Russian hacking/interference/influence/collusion

I'd like to ask those who still believe the Trump/Russia narrative to lend me their ears for a moment. This won't be a novel-length post, nor does it seek to challenge your politics.

I only have one question (which is a statement as well).

Where were the conspiratorial shifty Russians at in New Jersey/Virginia last month, and in Alabama yesterday?



That answer is simple. Democrats kicked our asses in these elections because there is no Russian-whatever nonsense occuring. It is a conspiracy theory created and peddled by bitter politicians and electoral losers (like Hillary, the biggest loser).

In light of the revelations from the text messages exchanged between key players in the entire conspiracy (and subsequent probe), how do you reconcile that? How do you justify the fact that this very pro-Clinton agent changed the wording to reflect carelessness as opposed to espionage (gross negligence) in Clinton's federal criminal investigation? The very same agents/lawyers that are heading the Russian investigation, which clearly started as an appropriate counter-intelligence investigation and was spun/misdirected into an attack on the President.

One big nothing-burger, alright. Congrats on winning those elections by the way. But this Russian crap is nothing more than a ploy.

BTW: This is in the deconstructing disinfo forum because this post directly deconstructs the disinformation campaign that is the entire Russian narrative.

im interested in the soros linked voting machine company.

smartmatic, linked to open borders society, which is GS

Well said, but the Russian finger pointers will be along to take what you posted and twist around to you, as per the usual liberal MO.

Trey did a good job grilling Rosenstien on this issue

a reply to: dashen

Very interesting! Since someone (a Democrat I believe) recently obtained a restraining order to force them to retain all voting records/ballots, an audit would easily reveal if this was the case.

I would check, too. Since their attacks usually (actually, always) backfire on them. I really wouldn't be surprised.

But I think what is clear (even without the mountain of other evidence) is that Russia is involved in no such manipulation (just standard run of the mill espionage) and that their entire narrative against Trump is a plot to overthrow our President.

a reply to: Arnie123

Watching that stooge Rosenstein defend their credibility was comical. Any credible poll suggests a majority agrees they have precisely zilch credibility or legitimacy.

To be totally honest, I don't see the point for their agency's continued existence at this time. There are dozens (yeah, shocker) of federal law enforcement agencies that can easily investigate and prosecute violations of federal law.

Leaving these cesspools open will do nothing but reinforce poor behavior by criminals and cronies

a reply to: JBurns

Maybe Roy Moore didn't have decades long contacts with people in the Russian government. And anyway, the cat is out of the bag at this point.

Trump won. So they won. Why keep fighting?

a reply to: Arnie123

OK you guys here goes

originally posted by:

JBurns
That answer is simple. Democrats kicked our asses in these elections because there is no Russian-whatever nonsense occuring.

Are you saying GOP could win only if the Russians helped? I feel like you're selling them short here, Alabama was very close.

a reply to: JBurns

Russia and Clinton and Obama tried to interfere in the election, on a national scale, in 2016. It's ironic that Clinton and Obama actually HELPED Russia get Trump elected.

Russia's fake ads and documents didn't sway many voters. Their biggest catch was FBI Director James Comey. I remember that he fell hook, line and sinker, for a FAKE Russian document of some kind.

originally posted by: Cutepants
a reply to: Arnie123

OK you guys here goes

originally posted by:

JBurns
That answer is simple. Democrats kicked our asses in these elections because there is no Russian-whatever nonsense occuring.

Are you saying GOP could win only if the Russians helped? I feel like you're selling them short here, Alabama was very close.

Jburns, see what I mean about the twist and pull? lmfao, smh.

The FBI, DOJ, DNC, CNN, MSNBC, Google, Facebook and Clinton camp all colluded to affect the outcome of the 2016 election.

Current members of Congress have been blackmailed so they must keep moving forward with the phony allegations.

Russia didn't need to and didn't want to do anything. It was obvious Trump was going to win, obvious!

It really is the biggest scandal in American history - the beautiful part?... its being exposed every day, its not going to stop now.. the flood gates are opening!

a reply to: Cutepants

Of course not. We won the Presidency without their help

MAGA!

Alabama is not official. They still have to do a manual recount or something because state law requires it when within a half a percent pint victory.

Hopefully we can keep the anti-constitution party out of that Senate seat with a corrected count.

a reply to: JBurns

Well I can solidly stand behind MAGA, hope the Donald overcomes and pulls through with that. Just saying you seem to be contradicting yourself. If they loose you say it's because the Russians didn't help, if they win you say they don't need no Russian help in the first place. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Good question I would make a few points in response.

1. The belief is that the goal of the Russians was to get trump into power. This is not the same as tackling every other election in the country.

2. Due to the massive attention the issue of Russian interference is getting just now they may have viewed that any further meddling could be too much of a risk

3. And this is a big one..... Trump is so unpopular that even if the Russians did try to influence the recent vote in Alabama it might not have worked.

4. In the aftermath of the presidential elections US intelligence is going to be much more aggressive in dealing with the kind of interference in the election that has been alleged.

5. It could be that there was Russian interference but it just failed. Remember officially Clinton got the popular vote despite the Russians

Just my take on it.

a reply to: JBurns

Here is Dick Morris telling about the Inspector General over the Mueller probe.

Interesting. Seems he likes to eat prosecutors.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: JBurns

Russia and Clinton and Obama tried to interfere in the election, on a national scale, in 2016. It's ironic that Clinton and Obama actually HELPED Russia get Trump elected.


Their biggest catch was FBI Director James Comey. I remember that he fell hook, line and sinker, for a FAKE Russian document of some kind.

Russia's fake ads and documents didn't sway many voters.

They didnt have to sway many... did you not see how a few votes in three states got Trump elected?

originally posted by: JBurns
I'd like to ask those who still believe the Trump/Russia narrative to lend me their ears for a moment.

...Democrats kicked our asses in these elections...

no, moore won, election fraud will be uncovered and reveal this as the truth.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Good question I would make a few points in response.

1. The belief is that the goal of the Russians was to get trump into power. This is not the same as tackling every other election in the country.

I have heard nothing that proves or even suggests that Russia influenced the US election. Unless you take advice from for-profit network television.

2. Due to the massive attention the issue of Russian interference is getting just now they may have viewed that any further meddling could be too much of a risk

Because Russia really Gives a snip about what US for-profit media and their brain-dead followers think of them?

3. And this is a big one..... Trump is so unpopular that even if the Russians did try to influence the recent vote in Alabama it might not have worked.

I'm only guessing but it seems to me that your view about Trumps popularity is about as accurate as the US for-profit media telling people that Trump supports are bad people.

4. In the aftermath of the presidential elections US intelligence is going to be much more aggressive in dealing with the kind of interference in the election that has been alleged.

What kind of interference? It sounds like you are saying that the US intelligence community is going to spend more resources fabricating so called evidence to help US for-profit media influence US elections. Your OK with That?

5. It could be that there was Russian interference but it just failed. Remember officially Clinton got the popular vote despite the Russians

"It could be" is all the evidence Trump haters have had so far. You don't need Russia to meddle to be convinced that they are, you just need US for-profit media to tell you they are to be convinced. Since the candidate the US for-profit chose won, there was no reason to tell you that Russia was meddling.

Just my take on it.

Slow your role. US for-profit media will tell you what your take is. Go sit down till your told to stand.