deathly afraid of the
Russian meddling story gaining traction as it will derail his attempts
to 'innocently' and without suspicion, dance to the tune of his puppet
master, Vladimir Putin.


And of course Trump is totally tone deaf, as usual. He just picked
Rex, who has substantial ties to Russia, as sec of state. I would
not be surprised to see that one go down the tubes before he even
gets to the Senate. Apparently Trump wants to hear more about Russia,
their involvement in the election, go through all that, when there
are other, more qualified choices.

Trump is not tone deaf, if he were, he would not be fighting the story
like a junk yard dog on a chain. Any rational POTUS elect would
acknowledge the story and promise a full and thorough investigation
once he takes office.

His ego trumps his rationality.

As for Tillerson, he was personally selected by Putin and Trump is
dancing like the Russian marionette he really is. Tillerson is
indebted to the thug, Putin, and will not question or object to any of
Trump's partiality to a nation which is an obvious enemy, not only of
the USA but of freedom and liberty everywhere.

Russia is the new Mafia, only this Mafia has nuclear weapons and
complete control of the incoming president of the United States of
America.

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:55:47 -0500, FromTheRafters
wrote:

Stormin' Norman submitted this idea :
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:09:32 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:


I must have missed something, when did Trump praise any of our
intelligence services?


I didn't say he or the Trumpets praised any of them. Only that they
will cite them as evidence of something when it suits them, while
calling them idiots the rest of the time. In this case, BTJ is citing

"Praise" was a poor choice of words on my behalf. I was curious if
you can provide examples of when Trump has cited any of our
intelligence agencies in support of any of his positions? Having said
information would be very valuable for me.

I think his ego prevents him from doing so. After all, he knows more
about ISIS than the generals and can't even 'remember' having a
position opposite to what he now claims is his position on *anything*
he has flip-flopped on despite all of the evidence to the contrary.

As for BTJ, I have been encountering him for a long. I ignore
everything he posts as it is usually vile and filled with hatred. I
have yet to witness him having a logical, cogent or civil discussion
with anyone.

+1

Were you familiar with him as the various other names like Bullwinkle
in the past? He doesn't appear to be very intelligent at all.

Bullwinkle? How appropriate, wasn't Rocky the brains of the show?


Dir of National Inteligence Office as saying they have not concluded
that Russia was trying to help Trump. IDK what Trump himself has said,
if anything. And while you and I know it, for the peanut gallery,
the operative part here is "help Trump". DNI agrees that Russia was
meddling in the election. The finer point remains as to whether it
was specifically to help Trump win or if it was just to deligitamize
and disrupt the elections overall. And you're right, I have not heard
Trump say anything nice about US intel agencies, only to heap scorn on
them. Must be nice to be working there, with your life on the line.

As you are a thorough reader of posts in this group, I think you might
remember my position, all along, has been that Russia has meddled, in
numerous way, in our election process. At this point, I am less
concerned with their motives than I am with the meddling representing
an act of war.

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/12/...ect-trump.html


Yes, that is how I remembered Hamilton's comments in the Federalist
Papers, I couldn't remember if it was 62 or 68. I really wish our
current electors could be counted upon to understand and do their
duty. Alas, I doubt it will happen, but it would be GREAT if it did.


It is painfully obvious the POTUS elect is deathly afraid of the
Russian meddling story gaining traction as it will derail his attempts
to 'innocently' and without suspicion, dance to the tune of his puppet
master, Vladimir Putin.


And of course Trump is totally tone deaf, as usual. He just picked
Rex, who has substantial ties to Russia, as sec of state. I would
not be surprised to see that one go down the tubes before he even
gets to the Senate. Apparently Trump wants to hear more about Russia,
their involvement in the election, go through all that, when there
are other, more qualified choices.

Trump is not tone deaf, if he were, he would not be fighting the story
like a junk yard dog on a chain. Any rational POTUS elect would
acknowledge the story and promise a full and thorough investigation
once he takes office.

His ego trumps his rationality.


Ba dump bump....... (Johnny Carson)

As for Tillerson, he was personally selected by Putin and Trump is
dancing like the Russian marionette he really is. Tillerson is
indebted to the thug, Putin, and will not question or object to any of
Trump's partiality to a nation which is an obvious enemy, not only of
the USA but of freedom and liberty everywhere.

Russia is the new Mafia, only this Mafia has nuclear weapons and
complete control of the incoming president of the United States of
America.

"Stormin' Norman" wrote
stuff snipped

Russia is the new Mafia, only this Mafia has nuclear weapons and
complete control of the incoming president of the United States of
America.

I say give the guy a chance. What's the worst that could happen? WWIII?
(-:

--
Bobby G.