It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Here is what is striking about the situation: Hackers were able to leak emails embarrassing to the Clinton campaign, but not the Trump campaign. Sophisticated Russian hackers could probably exploit any number of vulnerabilities to obtain incriminating emails or texts that would support Trump's claims; if not from the secure White House servers, then from clumsy field agents or stolen Secret Service laptops. (Oops. That must be a coincidence.) No such "leaks" have been produced.
Trump didnt have a leaker and his staff was not dumb enough to get phished. The end.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: jellyrev
Trump didnt have a leaker and his staff was not dumb enough to get phished. The end.
Then why is Trump screaming about leakers in his administration? He actually suggested that Congress investigate them. (As if that were its job!) It's not a question of whether one group has better security, it is a question of when releasing the information gathered will best further the hackers' agenda. If the goal is political chaos in the United States, defeating the competent establishment candidate was a good first step, and embroiling the inexperienced winning candidate in scandals a good second step. But no-one could possibly have that agenda, could they?
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: jellyrev
Trump didnt have a leaker and his staff was not dumb enough to get phished. The end.
Then why is Trump screaming about leakers in his administration? He actually suggested that Congress investigate them. (As if that were its job!) It's not a question of whether one group has better security, it is a question of when releasing the information gathered will best further the hackers' agenda. If the goal is political chaos in the United States, defeating the competent establishment candidate was a good first step, and embroiling the inexperienced winning candidate in scandals a good second step. But no-one could possibly have that agenda, could they?
What has Putin's agenda got to do with collusion?
originally posted by: DJW001
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: jellyrev
Trump didnt have a leaker and his staff was not dumb enough to get phished. The end.
Then why is Trump screaming about leakers in his administration? He actually suggested that Congress investigate them. (As if that were its job!) It's not a question of whether one group has better security, it is a question of when releasing the information gathered will best further the hackers' agenda. If the goal is political chaos in the United States, defeating the competent establishment candidate was a good first step, and embroiling the inexperienced winning candidate in scandals a good second step. But no-one could possibly have that agenda, could they?
What has Putin's agenda got to do with collusion?
Are you saying that Putin's agenda includes political chaos in the United States? Thank you for that concession. As for "collusion," it is much the same as the allegations in the Steele dossier. It does not matter whether the charges are true or not, it only matters that they create a scandal that keeps the government unable to function efficiently.
At this point, there is absolutely no doubt that Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn received large sums f money from sources tied to the Kremlin. This was in their capacity as private citizens, and is legal. It does create the impression of potential influence, however, and that is a weakness that can be exploited, just like plausible, if fictitious, kompromat.
Actually it does matter whether the charges of collusion are true. That is the whole point, otherwise there is nothing unusual about Russia's actions.
You are effectively admitting that Putin and Russia have fully succeeded in getting you to distrust your govt.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth
Actually it does matter whether the charges of collusion are true. That is the whole point, otherwise there is nothing unusual about Russia's actions.
So hacking private citizens and making their emails public is okay in your book? Be that as it may, there is a huge difference between running editorials on RT and planting phony evidence on politicians. If the Trump campaign was not colluding, Russia has done an excellent job of framing them. Thank you for finally admitting that Russia is interfering in our domestic politics, and accepting the syllogism: "If the Trump campaign was not colluding with Russia, Russia has framed them."
You are effectively admitting that Putin and Russia have fully succeeded in getting you to distrust your govt.
I trust in the checks and balances laid out in the Constitution. I do not trust the incoming administration, but I have faith the processes of liberal democracy will correct the situation. The Kremlin may have won a battle, but they will lose the war.
The first, Russian propaganda, relies on your gullibility and seems to have succeeded.
The second, collusion between your President, his team and the Russians is a serious charge with no evidence, just innuendo that could well be driven by Russia, but if so they have been helped by left wing media, perhaps wittingly, perhaps deliberately. If Russia are trying to 'frame' the US Govt. then their biggest allies and advocates are the likes of CNN, MSNBC, NYT and WaPo.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth
The first, Russian propaganda, relies on your gullibility and seems to have succeeded.
I'm not the one rooting for the Kremlin.
The second, collusion between your President, his team and the Russians is a serious charge with no evidence, just innuendo that could well be driven by Russia, but if so they have been helped by left wing media, perhaps wittingly, perhaps deliberately. If Russia are trying to 'frame' the US Govt. then their biggest allies and advocates are the likes of CNN, MSNBC, NYT and WaPo.
Now you are conflating two issues. One is the Trump administration's possible collusion with Russia. That requires a criminal investigation, and was within Russia's power to create. The other is Donald Trump's fitness for office; that is the issue everyone but Trump's hard core supporters are concerned about.
I don't think you are rooting for Russia, I think you have been unwittingly co-opted through propaganda to help them.
I didn't mention fitness for office, only that the collusion narrative is something pushed by the liberal media and helps the Russian goals you state you understand.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth
I don't think you are rooting for Russia, I think you have been unwittingly co-opted through propaganda to help them.
No. They want us to believe that liberal democracy is bankrupt. I remind people at every turn that our system is resilient and will right itself. You, on the other hand, seem to expend a great deal of energy consciously advocating their agenda.
I didn't mention fitness for office, only that the collusion narrative is something pushed by the liberal media and helps the Russian goals you state you understand.
The media have a duty to report the truth. The fact is that there is a case to be made for collusion. Would you rather they participate in a cover up? From the perspective of the establishment, both its liberal and conservative wings, the issue has always been Trump's fitness for office. The longer he stays in office saying crazy things, the worse America looks on the world stage. The collusion "narrative" provides a convenient premise that would not involve "expert testimony" from mental health professionals. Pretty sure the average Trump supporter does not trust doctors... especially psychiatric ones.
Once again, thank you for affirm the Russian agenda.
What happens when the gop all vote together for the next 2 years?