New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Have they paid you too?

middleview

President
Supporting Member
It's bolded because you keep insisting it happened when nobody has any actual evidence of it, yet you repeat and defend it constantly.

It's another lie the FBI made it up to help along their narrative or "The Insurance Policy" as it has come to be known...... and you and your mindless useful idiot cohorts are its biggest cheerleaders.
How many Russians were indicted by Mueller?
What evidence do you have that it was someone else?
Why did Trump admit it was the Russians?
Why did the FBI tell Crowdstrike the Russians had hacked the DNC?
Did you forget all the other election related systems hacked?
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Keep telling yourself that, it's my opinion and NOT you defending corruption every day. Utterly clueless as usual, you can't deal with the fact your betters have been lying to you for years so you just keep lying.

Useful Idiot 101
Where is that evidence Hunter was being deposed?
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
You offered an explanation as to why that interpretation could possibly be wrong. The only testimony we have to go on is Crowdstrike's admission that they could find no evidence of the files being extracted at all, and, of course, the only person with first hand knowledge, Julian Assange, who has unequivocally stated that he didn't get them from "Russians."
Of course...Assange is a credible source...
 
How many Russians were indicted by Mueller?
What evidence do you have that it was someone else?
Why did Trump admit it was the Russians?
Why did the FBI tell Crowdstrike the Russians had hacked the DNC?
Did you forget all the other election related systems hacked?
Who cares about Muellers pointless indictments of people who will never see a court of law. He had to make it look like he was doing something as he looked for a villian in a story the Democrats, FBI and DOJ made up.

There is no evidence that it was the Russians. We have the people from Crowdstrike testimony where they refused to say under oath that it was the Russians, now why is that do you think (assuming you still do think)? Seems odd since the FBI supposedly confirmed it :rolleyes: that they would not swear under oath that was the case.................

Trump did not "admit" it was the Russians, he said Probably, as they were the same people who told him Michael Flynn lied to the FBI, which also turned out to be..... FALSE.

It fit the narrative, it had to be the Russians becuase it fit the story they were trying to sell in order to get rid of Trump or at the very least undermine his Presidency.

You refuse to admit and or deal with the fact that these people have been lying about all of this for years. I can't help you with that, but you could at the very least stop defending and lying yourself about this.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Who cares about Muellers pointless indictments of people who will never see a court of law. He had to make it look like he was doing something as he looked for a villian in a story the Democrats, FBI and DOJ made up.

There is no evidence that it was the Russians. We have the people from Crowdstrike testimony where they refused to say under oath that it was the Russians, now why is that do you think (assuming you still do think)? Seems odd since the FBI supposedly confirmed it :rolleyes: that they would not swear under oath that was the case.................

Trump did not "admit" it was the Russians, he said Probably, as they were the same people who told him Michael Flynn lied to the FBI, which also turned out to be..... FALSE.

It fit the narrative, it had to be the Russians becuase it fit the story they were trying to sell in order to get rid of Trump or at the very least undermine his Presidency.

You refuse to admit and or deal with the fact that these people have been lying about all of this for years. I can't help you with that, but you could at the very least stop defending and lying yourself about this.
So when Trump said it was probably the Russians, was he lying?
When all of the head of intelligence agencies said it was the Russians, they were lying?
When the Senate committee said it was the Russians, they were lying...
But when Putin says it wasn't us...he was being truthful. When Assange says it wasn't the Russians, he was being truthful.

You act as though Mueller just signed the indictments...that is false. He presented his case to a grand jury and they voted for the indictments.

A federal grand jury on Friday returned a new indictment against a dozen Russians as part of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into alleged Russian meddling during the 2016 presidential campaign.
The indictment targets 12 Russian intelligence officers for engaging in a sustained effort to hack networks of Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Committee, and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. All 12 are members of the GRU, Russia's intelligence service, according to the court filing.



U.S. intelligence agencies have said hackers working for GRU were directly involved in breaking into the Democratic National Committee's servers as well as breaching the email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager.

The hack and breaching of the DNC and Podesta email account were ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, the committee report said.

The stolen information was then exposed on WikiLeaks, and Trump campaign senior officials worked with Trump confidant Roger Stone to "obtain advance information about WikiLeaks's planned releases," the report said. Stone was later found guilty of lying to Congress, but Trump commuted his prison sentence.


 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Of course...Assange is a credible source...
He's one of only a few people who actually know the truth about who gave those emails to wikileaks, which, lets face it, is why you need to denigrate his character to prop up your propaganda on the matter.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
He's one of only a few people who actually know the truth about who gave those emails to wikileaks, which, lets face it, is why you need to denigrate his character to prop up your propaganda on the matter.
Yes, he may know the truth...he isn't admitting the Russian government was his source because that would destroy Wikileaks. He also may not know who delivered the data.

Meanwhile, review your own posts attacking sources you don't like when you haven't any facts to actually dispute what they have to say.
 
Again, there is NO EVIDENCE the Russians hacked the DNC.

So when Trump said it was probably the Russians, was he lying?
When all of the head of intelligence agencies said it was the Russians, they were lying?
When the Senate committee said it was the Russians, they were lying...
But when Putin says it wasn't us...he was being truthful. When Assange says it wasn't the Russians, he was being truthful.

You act as though Mueller just signed the indictments...that is false. He presented his case to a grand jury and they voted for the indictments.

A federal grand jury on Friday returned a new indictment against a dozen Russians as part of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into alleged Russian meddling during the 2016 presidential campaign.
The indictment targets 12 Russian intelligence officers for engaging in a sustained effort to hack networks of Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Committee, and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. All 12 are members of the GRU, Russia's intelligence service, according to the court filing.



U.S. intelligence agencies have said hackers working for GRU were directly involved in breaking into the Democratic National Committee's servers as well as breaching the email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager.

The hack and breaching of the DNC and Podesta email account were ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, the committee report said.

The stolen information was then exposed on WikiLeaks, and Trump campaign senior officials worked with Trump confidant Roger Stone to "obtain advance information about WikiLeaks's planned releases," the report said. Stone was later found guilty of lying to Congress, but Trump commuted his prison sentence.


This just in, THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES HAVE BEEN LYING TO AND ABOUT TRUMP SINCE 2016. THE INSURANCE POLICY, FROM PAYING THE GUY WHO WAS STEELE'S SOURCE TO FISA WARRANTS......

Grow the f-ck up already.

Please post more debunked talking points below:
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Yes, he may know the truth...he isn't admitting the Russian government was his source because that would destroy Wikileaks. He also may not know who delivered the data.

Meanwhile, review your own posts attacking sources you don't like when you haven't any facts to actually dispute what they have to say.
Or maybe because it wasn't them. The only other "evidence" I am aware of is Crowdstrike's admission that they have no idea who "exfiltrated" them. If you have hard evidence to support that it was "the Russians" please post it. Otherwise admit that you have nothing to back that up, other than the extremely suspect claim by someone in the "intelligence community" that has been caught pushing the false narrative about "Trump Russia collusion."
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Or maybe because it wasn't them. The only other "evidence" I am aware of is Crowdstrike's admission that they have no idea who "exfiltrated" them. If you have hard evidence to support that it was "the Russians" please post it. Otherwise admit that you have nothing to back that up, other than the extremely suspect claim by someone in the "intelligence community" that has been caught pushing the false narrative about "Trump Russia collusion."
1. Crowdstrike did find evidence of email prepared to be copied off the system. They didn't find evidence of who did it. The evidence that it was "exfiltrated" is that Wikileaks got copies.
2. Not "someone"...."Everyone" in the intelligence community and there is nobody offering evidence that it was someone else.

Russia interfered in the election...not just by hacking the DNC, but by their thousands of facebook and other social media efforts as well as by their hacking election systems around the country.

The investigation was about the Russian efforts as well as contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials. Insufficient evidence of any offer of favorable treatment was found to accuse the campaign of participating in a conspiracy. If it was, in fact, a hoax to discredit Trump wouldn't they have made shit up instead of finding in favor of Trump?
 
Top