The Russians did not hack the DNC

[Raoul_Luke]

Spinning and twisting in the air like a ballerina again. The fact is that Comey threw Hillary Clinton way under the bus by trashing her as he announced that he did not recommend prosecution. He was officially fired for stepping out of line by giving that press conference. He should have made a short announcement stating that his team fully investigated the emails and found no criminal conduct on her part....Period.

Then Coney made an announcement about the email investigation being reopened a week before the election. Meanwhile Trump’s campaign was rightfully being investigated and not a peep from Comey or the Obama DOJ. Comey virtually handed the razor thin election to Trump on a platter.

Then, it was Trump’s own DOJ that appointed Mueller as Special Council. Nobody framed Trump. He was never indicted or impeached for anything regarding the Mueller report or the US Senate Intel report which both clearly stated that GRU Intel was interfering with the 2016 election on Trumps behalf.

Yeah, we know that because of all the evidence that has come out about how Comey loved him some Orange Bad Man...oops!

 

[Raoul_Luke]

So a lying righty can pretend it is obvious to avoid actually answering...

One has nothing to do with the other. You argue there should have been no investigation of the Russian hack. I said there should be. I've said nothing like nobody should investigate the laptop...while you argue there are crimes with no evidence...

I must have missed all your shrill allegations that every unsavory detail on Hunter's hard drive is evidence of a crime.

 

[EatTheRich]

I never said the events they investigated were "fabricated" - I said they were all above board. Well, actually some of them were - like that ridiculous entrapment of Papadopoulos.

Above board or not, the FBI could unquestionably have sunk the Trump campaign just by making public what they knew if it hadn’t been FBI leadership’s preference that Trump win the 2016 election.

 

[middleview]

I must have missed all your shrill allegations that every unsavory detail on Hunter's hard drive is evidence of a Crime.

Sorry...what? I have yet to see evidence of a crime...it was the anti-Biden crowd who thought Joe should go to jail because of the laptop.

 

[middleview]

I have, repeatedly, and you ignore those posts (or post some ridiculous drive by retort). And then you turn right around and demand I list them yet again. It's like you are a @Bugsy McGurk sock puppet fer sh*t's sake.

link to one of those posts...

 

[Jack4freedom]

Yeah, we know that because of all the evidence that has come out about how Comey loved him some Orange Bad Man...oops!

It was not Comey’s job to love him some Orange man Raoul. After Comey handed him the election by endlessly trashing Clinton, Trump thought Comey should let Flynn off the hook and quash the Russian investigation. For not doing that, Trump ordered the assistant AG Rosenstein to fire him.

Trump thought he could run the US Government like wannabe mob boss like the way he ran his sleazy, crooked companies and his “charity” foundation. Whatever flak he took from law enforcement and the press he had coming in spades.

He is the biggest crybaby douchebag in US political history. It really cracks me up that so many suckers are still buying the crap that poor little Donny was being singled out and picked on by the FBI and the press. The press was instrumental in helping Trump win the GOP nomination and the general against Hillary Clinton.

He was given unlimited access to every major network during the campaign which was worth hundreds of millions in advertising that he did not have to spend while his opponents were hemorrhaging cash. Why a guy as smart as you doesn’t see through a lying, crybaby con man like Trump is a real mystery to me. It’s one thing to be a sleazy lying sack of shit, but being a big pussy too puts him in a class by himself.

 

[middleview]

I must have missed all your shrill allegations that every unsavory detail on Hunter's hard drive is evidence of a Crime.

Look....we have a number of circumstantial events surrounding the crime involved in hacking the DNC email system. One is the conversation with Downer when Papadopoulos informs him that the Russians have dirt on Clinton. Downer informed his superiors in Canberra when that conversation took place.

Much later, after DNC email happens to be released by Wikileaks, Downer informs the US. All by itself is it evidence of a crime? No.
Carter Page has a meeting with Russia's deputy prime minister...still no crime.
Something like 100 contacts with Russian government officials and Putin cronies. No crime here either.

Manafort shared internal polling data with someone rumored to be a russian agent.
Also not a crime.

Taken all together, what did the hacker of the DNC system have in mind? Clearly to help Trump. Should there have been an investigation to determine if there had been coordination or promise of favorable treatment for the Russians? I have said there should be an investigation. You don't think so.

On the other hand, there has been an investigation into Hunter's laptop...both the FBI and the Baltimore PD have all the evidence. Three years later you argue that there should have been criminal charges and that Joe Biden is implicated in crimes...
What are they? The NYPost article breathlessly proclaimed corruption, but I've seen nothing criminal.

If you have...what is the crime? Hunter trying to form a company with a Chinese company? Hmmm...no crime there. How about suggesting to his partners that Joe get 10% of the company....no crime there either. Note that there is no evidence that he talked to his father about that and there is no evidence that Joe owns 10%. The former CEO of the company, who was kicked out, now says Joe knew about the deal...
So what?

 

[middleview]

I knew it was all bullshit in 2016 (and said so). If the evidence shows they were aware in early 2017, that doesn't mean they only came to that conclusion after an exhaustive investigation. Anybody who wasn't on the rabid anti-Trump team knew the whole thing was bullshit from the get go. That's the part that's so funny - you pretend I wasn't saying none of this was "evidence" of anything other than anti-Trump bias. And now we see the "authorities" were all saying the same thing at various points very early on, and Barr has said flat out there was no adequate "predicate." I knew. They knew. Why didn't you?

So you knew that the over 100 contacts with Russian officials and Putin pals had nothing to do with the hack of the DNC? Nothing to do with the release of DNC email to Wiki?
Manafort releasing internal polling data to a Russian intel agent was innocent? I'm sure it had nothing at all to do with the hundreds of accounts the Russians had on Facebook or Twitter and did not enter into the Russian plan for social media posts supporting Trump.

What "authorities"? Barr? No bias there, eh? The IG said there was adequate predicate for Crossfire.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

 

[middleview]

I have, repeatedly, and you ignore those posts (or post some ridiculous drive by retort). And then you turn right around and demand I list them yet again. It's like you are a @Bugsy McGurk sock puppet fer sh*t's sake.

I've searched your posts for any reference to crimes you think were committed by Hunter or Joe Biden...evidence? Nope. Opinions? Oh yeah. You imply a lot and prove nothing. Trump's DOJ has had that laptop since 2019 and did not indict anyone.
The Baltimore PD has had a copy of the laptop disk since mid 2020...and nothing from them either.

You think Hunter getting a job with Burisma is evidence of a crime or corruption. Nope.
Hunter flew with Joe to China....is that a crime? No. Hunter met with individuals who invested money through his company....still no crime.

Get a grip. Come up with evidence of any of the bullshit you accuse them of. Joe wasn't even a government official in 2017 when the partnership with the Chinese company to form Bohai Harvest was discussed....but you think that is evidence of something corrupt.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

I've searched your posts for any reference to crimes you think were committed by Hunter or Joe Biden...evidence? Nope. Opinions? Oh yeah. You imply a lot and prove nothing. Trump's DOJ has had that laptop since 2019 and did not indict anyone.
The Baltimore PD has had a copy of the laptop disk since mid 2020...and nothing from them either.

You think Hunter getting a job with Burisma is evidence of a Crime or corruption. Nope.
Hunter flew with Joe to China....is that a Crime? No. Hunter met with individuals who invested money through his company....still no Crime.

Get a grip. Come up with evidence of any of the bullshit you accuse them of. Joe wasn't even a government official in 2017 when the partnership with the Chinese company to form Bohai Harvest was discussed....but you think that is evidence of something corrupt.

Yet all those completely legal "meetings" (most of which were "meet and greets" at some dinner) between Trump's team and "Russians" were totally evidence enough to warrant an investigation of everyone in sight, including Trump. The FBI is where criminal investigations of Democrats go to die, regardless of whose DOJ controls it. Hunter is a crack addicted sex maniac. The idea that he got all those lucrative sinecures because of his "brilliance" is absurd. We're all dumber for simply being forced to entertain such an idiotic premise.

So lets recap - according to you, meetings between Republicans and foreigners where no business is conducted = hair on fire evidence of obvious criminal behavior; while Democrats meeting with foreigners and walking away with tens of millions = nothing to see here, move along. Which is precisely why you are clearly a hypocrite.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

So you knew that the over 100 contacts with Russian officials and Putin pals had nothing to do with the hack of the DNC? Nothing to do with the release of DNC email to Wiki?
Manafort releasing internal polling data to a Russian intel agent was innocent? I'm sure it had nothing at all to do with the hundreds of accounts the Russians had on Facebook or Twitter and did not enter into the Russian plan for social media posts supporting Trump.

What "authorities"? Barr? No bias there, eh? The IG said there was adequate predicate for Crossfire.

https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

Most of those "contacts" were simple cases of small talk at dinner parties and conferences. The "hack of the DNC" started in 2015 and, according to Assange, the Russians didn't give him the emails (a claim backed up by Crowdstrike's admission that they never saw the file leave the network.

Since when is "polling data" a state secret? Manafort was leveraging that information as an implied threat to a guy who owed him money. A "Russian" who just happened to be a US intelligence asset. The Facebook accounts amounted to a fart in the wing as far as election interference go, and they immediately switched to targeting Trump as soon as he won - does that sound like a project to "support" him?

The "IG?" LOL - bureaucracies have such a stellar record of investigating themselves. No bias there, eh? The evidence says there was no predicate for Crossfire.

 

[middleview]

Most of those "contacts" were simple cases of small talk at dinner parties and conferences. The "hack of the DNC" started in 2015 and, according to Assange, the Russians didn't give him the emails (a claim backed up by Crowdstrike's admission that they never saw the file leave the network.

Since when is "polling data" a state secret? Manafort was leveraging that information as an implied threat to a guy who owed him money. A "Russian" who just happened to be a US intelligence asset. The Facebook accounts amounted to a fart in the wing as far as election interference go, and they immediately switched to targeting Trump as soon as he won - does that sound like a project to "support" him?

The "IG?" LOL - bureaucracies have such a stellar record of investigating themselves. No bias there, eh? The evidence says there was no predicate for Crossfire.

that you believe assange and not the heads of our own intel agencies or the inspector general is telling.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Look....we have a number of circumstantial events surrounding the Crime involved in hacking the DNC email system. One is the conversation with Downer when Papadopoulos informs him that the Russians have dirt on Clinton. Downer informed his superiors in Canberra when that conversation took place.

Much later, after DNC email happens to be released by Wikileaks, Downer informs the US. All by itself is it evidence of a Crime? No.
Carter Page has a meeting with Russia's deputy prime minister...still no Crime.
Something like 100 contacts with Russian government officials and Putin cronies. No Crime here either.

Manafort shared internal polling data with someone rumored to be a russian agent.
Also not a Crime.

Taken all together, what did the hacker of the DNC system have in mind? Clearly to help Trump. Should there have been an investigation to determine if there had been coordination or promise of favorable treatment for the Russians? I have said there should be an investigation. You don't think so.

On the other hand, there has been an investigation into Hunter's laptop...both the FBI and the Baltimore PD have all the evidence. Three years later you argue that there should have been criminal charges and that Joe Biden is implicated in crimes...
What are they? The NYPost article breathlessly proclaimed corruption, but I've seen nothing criminal.

If you have...what is the Crime? Hunter trying to form a company with a Chinese company? Hmmm...no Crime there. How about suggesting to his partners that Joe get 10% of the company....no Crime there either. Note that there is no evidence that he talked to his father about that and there is no evidence that Joe owns 10%. The former CEO of the company, who was kicked out, now says Joe knew about the deal...
So what?

No, it's not "evidence of a crime." I have told you over and over how the whole deal looks fishy, what with Downer being a Clinton crony and all. And with all the really solid evidence that has come out the past few months about how the whole "Russian collusion" thing was a Clinton campaign dirty trick, it looks like it was a set up even more so than when I was telling you it was years ago. Just another example of something I was right about that you had all wrong. If you had an ounce of integrity you'd admit it - instead you cling to the fictional accounts that sound goofier with each passing revelation.

We don't know what the hacker had in mind, because we don't know who it was. The idea that they were out to help Trump sounds good in theory but it wasn't the Russians, who clearly would have preferred Hillary:



It seems more likely to me that it was someone looking to hurt Hillary and Trump, as usual, just lucked out.

As for the Bidens, is there ironclad evidence they are committing crimes? Nope. It's just me doing a logical analysis of the circumstantial evidence and drawing a conclusion. That has served me well over the years and when the Republicans win in November and the investigations start I'm betting the Bidens don't come out smelling like roses. Will any of the evidence produced change your mind? I doubt it. You seem to enjoy being wrong about everything.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

It was not Comey’s job to love him some Orange man Raoul. After Comey handed him the election by endlessly trashing Clinton, Trump thought Comey should let Flynn off the hook and quash the Russian investigation. For not doing that, Trump ordered the assistant AG Rosenstein to fire him.

Trump thought he could run the US Government like wannabe mob boss like the way he ran his sleazy, crooked companies and his “charity” foundation. Whatever flak he took from law enforcement and the press he had coming in spades.

He is the biggest crybaby douchebag in US political history. It really cracks me up that so many suckers are still buying the crap that poor little Donny was being singled out and picked on by the FBI and the press. The press was instrumental in helping Trump win the GOP nomination and the general against Hillary Clinton.

He was given unlimited access to every major network during the campaign which was worth hundreds of millions in advertising that he did not have to spend while his opponents were hemorrhaging cash. Why a guy as smart as you doesn’t see through a lying, crybaby con man like Trump is a real mystery to me. It’s one thing to be a sleazy lying sack of shit, but being a big pussy too puts him in a class by himself.

Oh I don't harbor any illusions Jack. I do not disagree at all with your characterization of Trump the man. But the idea that the intrenched bureaucracy and the press allied to usher him into the Oval Office is at odds with the known facts. And I'm the kind of guy who thinks, no matter how big a douche bag you are, it doesn't give the power elites free rein to ride roughshod over your Constitutional rights.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

link to one of those posts...

There are now several on this thread.

 

[middleview]

Yet all those completely legal "meetings" (most of which were "meet and greets" at some dinner) between Trump's team and "Russians" were totally evidence enough to warrant an investigation of everyone in sight, including Trump. The FBI is where criminal investigations of Democrats go to die, regardless of whose DOJ controls it. Hunter is a crack addicted sex maniac. The idea that he got all those lucrative sinecures because of his "brilliance" is absurd. We're all dumber for simply being forced to entertain such an idiotic premise.

So lets recap - according to you, meetings between Republicans and foreigners where no business is conducted = hair on fire evidence of obvious criminal behavior; while Democrats meeting with foreigners and walking away with tens of millions = nothing to see here, move along. Which is precisely why you are clearly a hypocrite.

The dishonesty evident in your posts is laughable. You claim The meetings between republicans and foreigners is my evidence of a crime...that is a lie. I posted the meetings with Russian diplomats and Putin cronies were reasons for an investigation into whether or not those meetings had any link to the effort by Russia to help Trump. That you stick to the DNC hack and ignore hacks in all 50 states...as well as the Russian social media campaign is just you sticking to the Trump party line.

 

[middleview]

No, it's not "evidence of a Crime." I have told you over and over how the whole deal looks fishy, what with Downer being a Clinton crony and all. And with all the really solid evidence that has come out the past few months about how the whole "Russian collusion" thing was a Clinton campaign dirty trick, it looks like it was a set up even more so than when I was telling you it was years ago. Just another example of something I was right about that you had all wrong. If you had an ounce of integrity you'd admit it - instead you cling to the fictional accounts that sound goofier with each passing revelation.

We don't know what the hacker had in mind, because we don't know who it was. The idea that they were out to help Trump sounds good in theory but it wasn't the Russians, who clearly would have preferred Hillary:

View attachment 70304

It seems more likely to me that it was someone looking to hurt Hillary and Trump, as usual, just lucked out.

As for the Bidens, is there ironclad evidence they are committing crimes? Nope. It's just me doing a logical analysis of the circumstantial evidence and drawing a conclusion. That has served me well over the years and when the Republicans win in November and the investigations start I'm betting the Bidens don't come out smelling like roses. Will any of the evidence produced change your mind? I doubt it. You seem to enjoy being wrong about everything.

funny your "logical analysis" is limited to the Bidens and ignores Trump.

 

[middleview]

Did they provide them the "evidence" they later told Congress they didn't have which proves the "Russians" exfiltrated the email file(s)?

Where is your evidence that the email came to Wiki from some other source?

 

[middleview]

Go see the movie.

Not likely...I'm not spending $20 to see his crap. Did you?

 

[middleview]

There are now several on this thread.

No there are not...again, if you have specific crimes evidenced by the laptop...what are they? The NYPost implies unethical or criminal acts...but dodges actually saying what they are. You use the same tactics.