Bad Wigins wrote:
The Russians didn't hack the DNC.
Says the Russian contractor who is paid to say that. Congrats, you made another ruble.
Bad Wigins wrote:
The Russians didn't hack the DNC.
Says the Russian contractor who is paid to say that. Congrats, you made another ruble.
Serious question from someone who is not American: how did US Intelligence draw the conclusion that Russia was pissed off about doping and as such decided the best course of action was to hack one-half of the US political system? I scanned the report and couldn't find anything on this. WADA is based in Canada, run by a British guy and the IOC, and the two reports exposing the doping in depth was written by a Canadian. Am I missing something?
Also, I don't understand why people are blaming Comey for Clinton's loss. If anything, it should have effected pre-voting between when the announcement came and when they officially said there was nothing to conclude. Why do the democrats think that people from their own party fled in droves to Trump even after it was determined to be a false alarm? There should be no net-effect to Clinton's numbers by election day.
Bad Wigins wrote:
The Russians didn't hack the DNC. Prove they did, instead of trying to be funny.
Our intelligence services tracked it back to Russia. Thanks again for your fine work as a Russian troll. Another ruble in the bank.
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/us/politics/russia-hack-report.html?_r=0Also, Trump supporters who are bashing the democrats. You aren't any better. The media wants people to make this a republican/democrat thing. It's not. It's about good vs. evil. The crap implicated in those emails is flat out evil.
Also, Sanders would undoubtedly be the one taking office on January 20th if our media covered him responsibly. There is no way he wouldn't have demolished Trump in the general election. The media and the DNC essentially hacked our political process...this talk of the Russians hacking and ruining Hillary's chances are both unfounded and pointless. She shouldn't have been the democratic candidate anyway.
If anything, this shows the American political system is a joke. Having parties does nothing but divide us and distract us from the real problems.
Above poster who linked the article, read the first sentence of the article: "But the declassified report contained no information about how the agencies had collected their data or had come to their conclusions."
If evidence can't be provided, I call b.s. This is just as bad as saying, "We killed Bin Laden...but we threw his body in the ocean so we can't provide proof."
Also, Assange has made it clear that the Russians didn't provide the information to him. I believe Assange over anybody in our government. His track record, aside from the lies aimed at taking him down, is much more credible. In interviews, he has all but told us it was Seth Rich. He keeps his sources confidential, and doesn't want to break that despite Rich being dead, but it's clear Rich, and likely others like him, was the person behind the leaks. And he is dead. What is more damning to the U.S.? Being hacked by the dreaded Russians (is this 1960?) or being hacked by a DNC staffer who mysteriously ended up murdered not long after? Hmmm...makes sense to try to use the Russians as the scapegoat.
Critical thinker: "Show me evidence of Russian involvement. Where's the proof?"
Dumb lib:*links to article*
"See, see! This article says so, so it's true! hahahaha I told you it's true - I told you!!! Dumb russian stooooge!"
For those of you (1) believe someone like Assange over 17 Federal agencies who unilaterally have come to the same conclusion that the DNC was hacked by the Russians, and (2) believe that the US election process is "rigged," so that your favorite candidate should/should not have won, then you all just got played by the Russians, whose stated goal is to SOW DISTRUST in the US election and in US political institutions. Hate to say it, but well played, Russians, well played. You clearly got to many of the people on this board.
ruuuuuf wrote:
Also, Assange has made it clear that the Russians didn't provide the information to him. I believe Assange over anybody in our government. His track record, aside from the lies aimed at taking him down, is much more credible. In interviews, he has all but told us it was Seth Rich. He keeps his sources confidential, and doesn't want to break that despite Rich being dead, but it's clear Rich, and likely others like him, was the person behind the leaks. And he is dead. What is more damning to the U.S.? Being hacked by the dreaded Russians (is this 1960?) or being hacked by a DNC staffer who mysteriously ended up murdered not long after? Hmmm...makes sense to try to use the Russians as the scapegoat.
The 17 federal agencies are overseen by the same person, idiot. Again, there's no proof. I don't support any candidate by the way. It's just clear Bernie would have won. And again, your same federal agencies said the emails are REAL because they know there is no way to deny them. Who cares how they were obtained...THEY ARE REAL. That is not fake news. This isn't rocket science.
I work for the Federal Government and I'm part of the entrenched bureaucracy that stays in place no matter who the President or head of the agency is. We do our job under no political direction. Presidents and heads come and go...we have a job to do and we do it. So yes, I do believe the 17 Federal agencies, and more importantly, the hard-working people in them who were the ones doing the research.
ruuuuuf wrote:
The 17 federal agencies are overseen by the same person, idiot. Again, there's no proof. I don't support any candidate by the way. It's just clear Bernie would have won. And again, your same federal agencies said the emails are REAL because they know there is no way to deny them. Who cares how they were obtained...THEY ARE REAL. That is not fake news. This isn't rocket science.
Proof?
And if work for the federal government, why aren't you more concerned about the content of the emails? You don't have a problem with child trafficking and financing terrorism?
Yes. It is a distraction.
What does this have to do with WADA, the IOC, and Russian bans?
For example, only one Russian track and field athlete was cleared to compete at the 2016 Rio Olympics. This athlete had a previous Testosterone/Epitestosterone (T/E) ratio of 8.5:1 on a doping test, which was way over the limit of a 4:1 T/E ratio.
This athlete was still cleared to compete at the Rio Olympics:
http://pics.wikifeet.com/Darya-Klishina-Feet-1475953.jpg
http://iv1.lisimg.com/image/4096685/740full-darya-klishina.jpg
Why was Darya Klishina the only Russian track and field athlete cleared to compete at the 2016 Rio Olympics???
I don't know why she was the only one cleared to compete.
I don't need to know all the reasons why Darya was allowed to compete.
It was the correct decision.
W
hip hip wrote:
What's your beef with US Intel?
1600/800 guy wrote:
His beef is that they are lying
That's right, US Intelligence is lying and Putin/ Trump are telling the truth.
Son, President Eisenhower warning us about the industrial-military complex in his farewell address, Kennedy's assassination, it's subsequent whitewash, a.k.a the Warren Report, Watergate, the continuous Clinton scandals, and Bush's lies about Iraqi WMD's have sowed more distrust of American politicians and political institutions than the Russians could ever hope to do.
All that Assange and Snowden have done is confirm what Ike already warned us about 56 years ago.
run with the wom wrote:
Our intelligence services tracked it back to Russia.
You tracked your head back to Uranus.
Why would Putin want Trump to win?
Trump is a big time a pro-energy guy, while the Russian economy is critically driven by energy. USA fracking directly hurts Russian revenue. Russia has cut there own oil production in order to drive up the price of Oil. Trump policys will encourage USA based production and will directly hurt Russian revenue.
So I dont believe Putin was trying to get Trump elected, the one guy who will actually lower American Oil production costs.
Hillary on the other hand said "So by the time we get through all of my conditions, I do not think there will be many places in America where (oil) fracking will continue to take place."
So I see no motive, quite the opposite, now is it evil for a foreign government to influence the election? While French and Italian leaders basically campaigned for Hillary, the DNC loved it and even promoted it. But hey if a foreign government wants Trump they are "hacking the election"
Just another guy wrote:
Why would Putin want Trump to win?
Because he didn't like Clinton? Because he can play Trump like a cheap fiddle? Who knows!
WOWW wrote:
Bought in biglyI have no doubt you all will support raping children if Trump tells you it's ok and make out that "liberals" are weak if raping children is upsetting to them.
Actually California libs passed SB 1322 which keeps cops from arresting sex workers under age 18 for soliciting or engaging in prostitution, or loitering with the intent... sooo... it's the libs enabling rape and child trafficking, not trump supporters. soooo... maybe you're the f*cking stupid one?
Your grasp of logic appalls me.