- This topic has 27 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
Is the CIA just another organization that’s trying to undermine Trump’s legitimacy?
Under the CIA’s current leadership, yes.
Is it possible that this one time they are telling the truth?
No, it is a politicized government agency whose leaders are doing their political masters’ bidding. Along with the rest of the country, most civilian government agencies have become highly politicized in recent years. Assume they’ll be interested in different things on Jan. 21.
“Anything is possible, but before you make a public statement – you have to be able to back it up with proof!”
Agreed. Do you hold comey to that same standard?
Health
Im not sure what you are saying
As you may Recall on October 28 Comey announced he was reopening an investigation. At no point did he claim he had proof at that time. tehn on November 6 he indicated they were closing it again since there was nothing there.
assuming his conclusion on November 6 was correct (which I assume eh would say). do you say he shouldn’t have said anything on October 28?
BTW read up on the CIA, they do in fact have proof that Russia was involved
Hold up my dear Health
“He didn’t at that time.”
Yet he announced an investigation without proof.
coorect? (that is what you said
which is not in keeping with the line you posted above “but before you make a public statement – you have to be able to back it up with proof!”
that I was responding too.
Comey made a public stament without proof (according to you (and the facts))
(As for the rest there is no definite prrof that the kremlin ordered it but I belive they all agree the hacks came from Russsia but this is an aside,)
Hey everyone!! First post!
I have yet to see an actual piece of evidence showing that Russia hacked the elections. As I saw in the article, the conclusion was that Russia’s intentions in this election were pro-Trump, but what they actually did was inconclusive. The election results were gone over dozens of times by many news agencies including CNN, if they saw a single hint of an anomaly in the results, it would have been headline news.
Welcome to the CR, FuturePOTUS 🙂
Yeah, the whole “the Russians hacked the elections!” thing is definitely overrated… While the Russians did probably hack and leak the DNC emails (Why would the CIA lie about this? Just to antagonize their future boss? And it shouldn’t be a shock to anybody that the CIA didn’t announce how it got its info – ever heard of the concept of “classified”? </rant>), that wasn’t the main focus of the Hillary email scandals – it was mostly about the emails she sent over her home-brewn server as Secretary of State. Can’t blame the Russians for revealing that.
And anyways, it’s not like the Russians falsely framed anybody here – they just showed us up what the DNC was really up to. The Dems should stop whining about the Russians airing their dirty laundry in public and start actually taking responsibility for the mess.
Thank You 🙂
You raise very good points. In addition, the CIA themselves hasn’t said anything publicly, to my knowledge. Most information we have is based on The Washington Post’s unnamed sources that speak of a ‘secret CIA investigation,’ so it is subject to questions due to their blatant liberal bias throughout this election, and the trustworthiness of both them and their sources.
While it is true that it was a public service for Wikileaks to release the emails, in a theoretical possibility that Russia did hack to obtain the material, it should be a national crisis. That being said, I see no evidence that Russia did such a thing. Julian Assange, Editor of Wikileaks, denied again and again that Russia gave him the material (your choice whether to believe him or not). Until I see any actual evidence (not circumstantial, not speculation, not ‘their intentions were for Trump, therefore they did something,’ etc.) that Russia did anything, I find it very, very hard to believe.
mw13
There are two email scandals that are completly unrelated.
Health
“He was told by his agents that there was proof, but he wasn’t told it yet himself!”
you are hands down my favorite poster. That sentence is completely meaningless. the bottom line is Comey made an announcement without proof Which is exactly what you said the CIA shouldnt do. Your double standard is hilarious.
The bottom line is, this election was one of the closest in recent memory (contrary to what our dear presiden president elect has said, but then again everything in reality is contrary to what he has said). Anything can (and probably did) sway it It is hard to deny Comey pushed a few people from Hillary, it is hard to deny the email dump (regardless of who sent it) pushed a few more
Dearest Health, Her is an Easy question:
did Comey have proof that there was something relevant in the emails from Weiner’s computer?
Health: CNN has no more evidence than we do. Which is non-existent. Why should I believe Harry Reid over equally high officials who say it never happened, when all logic points against him, without conclusive proof?
ubiquitin: Yes, they did an initial scan of the emails and found relative material.
“Thank you for answering for me!”
I’m confused what did they find? and then why wasnt it deemed relevant a week later?
“But he will never believe anything bad about his idols – the Democrats”
um, no Hillary is a big liar. I have said that repeatedly.
(Oh btw lying is bad so that is something bad about Democrats)
“Well, did you vote for her?!?”
Yes.
A. Lying itself isnt a disqualifier
B. IF it was There wouldnt be anyone to vote for
C. If i was choosing solely based on less of a liar, there is no question that is still Hillary
D. There are other factors aside from trustworthiness that decide my vote.
Now your turn:
I’m confused what did they find? and then why wasnt it deemed relevant a week later?
Aslo Earleir you saidthat Comey’s proof wasnt “from [his] own knowledge!”
what did you mean by that? Where was his proof from?
The whole situation with the email’s on Weiner’s computer was very shady. They found approximately 650,000 emails, according to the Wall Street Journal. It took approximately two weeks to look through them, as opposed to a year it took to look through the 55,000 emails previously discovered. They said most of them were duplicates, yet CBS reported that there were many new emails found. The 33,000 ‘missing’ emails were later discovered to be in the possession of the FBI, a finding that the AP took heat over for not putting out the story when they discovered the details. We know nothing of their contents. I wonder what Comey’s real motives were with all of this, if an investigation actually took place or if it was suppressed, how much was falsified, and what more evils are to be found in the 33,000 emails and the others on Weiner’s computer.
And why were classified emails in particular, and Huma’s State Department emails in general, on Weiner’s computer in the first place?
That’s another question that remains unanswered. Also, why isn’t Huma being charged with having classified info on that computer?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.