All Things Russia & Ukraine

[kramerica.inc]

Trump declassifies more docs:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnew ... uments.amp

[6ftstick]

Nothing to see here, move along, focus on the bright shiny covid object over there.

Over 210,000 American citizens dead; and it is a joke to you...

It was not a joke, you know it, & it's dishonest of you to imply that it was.
It was in response to njbill saying this :
In any event, no one is going to pay any attention to this.
Trump being sick and in the hospital sucks all of the oxygen out of the room.

Sorry, you are correct.

Thanks. Even though we often disagree, I appreciate your honesty.

....& for MDLF76, it was not dismissive. It was in direct reply to bill accurately pointing out that covid has become the primary campaign issue that blocks out everything else. The only people still paying attention to the investigations are those like me who have been following them from the outset.

ok, but take it from most of us on here, that it sure came across as dismissive. That's certainly what "bright shiny object" means in nearly any such instance. "squirrel" being the same concept. "Nothing to see here, move along"..."squirrel"..."bright shiny object" offered up to distract. Not actually serious. Just shiny.

But no, you are not in a lonely group doggedly paying attention to these truly important issues instead of "shiny" ones like Covid. There's a whole bunch of Trumpist nut jobs trying to make as big a deal as they possibly can, rather desperately at this point. And the Russians love it.

But the rest of the populace is having none of it. They see it for what it is, this go round. And indeed, they really do have more important things with which to be concerned. And it ain't shiny.

So the self-anointed oracle of this forum takes it upon himself to pass judgement on behalf of "most of us on here". Such insufferable arrogance.

This intell was deemed credible enough in July 2016 by the CIA for Director Brennan to personally brief Pres Obama, CoS McDonough, & NSA Susan Rice on the details, as well as asking FBI Director Comey & Counter Intel chief Strzok to investigate (which they declined).

Nonetheless, Candidate Clinton & her proxies proceeded to construct precisely the narrative which the intel indicated, in addition to paying for solicited Russian disinformation to inject it into the FBI's intel stream & feed to a compliant MSM, to support that concocted narrative. Just track the campaign statements about Trump-Russia by Candidate Clinton & other Dems. Thanks to a collaborative MSM, the narrative worked because Trump had business contacts with Russians which convinced him that the US (like the EU nations) could have a productive, pragmatic relationship with Russia, in the wake of the failed Obama-Clinton Reset attempt.

ZERO coverage by the MSM so far. They fed us RUSSIA BS for 4 years and now when the truth starts to seep out They don't like the story. Baztidz.

Lets hear Biden, the Dems and the MSM lecture us some more about the smooth transition of power.

[cradleandshoot]

Nothing to see here, move along, focus on the bright shiny covid object over there.

Over 210,000 American citizens dead; and it is a joke to you...

It was not a joke, you know it, & it's dishonest of you to imply that it was.
It was in response to njbill saying this :
In any event, no one is going to pay any attention to this.
Trump being sick and in the hospital sucks all of the oxygen out of the room.

Sorry, you are correct.

Thanks. Even though we often disagree, I appreciate your honesty.

....& for MDLF76, it was not dismissive. It was in direct reply to bill accurately pointing out that covid has become the primary campaign issue that blocks out everything else. The only people still paying attention to the investigations are those like me who have been following them from the outset.

ok, but take it from most of us on here, that it sure came across as dismissive. That's certainly what "bright shiny object" means in nearly any such instance. "squirrel" being the same concept. "Nothing to see here, move along"..."squirrel"..."bright shiny object" offered up to distract. Not actually serious. Just shiny.

But no, you are not in a lonely group doggedly paying attention to these truly important issues instead of "shiny" ones like Covid. There's a whole bunch of Trumpist nut jobs trying to make as big a deal as they possibly can, rather desperately at this point. And the Russians love it.

But the rest of the populace is having none of it. They see it for what it is, this go round. And indeed, they really do have more important things with which to be concerned. And it ain't shiny.

So the self-anointed oracle of this forum takes it upon himself to pass judgement on behalf of "most of us on here". Such insufferable arrogance.

This intell was deemed credible enough in July 2016 by the CIA for Director Brennan to personally brief Pres Obama, CoS McDonough, & NSA Susan Rice on the details, as well as asking FBI Director Comey & Counter Intel chief Strzok to investigate (which they declined).

Nonetheless, Candidate Clinton & her proxies proceeded to construct precisely the narrative which the intel indicated, in addition to paying for solicited Russian disinformation to inject it into the FBI's intel stream & feed to a compliant MSM, to support that concocted narrative. Just track the campaign statements about Trump-Russia by Candidate Clinton & other Dems. Thanks to a collaborative MSM, the narrative worked because Trump had business contacts with Russians which convinced him that the US (like the EU nations) could have a productive, pragmatic relationship with Russia, in the wake of the failed Obama-Clinton Reset attempt.

ZERO coverage by the MSM so far. They fed us RUSSIA BS for 4 years and now when the truth starts to seep out They don't like the story. Baztidz.

Lets hear Biden, the Dems and the MSM lecture us some more about the smooth transition of power.

Maybe Mr Brennan and Mr Comey can go on MSNBC and explain it all for us one more time? There still seems to be some loose ends to be tied up.

[6ftstick]

Trump is going to lose this battle in the fullness of time.

Sometime down the road, a lot more of the evidence of his collusion with the Russians will come out.

The judgment of history will be that he colluded with the Russians to try to gain an advantage in the 2016 election. And that the Russians helped him win the election (especially the email leaks).

It will never be possible to quantify exactly how many votes in which states he got because of the Russians, of course. But history will judge that the interference was a significant help to his election.

What he is doing right now, and this will include the Durham report, it is to try to leak out as much stuff as he can before he leaves office that (he thinks) shows the Russian interference was minimal and that Bad Man Obama was out to get him. In fact, history will judge that there was ample basis to investigate Trump.

There were multiple times during President Barack Obama’s final year in office where he completely dismissed the idea that Russia was even capable of affecting the outcome of a U.S. presidential election, much less physically change the votes to “steal” it from one candidate or another.

As noted by The Daily Caller, Obama – in a separate context, criticizing Trump for allegedly questioning the integrity of U.S. elections – admitted that no amount of influence from Russia would or could affect an outcome.

“I’ve never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history any presidential candidate trying to discredit the election process before votes have even taken place. No serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig America’s elections.”

As I said, you can’t quantify it, but it certainly had an effect. No one disputes that except Trump and his followers.

But two things are clear. The Russians helped and Trump welcomed the help.

The Daily Caller? You mean the same rag started by Tucker Carlson whose employer has taken the position IN COURT that Tucker is a liar and can’t be believed so he can’t defame anybody?

OBAMAS words. forget the vehicle. OBAMAS words right out of his mouth

"rig the election" as in widespread voter fraud, vote count tampering.

Influence voting patterns through disinformation is entirely another matter.

You're not really this dense, right? Just trolling?
That's what the Daily Caller is doing and you're repeating it, right?

You're not really this dense are you?

[MDlaxfan76]

Trump is going to lose this battle in the fullness of time.

Sometime down the road, a lot more of the evidence of his collusion with the Russians will come out.

The judgment of history will be that he colluded with the Russians to try to gain an advantage in the 2016 election. And that the Russians helped him win the election (especially the email leaks).

It will never be possible to quantify exactly how many votes in which states he got because of the Russians, of course. But history will judge that the interference was a significant help to his election.

What he is doing right now, and this will include the Durham report, it is to try to leak out as much stuff as he can before he leaves office that (he thinks) shows the Russian interference was minimal and that Bad Man Obama was out to get him. In fact, history will judge that there was ample basis to investigate Trump.

There were multiple times during President Barack Obama’s final year in office where he completely dismissed the idea that Russia was even capable of affecting the outcome of a U.S. presidential election, much less physically change the votes to “steal” it from one candidate or another.

As noted by The Daily Caller, Obama – in a separate context, criticizing Trump for allegedly questioning the integrity of U.S. elections – admitted that no amount of influence from Russia would or could affect an outcome.

“I’ve never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history any presidential candidate trying to discredit the election process before votes have even taken place. No serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig America’s elections.”

As I said, you can’t quantify it, but it certainly had an effect. No one disputes that except Trump and his followers.

But two things are clear. The Russians helped and Trump welcomed the help.

The Daily Caller? You mean the same rag started by Tucker Carlson whose employer has taken the position IN COURT that Tucker is a liar and can’t be believed so he can’t defame anybody?

OBAMAS words. forget the vehicle. OBAMAS words right out of his mouth Nope, not what he said.

"rig the election" as in widespread voter fraud, vote count tampering.

Influence voting patterns through disinformation is entirely another matter.

You're not really this dense, right? Just trolling?
That's what the Daily Caller is doing and you're repeating it, right?

You're not really this dense are you?

ok, I'll play. You really are that dense.

What you bolded in red aren't Obama's words, they're the Daily Caller's writer's mis-characterization.

The writer then quotes Obama directly and it's definitely not the same meaning as his characterization.

I explained it for you, but you still equate a mischaracterization with a quote, so, maybe 'dense' isn't the right word, maybe just 'gullible' as all get out. Nah... 'dense' too.

[MDlaxfan76]

Nothing to see here, move along, focus on the bright shiny covid object over there.

Over 210,000 American citizens dead; and it is a joke to you...

It was not a joke, you know it, & it's dishonest of you to imply that it was.
It was in response to njbill saying this :
In any event, no one is going to pay any attention to this.
Trump being sick and in the hospital sucks all of the oxygen out of the room.

Sorry, you are correct.

Thanks. Even though we often disagree, I appreciate your honesty.

....& for MDLF76, it was not dismissive. It was in direct reply to bill accurately pointing out that covid has become the primary campaign issue that blocks out everything else. The only people still paying attention to the investigations are those like me who have been following them from the outset.

ok, but take it from most of us on here, that it sure came across as dismissive. That's certainly what "bright shiny object" means in nearly any such instance. "squirrel" being the same concept. "Nothing to see here, move along"..."squirrel"..."bright shiny object" offered up to distract. Not actually serious. Just shiny.

But no, you are not in a lonely group doggedly paying attention to these truly important issues instead of "shiny" ones like Covid. There's a whole bunch of Trumpist nut jobs trying to make as big a deal as they possibly can, rather desperately at this point. And the Russians love it.

But the rest of the populace is having none of it. They see it for what it is, this go round. And indeed, they really do have more important things with which to be concerned. And it ain't shiny.

So the self-anointed oracle of this forum takes it upon himself to pass judgement on behalf of "most of us on here". Such insufferable arrogance.

This intell was deemed credible enough in July 2016 by the CIA for Director Brennan to personally brief Pres Obama, CoS McDonough, & NSA Susan Rice on the details, as well as asking FBI Director Comey & Counter Intel chief Strzok to investigate (which they declined).

Nonetheless, Candidate Clinton & her proxies proceeded to construct precisely the narrative which the intel indicated, in addition to paying for solicited Russian disinformation to inject it into the FBI's intel stream & feed to a compliant MSM, to support that concocted narrative. Just track the campaign statements about Trump-Russia by Candidate Clinton & other Dems. Thanks to a collaborative MSM, the narrative worked because Trump had business contacts with Russians which convinced him that the US (like the EU nations) could have a productive, pragmatic relationship with Russia, in the wake of the failed Obama-Clinton Reset attempt.

"insufferable arrogance", man that's the pot calling the kettle black.

It's rough isn't it when someone stands up to you? You called CU88 "dishonest" and told us it wasn't a "joke". Ok, not a "joke" but "dismissive"...and I explained to you, the "insufferable arrogant" blowhard who calls people "dishonest", why it would be taken as "dismissive". Did you respond, 'that wasn't my intent, sorry to give that impression'? Nope, you double down with the personal insults.

That's your pattern, ok, got it.

Keep up with the Russian propaganda Salty, we get that too.

Love your new spin on Trump, though, bolded above.

"business contacts"...hmm, so why'd he lie about those so repeatedly?

[6ftstick]

Trump is going to lose this battle in the fullness of time.

Sometime down the road, a lot more of the evidence of his collusion with the Russians will come out.

The judgment of history will be that he colluded with the Russians to try to gain an advantage in the 2016 election. And that the Russians helped him win the election (especially the email leaks).

It will never be possible to quantify exactly how many votes in which states he got because of the Russians, of course. But history will judge that the interference was a significant help to his election.

What he is doing right now, and this will include the Durham report, it is to try to leak out as much stuff as he can before he leaves office that (he thinks) shows the Russian interference was minimal and that Bad Man Obama was out to get him. In fact, history will judge that there was ample basis to investigate Trump.

There were multiple times during President Barack Obama’s final year in office where he completely dismissed the idea that Russia was even capable of affecting the outcome of a U.S. presidential election, much less physically change the votes to “steal” it from one candidate or another.

As noted by The Daily Caller, Obama – in a separate context, criticizing Trump for allegedly questioning the integrity of U.S. elections – admitted that no amount of influence from Russia would or could affect an outcome.

“I’ve never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history any presidential candidate trying to discredit the election process before votes have even taken place. No serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig America’s elections.”

As I said, you can’t quantify it, but it certainly had an effect. No one disputes that except Trump and his followers.

But two things are clear. The Russians helped and Trump welcomed the help.

The Daily Caller? You mean the same rag started by Tucker Carlson whose employer has taken the position IN COURT that Tucker is a liar and can’t be believed so he can’t defame anybody?

OBAMAS words. forget the vehicle. OBAMAS words right out of his mouth Nope, not what he said.

"rig the election" as in widespread voter fraud, vote count tampering.

Influence voting patterns through disinformation is entirely another matter.

You're not really this dense, right? Just trolling?
That's what the Daily Caller is doing and you're repeating it, right?

You're not really this dense are you?

ok, I'll play. You really are that dense.

What you bolded in red aren't Obama's words, they're the Daily Caller's writer's mis-characterization.

The writer then quotes Obama directly and it's definitely not the same meaning as his characterization.

I explained it for you, but you still equate a mischaracterization with a quote, so, maybe 'dense' isn't the right word, maybe just 'gullible' as all get out. Nah... 'dense' too.

Oh for Krizakes!

obama.jpg (71.68 KiB) Viewed 1168 times

[MDlaxfan76]

Correct, 6ft, that's what Obama said...you can try and put other words in his mouth like the Daily Caller did, but Obama DID NOT say that the Russians can't influence the decisions that voters make when they vote.

Worlds of difference between such influence and voter fraud or election result tampering, the sorts of "rigging" that Trump is claiming.

Here's a thought experiment for you, does advertising have any influence on how any voters vote?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Correct, 6ft, that's what Obama said...you can try and put other words in his mouth like the Daily Caller did, but Obama DID NOT say that the Russians can't influence the decisions that voters make when they vote.

Worlds of difference between such influence and voter fraud or election result tampering, the sorts of "rigging" that Trump is claiming.

Here's a thought experiment for you, does advertising have any influence on how any voters vote?

Nope. The media doesn’t influence how people think. I heard it over and over on this site. Russians can’t tell me who to vote for!

[a fan]

Oh for Krizakes!

Use the whole speech. Not what "some guy on the internet" tells you said, or meant.



That's odd, sixfoot. The "guy on the internet" left a whole bunch of words out. We're all just SHOCKED that that would happen.

And you're on here yelling at others for not taking "some guy on the internet's" word for what Obama said.

Do yourself a favor, and listen to the whole thing.

When someone questions the accuracy of a quote, go back to the freaking actual source. We all get "got" by this stuff now and again. The important part is to fix your error, and get the actual facts straight.

[njbill]

Oh for Krizakes!

Use the whole speech. Not what "some guy on the internet" tells you said, or meant.



That's odd, sixfoot. The "guy on the internet" left a whole bunch of words out. We're all just SHOCKED that that would happen.

And you're on here yelling at others for not taking "some guy on the internet's" word for what Obama said.

Do yourself a favor, and listen to the whole thing.

When someone questions the accuracy of a quote, go back to the freaking actual source. We all get "got" by this stuff now and again. The important part is to fix your error, and get the actual facts straight.

The key takeaway: Trump, stop whining.

[MDlaxfan76]

Oh for Krizakes!

Use the whole speech. Not what "some guy on the internet" tells you said, or meant.



That's odd, sixfoot. The "guy on the internet" left a whole bunch of words out. We're all just SHOCKED that that would happen.

And you're on here yelling at others for not taking "some guy on the internet's" word for what Obama said.

Do yourself a favor, and listen to the whole thing.

When someone questions the accuracy of a quote, go back to the freaking actual source. We all get "got" by this stuff now and again. The important part is to fix your error, and get the actual facts straight.

Thanks for finding and sharing...very well worth a full listen.

[a fan]

Oh for Krizakes!

Use the whole speech. Not what "some guy on the internet" tells you said, or meant.



That's odd, sixfoot. The "guy on the internet" left a whole bunch of words out. We're all just SHOCKED that that would happen.

And you're on here yelling at others for not taking "some guy on the internet's" word for what Obama said.

Do yourself a favor, and listen to the whole thing.

When someone questions the accuracy of a quote, go back to the freaking actual source. We all get "got" by this stuff now and again. The important part is to fix your error, and get the actual facts straight.

The key takeaway: Trump, stop whining.

Idiot TrumpFans don't understand how dangerous it is to question our elections without proof of serious problems.

What they think is: "only THEIR SIDE is corrupt". Which is just the dumbest, most idiotic idea in the history of voting.

They don't get that because of social media and idiotic conspiracy theories......there will be a time when "their side" wins, and millions of people will decide that the elections were fake, rather than just some stupid partisans. When moderates and non-partisan Americans think that the elections are rigged?

Then our country is in some SERIOUS trouble. Trump is playing with fire here. And yup, so did the Dems who went so far as to claim that the last election was flat our rigged.

[6ftstick]

Oh for Krizakes!

Use the whole speech. Not what "some guy on the internet" tells you said, or meant.



That's odd, sixfoot. The "guy on the internet" left a whole bunch of words out. We're all just SHOCKED that that would happen.

And you're on here yelling at others for not taking "some guy on the internet's" word for what Obama said.

Do yourself a favor, and listen to the whole thing.

When someone questions the accuracy of a quote, go back to the freaking actual source. We all get "got" by this stuff now and again. The important part is to fix your error, and get the actual facts straight.

WHATS YOUR POINT. HE SAID WHAT HE SAID. IN CONTEXT HES TELLING TRUMP NOT TO WHINE CAUSE "NOTHING" COULD HAPPEN.

[a fan]

WHATS YOUR POINT. HE SAID WHAT HE SAID. IN CONTEXT HES TELLING TRUMP NOT TO WHINE CAUSE "NOTHING" COULD HAPPEN.

So.....double down.

My point is that your quote left out what he actually said. Intentionally.

Apparently that doesn't bother you, so I'll just start editing what your man Trump says, and claim it's verbatim. And if you get upset, I'll just tell you "well, he said those words, right?", and pretend that I just can't understand why you'd want me to quote him accurately.

Happy?

[6ftstick]

WHATS YOUR POINT. HE SAID WHAT HE SAID. IN CONTEXT HES TELLING TRUMP NOT TO WHINE CAUSE "NOTHING" COULD HAPPEN.

Its a completely accurate quote. Theres no other interpretation. What he adds about Trump REINFORCES THE POINT HES MAKING.

FFS YOU TDS PEOPLE BELIEVE ANY SECOND THIRD OR FOURTH HAND UNSOURCED WHISPER ABOUT TRUMP BUT WHEN A DEMOCRAT TELLS YOU SOMETHING AND YOU CAN WATCH HIS LIPS MOVE AS HE TELLS IT TO YOU YOU SAY "NAH DIDN'T HAPPEN" OR "HE DIDN'T MEAN IT THAT WAY."

[a fan]

Its a completely accurate quote.

Yeah. No it isn't, 6foot. Did you notice the dotted lines, where he left out what Obama said? The "quote" does it twice.

That's called an ellipsis, 6ft. It means he left words that Obama said out. So no, that's NOT an accurate quote. An accurate quote has ALL the words, and ALL the pertinent context. Stop bickering over nothing.

FFS YOU TDS PEOPLE BELIEVE ANY SECOND THIRD OR FOURTH HAND UNSOURCED WHISPER ABOUT TRUMP BUT WHEN A DEMOCRAT TELLS YOU SOMETHING AND YOU CAN WATCH HIS LIPS MOVE AS HE TELLS IT TO YOU YOU SAY "NAH DIDN'T HAPPEN"

I didn't say it didn't happen, FFS. Six----I literally gave you the entire speech. How the F is that me denying he said those things?

Dude, dont' give me this TDS cr*p. If I've got TDS, you're a pro-goverment zealot who believes everything and anything your government tells you.

Example? I have REPEATEDLY praised Trump for executing good policies. His handling of the Middle East, for example? And pulling Troops home from Germany? I'm OVERJOYED with his performance there. I still think that pulling out of the Iran deal was stupid, but whatever....on the whole? I'd give him an A.

I'm beyond worried that Biden is just going to take us right back into playing cop to the world. I think he's dumb enough to do that.

So FFS, show me some respect. Just because I don't blindly think that Trump is magic, and never ever makes a mistake as you do?

Doesn't mean I have TDS, sorry mate, that cr*p won't work on me.

[kramerica.inc]

Trump is going to lose this battle in the fullness of time.

Sometime down the road, a lot more of the evidence of his collusion with the Russians will come out.

The judgment of history will be that he colluded with the Russians to try to gain an advantage in the 2016 election. And that the Russians helped him win the election (especially the email leaks).

It will never be possible to quantify exactly how many votes in which states he got because of the Russians, of course. But history will judge that the interference was a significant help to his election.

What he is doing right now, and this will include the Durham report, it is to try to leak out as much stuff as he can before he leaves office that (he thinks) shows the Russian interference was minimal and that Bad Man Obama was out to get him. In fact, history will judge that there was ample basis to investigate Trump.

There were multiple times during President Barack Obama’s final year in office where he completely dismissed the idea that Russia was even capable of affecting the outcome of a U.S. presidential election, much less physically change the votes to “steal” it from one candidate or another.

As noted by The Daily Caller, Obama – in a separate context, criticizing Trump for allegedly questioning the integrity of U.S. elections – admitted that no amount of influence from Russia would or could affect an outcome.

“I’ve never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history any presidential candidate trying to discredit the election process before votes have even taken place. No serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig America’s elections.”

As I said, you can’t quantify it, but it certainly had an effect. No one disputes that except Trump and his followers.

But two things are clear. The Russians helped and Trump welcomed the help.

The Daily Caller? You mean the same rag started by Tucker Carlson whose employer has taken the position IN COURT that Tucker is a liar and can’t be believed so he can’t defame anybody?

OBAMAS words. forget the vehicle. OBAMAS words right out of his mouth Nope, not what he said.

"rig the election" as in widespread voter fraud, vote count tampering.

Influence voting patterns through disinformation is entirely another matter.

You're not really this dense, right? Just trolling?
That's what the Daily Caller is doing and you're repeating it, right?

You're not really this dense are you?

ok, I'll play. You really are that dense.

What you bolded in red aren't Obama's words, they're the Daily Caller's writer's mis-characterization.

The writer then quotes Obama directly and it's definitely not the same meaning as his characterization.

I explained it for you, but you still equate a mischaracterization with a quote, so, maybe 'dense' isn't the right word, maybe just 'gullible' as all get out. Nah... 'dense' too.

Oh for Krizakes!

obama.jpg

Obama KNEW the Russian hoax was made up by Hillary Clinton and he STILL ordered the FBI to spy on the Trump campaign.

Where are the subpoenas, hearings, and indictments?

[dislaxxic]

Faux News FAKE NEWS Tripe! Predication was 100% genuine. Get over it wingnut.

#BanTheFox

..

[Typical Lax Dad]

Oh for Krizakes!

Use the whole speech. Not what "some guy on the internet" tells you said, or meant.



That's odd, sixfoot. The "guy on the internet" left a whole bunch of words out. We're all just SHOCKED that that would happen.

And you're on here yelling at others for not taking "some guy on the internet's" word for what Obama said.

Do yourself a favor, and listen to the whole thing.

When someone questions the accuracy of a quote, go back to the freaking actual source. We all get "got" by this stuff now and again. The important part is to fix your error, and get the actual facts straight.

WHATS YOUR POINT. HE SAID WHAT HE SAID. IN CONTEXT HES TELLING TRUMP NOT TO WHINE CAUSE "NOTHING" COULD HAPPEN.

Here we go again. It’s ok to say “I was mistaken”. It’s no big deal.