The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
The "establishment" has been rocked...and they don't like it.

Not one bit!!

If the "establishment" could read your post they would be laughing so hard..

originally posted by: JacKatMtn
a reply to: seasonal

What state? Barry is staying in DC.... last I looked they don't rate a senate seat..

Wherever she has to move to in order to get elected. I'm not sure that's teh warmest marriage out there although they are surely more discreet in their dealings than teh Clintons.

Perhaps her life mission is to go down as the most hated individual to ever hold public office.

To quote a former President:

"MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"

a reply to: seasonal

Don't forget Alexander Hamilton in your CIA+Clinton conspiracy..

Federalist papers 68 explaining the electoral colleges duty to protect the country from Putin's pet Trump.

Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption.

These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.

How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?

But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention.

They have not made the appointment of the President to depend on any preexisting bodies of men, who might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes; but they have referred it in the first instance to an immediate act of the people of America, to be exerted in the choice of persons for the temporary and sole purpose of making the appointment. And they have excluded from eligibility to this trust, all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the President in office. No senator, representative, or other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States, can be of the numbers of the electors. Thus without corrupting the body of the people, the immediate agents in the election will at least enter upon the task free from any sinister bias. Their transient existence, and their detached situation, already taken notice of, afford a satisfactory prospect of their continuing so, to the conclusion of it. The business of corruption, when it is to embrace so considerable a number of men, requires time as well as means. Nor would it be found easy suddenly to embark them, dispersed as they would be over thirteen States, in any combinations founded upon motives, which though they could not properly be denominated corrupt, might yet be of a nature to mislead them from their duty.

Federalist Papers...I provided a link from those evil liberals over at TeaParty.com
www.teaparty911.com...

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
The "establishment" has been rocked...and they don't like it.

Not one bit!!

Oh totally. Everyone expected a bleeding heart liberal win. First the black man. Next the incompetent woman, who failed to fulfill her duties in protecting US diplomats in Benghazi. Because this is the bleeding heart liberal control leader of progressive world thought. We're going to elect her just because she is female. Obama should have taken her defeat as a compliment. US Code states that the Secretary of State duties are the protection of US government officials. She failed to shut that embassy down after Gaddafi got knifed rectally by his own people and he wasn't even gay. She sends a alternative lifestyle representative to Libya AFTER Gaddafi was killed to an unstable state where....is that lifestyle even legal in Libya?

Further she betrayed her parties ideals in failing to protect that embassador. The alternative lifestyle, LGBT, has always been a leftist movement of the democratic PC correct lovefest. How less than supportive can you get?

Finally, when I was in the military, you demonstrated competency at a lower level rank before receiving a promotion. If she could not understand her duties according to US Code as Secretary of State in protecting that embassador, how is she qualified for a higher level promoting to President?

a reply to: seasonal

It sounds like hilary has some personal beef with Russia.

Why is she pointing fingers anyway? It's her fault she lost the election, not anyone else.
When someone who has even a shred of integrity, they will accept responsibility.

I bet Putin is relieved he won't have to defend his people against such a deceitful crack-pot.

originally posted by: loveguy
a reply to: seasonal

When someone who has even a shred of integrity, they will accept responsibility.

Cognitive dissonance and dissociation = inability to deal with reality.

originally posted by: rickymouse

Their stuff is not what got Trump elected, it was Hillary's past actions that made her lose. Why would anyone think that this woman who has been brought in front of congress for serious mistakes she made in her job and her ignoring the Benghazi concerns would win? Screwing up as president is not a good thing.

Hillary is over...You miss the bigger picture.

There is no scenario under which she will ever be President.

There are plausible scenarios where Trump will not be.

The CIA stated with the most certain language they ever state anything...that Putin and Russia conducted a cyber-hacking campaign to benefit Donald Trump and help him get elected.

Things like Paul Manafort's Infamous political ties and Russia dealings...
Or Trump advisor Carter page?..Went to Russia in July and explicitly offered to lift US Sanctions on Russia if Trump was elected and met with Igor Diveykin..

U.S. intelligence agencies have also received reports that Page met with another top Putin aide while in Moscow — Igor Diveykin. A former Russian security official, Diveykin now serves as deputy chief for internal policy and is believed by U.S. officials to have responsibility for intelligence collected by Russian agencies about the U.S. election, the Western intelligence source said.

www.yahoo.com...

There is also Trumps trip to Russia for the Miss USA pageant...Where he was strongly anti-Russia before the trip and strongly pro-Russia afterwards. There are a dozen different ways he could have been co-opted while there...

Hillary will never be President. If the CIA and/or FBI step in and directly provide evidence that Trump collaborated in the DNC hack...or has been otherwise colluding with Russian agents or representatives to aid in his election, made promises of lifting the US sanctions in trade for help etc....he could go to jail, and possible for "high crimes" or "treason"...but he certainly would not be President. It would likely go to Pence via the electoral college.

That is what we should be watching for...How much the CIA will investigate and share over the next couple weeks...Whether the FBI obtained a FISA Warrant to look at Trump and Trump aides. (Some sites have claimed they got one..unnamed sources..so could be BS)

It's not a left right thing or a Hillary v Trump thing...If it goes south, Pence is next up. I know it's easier in the left v right paradigm.

a reply to: Indigo5

I think you've laid your case out very well I too am worried. That piece of crap McCain and his stooge Mr Graham need watching very carefully.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Perhaps her life mission is to go down as the most hated individual to ever hold public office.

If you can watch 7 minutes of this video, you will understand my sentiments.


PS: the all seeing eye at the beginning is purely "coincidental".

Thoughts? We all knew she wasn't gonna go away that easily. The powers that be have a lot to lose.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: rickymouse

Their stuff is not what got Trump elected, it was Hillary's past actions that made her lose. Why would anyone think that this woman who has been brought in front of congress for serious mistakes she made in her job and her ignoring the Benghazi concerns would win? Screwing up as president is not a good thing.

Hillary is over...You miss the bigger picture.

There is no scenario under which she will ever be President.

There are plausible scenarios where Trump will not be.

The CIA stated with the most certain language they ever state anything...that Putin and Russia conducted a cyber-hacking campaign to benefit Donald Trump and help him get elected.

Things like Paul Manafort's Infamous political ties and Russia dealings...
Or Trump advisor Carter page?..Went to Russia in July and explicitly offered to lift US Sanctions on Russia if Trump was elected and met with Igor Diveykin..

U.S. intelligence agencies have also received reports that Page met with another top Putin aide while in Moscow — Igor Diveykin. A former Russian security official, Diveykin now serves as deputy chief for internal policy and is believed by U.S. officials to have responsibility for intelligence collected by Russian agencies about the U.S. election, the Western intelligence source said.

www.yahoo.com...

There is also Trumps trip to Russia for the Miss USA pageant...Where he was strongly anti-Russia before the trip and strongly pro-Russia afterwards. There are a dozen different ways he could have been co-opted while there...

Hillary will never be President. If the CIA and/or FBI step in and directly provide evidence that Trump collaborated in the DNC hack...or has been otherwise colluding with Russian agents or representatives to aid in his election, made promises of lifting the US sanctions in trade for help etc....he could go to jail, and possible for "high crimes" or "treason"...but he certainly would not be President. It would likely go to Pence via the electoral college.

That is what we should be watching for...How much the CIA will investigate and share over the next couple weeks...Whether the FBI obtained a FISA Warrant to look at Trump and Trump aides. (Some sites have claimed they got one..unnamed sources..so could be BS)

It's not a left right thing or a Hillary v Trump thing...If it goes south, Pence is next up. I know it's easier in the left v right paradigm.

What you stated above the second box, is not what that content said.

"U.S. intelligence agencies have also received reports that Page met with another top Putin aide while in Moscow " does not mean "Went to Russia in July and explicitly offered to lift US Sanctions on Russia if Trump was elected

On top of that, I saw "received reports" and "believed by U.S. officials " in that box. That means there is no firm evidence that they met and it means that some US officials believed they might be talking about the US election. Now your stigmatization is not even close to what that paragraph said.

Sure, the Russian leaders did not like Hillary, that is evident. I doubt if anything would have been done if Bernie was against Trump. On top of that, the leaked information was real, that needs to be considered. You cannot throw out the evidence just because the source is the Russians.

Our government does lots of that cyber stuff, they even brag they are the best in the world. How do you think they know that it came from Russia, they probably hack a lot of their stuff. We also listened into our allies phone calls until we got caught, now we got better at covering our tracks.

People feel the story about fake news might be fake so they dont believe it.

originally posted by: [post=21640104]rickymouse

Our government does lots of that cyber stuff, they even brag they are the best in the world. How do you think they know that it came from Russia, they probably hack a lot of their stuff. We also listened into our allies phone calls until we got caught, now we got better at covering our tracks.

This is BS. Yes...Our government does "a lot of cyber stuff" and a lot of spying, but engaging in intelligence gathering and conducting a full, active cyber campaign to influence an election is unprecedented.

a reply to: seasonal

Sad part is it is not just the liberals. You have Republicans buying into this crap too

a reply to: norhoc

The Republicans behind the democrat attempt to a coup are the same that have been in bed with Hilary and the political rats within the democratic party link to corruption.

These dissenter republicans against trump are the same that have as much crap under the table as Hilary, they had a lot to win if Hillary was the president but no so much with Trump, because they are about making money and filling their pockets.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: [post=21640104]rickymouse

Our government does lots of that cyber stuff, they even brag they are the best in the world. How do you think they know that it came from Russia, they probably hack a lot of their stuff. We also listened into our allies phone calls until we got caught, now we got better at covering our tracks.

This is BS. Yes...Our government does "a lot of cyber stuff" and a lot of spying, but engaging in intelligence gathering and conducting a full, active cyber campaign to influence an election is unprecedented.

Are you for real? The US government alone is responsible for attempting to overthrow more than 70 foreign governments through suppression, funding counter opposition, direct military intervention, assassinations, bribery and every other dirty trick under the sun. You are logically inconsistent.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: [post=21640104]rickymouse

Our government does lots of that cyber stuff, they even brag they are the best in the world. How do you think they know that it came from Russia, they probably hack a lot of their stuff. We also listened into our allies phone calls until we got caught, now we got better at covering our tracks.

This is BS. Yes...Our government does "a lot of cyber stuff" and a lot of spying, but engaging in intelligence gathering and conducting a full, active cyber campaign to influence an election is unprecedented.

I saw the head of one of the intelligence agencies on TV bragging about how good we are at cyber stuff and use some of these kind of persuasive tactics. We put sanctions on other countries to try to persuade the people of the country to get rid of the leader or any policy we do not like.

Didn't you take Government in school? Maybe they don't teach this kind of stuff in schools anymore. At least not in the textbooks, I am sure the teachers would mention something about this sort of stuff in class though.

At least our CIA is not assassinating government officials of other countries anymore like they used to do. Or at least they are better at hiding it.

a reply to: rickymouse

YES - espionage is fair game. A foreign intelligence service getting the internal political emails of a major political party of a major foreign adversary? FAIR GAME...Everyone does it.

BUT WEAPONIZING that INTEL and using it to influence an election? That's a first and out of bounds.

That is what I have heard several commentators in the Espionage racket repeatedly state. X-CIA heads and X-KGB..both equally shocked at what Russia did.

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: rickymouse

YES - espionage is fair game. A foreign intelligence service getting the internal political emails of a major political party of a major foreign adversary? FAIR GAME...Everyone does it.

BUT WEAPONIZING that INTEL and using it to influence an election? That's a first and out of bounds.

That is what I have heard several commentators in the Espionage racket repeatedly state. X-CIA heads and X-KGB..both equally shocked at what Russia did.

So who made that rule? I bet The USA made that rule. Did Russia actually agree to that rule in writing?

Russia makes all sorts of rules in their countries that are part of their group, does the USA or any other nations not in that group need to follow those rules? Does the USA actually have a precisely stated law that governs this particular instance? If Trump wasn't involved in this, does it mean Trump's win is not official? All Putin did was show real evidence that Hillary was a deceiver by releasing this stuff to Wiki, if in fact it went that way. Sure, Russia had that information but also there were other breaches by other nations and individuals, what one actually geve it to Wiki. It could have been any good hacker who gave this truithful information to Wiki.

The information was real, we are supposed to just say it is not real because of the source. Well, no wonder not many in the boxed public pays much attention to ATS, there are some unreal things posted here that we attempt to scrutinize to see if they are legit.

This is what I've gathered:

The recent outcry of Russian hackers helping Trump win the election is not directed towards the general populace. It is targeted solely on the electors who will be meeting Dec. 19 to cast their ballots for Trump.

A group of electors, led by Nancy Pelosi's daughter have requested that Obama appointee James Clapper brief the electors over Russian intervention of the elections. This effort is also supported by the Clinton campaign. Several politicians are calling for the electors to take into consideration the Russian hack of the election. MSM sources are also attempting to sway the electoral college decision.

Electors Against Trump Are Faithful Not Faithless It's their obligation to the Constitution and the country

Time

This is an attempt to sway the decision of the electoral college. It will take 37 electors to change their vote away from Trump to be successful, that is a tall order which brings to light the sudden and massive amount of propaganda over Trump and Russia tampering with elections.

Now, even if this attempt fails, and this is important to note: if the electors still choose Trump by a slight margin, on Jan 6 Congress counts the electoral votes. One of the rules for this vote is the objection, it will take one member from House and Senate to object a vote, discuss, and then consider that vote lawful or unlawful and thus canceling that electoral vote.

In other words, Trump has to win the electoral college by a wide margin, meaning that this manipulation of electors must fail miserably. It doesn't matter if the general public believe these accusations or not, only a handful of electors are needed to sway the election (37).