It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

When will Trump/Russia conspiracy theorists admit this is all spin?

page: 1
36
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+19 more 
posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Recent revelation about disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok has reframed the entire Mueller investigation and Trump/Russia narrative as a whole.

Political hacking is a common practice of nation-states, and as a result this top counter-intelligence investigator was initially assigned the case. However, it is widely disputed that any nation states were involved outside of the typical intelligence collection activities. Elections are divisive, and voters had made up their minds long before the email/"propaganda" drip-drip-drip started. Therefore, why would Russian intelligence leak anything and expose the fact they were even hacked? Intelligence services don't boast about their exploits, nor do they burn sources or methods for the sake of attempting to sway voters that have already made up their minds.

Anyhow, the leaks themselves were very likely internal, much like Snowden and the other major leaks we've seen. Additionally, the Guccifer 2.0 character is still unknown to this day, and could be anywhere. It is trivial (as even CIA document dumps/tool leaks - ie: ShadowBrokers) to spoof your origin, and intentionally leave behind IP breadcrumbs in code (amateur stuff, too. not the kind of stuff groups with tens of millions+ in funding do). The assertion that Russia engaged in hacking is probably true, but it is unlikely it was outside the "norm" for nation-state activity (we do the same thing, as well as every other developed country w/ state intelligence). I highly doubt they'd risk exposing any hard-gained footholds.

So we're left with an investigation that started out as a desperate attempt to explain Clinton's devastating and unexpected loss last November, and ended up as a political witch hunt filled with partisan characters and special counsels who have to be threated with contempt of congress to comply. Mueller is behaving as though he is above congressional reproach or oversight (which has lawful power of subpoena), by shielding agents with clear pro-Hillary bias.

Not only did this named agent have connections to Clinton mega-doner (Terry McAuliffe), he expressed significant anti-Trump beliefs in text messages Mueller also tried to shield. More reports of agents misbehaving, coupled with the continual leaks from the special investigation lead me to believe Mueller doesn't run a tight ship, and his team is grossly unqualified to lead any investigation.

It is clear the investigation was started under absolutely false pretenses. What should have never been was then falsely framed as an investigation against Trump. At first this was probably just to make Clintonistas feel better about the loss, and evolved into a tool they believed *could possibly* lead to Trump's 'removal' (which allows the delusion to continue - despite no such action in over a year, and a host of lame bottom of the bucket charges from the investigation against aids spanning over a decade)

1) It makes no sense for Russia to hack any party (they hacked both, BTW) and then dump the data. APT's do not do this.

2) The dossier has been proven as partisan spin, thanks to revelations that Clinton's campaign financed Christopher Steele (a UK citizen) who compiled the erroneous dossier with tons of speculative claims, which are unproven to this date. He even got several facts totally wrong. Most importantly, some contents of the dossier are impossible to verify. Some dates and times possibly coincide with Trumps movements, but that proves nothing of the actual content and actions of those dates. He could've been playing golf or drinking martinis when he's said to have been doing what the dossier alleges. Most claims are simply unable to be vetted. What can be vetted, is generally proven false or too general to be proven/disproven.
(AKA *snicker* "I heard such and such was doing such and such with so and so then")

3) Even Obama/Clapper and other agencies came out RIGHT AFTER the election and said Russia didn't mess with vote tallies (that is impossible), nor did it even impact the election significantly. This evolved over a period of a few weeks, and combined with rampant anti-Trump derangement syndrome and gave rise to these totally unproven theories. Many were made up by angry people who used the accusations as a way to get back at Trump, and continually as impetus in their wishes to impeach the President. The allegations grow more bold and boisterous as time rolls on, because nearly anything and everything is accused of being a pro-GOP "Kremlin" OP. Even a cursory look at recent events will disprove that theory. If Putin (who calls the theories ludicrous, BTW) wanted to support the GOP, why wouldn't he rig Virginia for them? Why did a Democrat beat a Republican in Virginia? This is ridiculous. So many on the left push this theory in true-believer style because they can't accept Trump won the presidency. Instead of reflecting on their own actions (and mistakes), many on sites like DU continue to push bizarre and Occam's razor violating theories.

4) Strzok and other agents are a common thread between the email investigation to the post election Russiagate nonsense. Given their demeanor and actions, it is clear they were engaging in vindictive behavior toward Trump, and covering for Clinton where possible. The Lynch/Clinton secret meeting in Arizona demonstrates the considerable collusion between the deep state and the Obama DOJ. Clearly these individuals, holdovers, are the precise deep state Trump has warned of.

What am I missing ATSers? I know there is more to this, but it is time we debunk this false narrative. Anyone else remember Obama and the ex-DNI himself coming out and saying Russia wasn't what swung the election?

When the President of the United States gets on public forums and confirms this decades old theory, it is noteworthy. Called the "shadow government," "dark government," "secret government," "state within a state," or more recently just "deep state" - the shadow government has long been theorized to include officials that occupied other posts in the puppet government. They are not exclusively high level officials, either. It is the lower level people that carry out directives from the higher-ups. It is likely they exist at all levels.
edit on 12/5/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



+9 more 
posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns When the investigation is over. Until then let's just talk about conspiracy's and what not. And no this investigation is not a conspiracy just a investigation.




posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 09:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: JBurns When the investigation is over. Until then let's just talk about conspiracy's and what not. And no this investigation is not a conspiracy just a investigation.



I appreciate your reply and POV

My concern is that Mueller needs oversight. It is also clear that some individuals, like the Podesta Group have not yet been indicted (at least not publically). Since they are guilty of the same things Manafort, etc were, I find it unusual they wouldn't be facing charges.

Tony Podesta and the CEO even stepped down, and the group has now shuttered (as of last month). It is clear they were bracing for the storm, but where is it? So they disassociate out of the blue, and relocate among different lobbyist groups? I don't think so. These people clearly committed crimes, and Mueller is proving he's a partisan by not pursuing them as well.

Much like candy-like immunity deals given during the Clinton investigation. I've never heard of so many people being given immunity, without the big fish getting charged.

And why was she allowed to clean the server, when it was suspected of containing evidence of a crime? They had a search warrant, which you cannot get unless you swear on an affidavit and demonstrate probable cause that it contains evidence. It should have been seized, without her knowing in advance. Instead, she hired an outside company to scrub an admitted 30,000 emails from the server before turning it over. Ridiculous handling of the case. I only bring the emails up because several of these same agents worked on that investigation, and their exposure now calls all of this into question again.

So, with that in mind, how can we trust Mueller's team? The proven anti-Trump bias, and constant leaks from the investigation (likely by those agents) puts its credibility entirely at risk.

Even if something was somehow found now, no one on the right would believe it. It has lost its legitimacy, unfortunately. Several days ago I was praising Mueller and his legacy, so this is a big deal to me. We'd never accept any findings to remove Trump now. Not from that group of partisans anyhow.

Mueller should be fired, and Sessions should handle all Clinton related investigation while a new non-partisan special counsel is appointed for the Russia investigation - only because it would be inappropriate for Trump himself to terminate it. Sessions should direct the special counsel to examine Mueller and team, and determine if it is worth pursuing. If the non-partisan special counsel says it is worth pursuing, then his scope could be widened.
edit on 12/5/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 09:38 PM
link   
After the fat lady sings of course. Until then, why bother? We all speculate, but we don't know, and we won't until it's over.



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Probably around the same time the 9-11 truthers, Sandy Hook nutbags and Pedogate prosecutors all get together and buy the world a coke.



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns


Anyone else remember Obama and the ex-DNI himself coming out and saying Russia wasn't what swung the election?


Clap on, clap off, the Clapper:


The Washington Post reported Friday that the CIA has secretly concluded that the Vladimir Putin regime directed hackers to penetrate the Democrats’ emails expressly to help Republican Trump win the election. The Post said the CIA has identified people with connections to the Russia government who supplied the stolen emails to Wikileaks.

That is not what Mr. Clapper, the director of national intelligence, told the House Intelligence Committee at an open hearing on Nov. 17.

Asked about Russia and Wikileaks, Mr. Clapper said, “As far as the WikiLeaks connection, the evidence there is not as strong and we don’t have good insight into the sequencing of the releases or when the data may have been provided. We don’t have as good insight into that.”


Washington times

I can't find any direct quotes from Obama himself, but I did find this:


The Obama administration said it has seen no evidence of hackers tampering with the 2016 presidential election, even as recount proceedings began in Wisconsin.

“We stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people,” a senior administration official told POLITICO late Friday.

“The federal government did not observe any increased level of malicious cyber activity aimed at disrupting our electoral process on election day,” the official added. “We believe our elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective.”


Politico

 


Found Obama:


In his year-end news conference on Friday, Obama said that since massive attacks on the Democratic National Committee were discovered one of his main concerns was preventing “potential hacking that could hamper vote counting, affect the actual election process itself.”

To that end, at the G20 summit Obama says he told Putin “to cut it out, and there were going to be some serious consequences if he didn’t.”

“In fact, we did not see further tampering of the election process,” Obama said. “But the leaks through WikiLeaks had already occurred.”


Obama Vows Retaliation as Evidence of Russian Hacking Mounts

By Brian Ross
Rhonda Schwartz
MEGAN CHRISTIE
Randy Kreider

edit on 5-12-2017 by jadedANDcynical because: found Obama


+3 more 
posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 09:51 PM
link   
What you are seeing is weaponized government.

Just look at all the groups and agencies with a political agenda.

FBI

CIA

DNC

IRS

NSA

Just to name a few...



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thorneblood
Probably around the same time the 9-11 truthers, Sandy Hook nutbags and Pedogate prosecutors all get together and buy the world a coke.


You actually believe the official story regarding 9/11?

I am curious because this helps me know how serious to take you in the future.


edit on 2017/12/5 by Metallicus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thorneblood
Probably around the same time the 9-11 truthers, Sandy Hook nutbags and Pedogate prosecutors all get together and buy the world a coke.


Please never mention pedogate when you have no idea what it actually is about. Downplaying this # is exactly what is wrong with the world.



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 10:18 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Read everything..

Nevermind!
edit on 5-12-2017 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)


Damnit..



edit on 5-12-2017 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere I think you forgot the GOP lol they all stink to high heaven.




posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Allaroundyou


edit on 5-12-2017 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Bigburgh

Awww...now i can't take back my star.


Anyway, for those who can't process sarcasm, the likelihood of anyone who buys this conspiracy giving it up is about as likely as the above mentioned conspiracy theorists getting together and buying the world a coke.

So let's all have a pint.




posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Perfectenemy that entire post was a very uneducated rambling. Not you but what you replied to.




posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Thorneblood



No.. a gave the star.
Just wish i was a little...
Well..

Behold... this is what i feel like anymore.

edit on 5-12-2017 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Literally everything is a conspiracy apparently, and the only "truths" are published by the shadiest of "news" outlets with dubious motives.

It's like everything is ass-backwards now.

The largest conspiracy in modern history is unfolding, but nope...it's "fake".

The world is upside down when actual conspiracies are denied .... on a website to explore conspiracies.



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Bigburgh I got nothin lol well played you




posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

This is a well worded post, however, what is there to discuss? I would assume anyone of any substance who is or considers themselves a true ATSer should know the Russia collusion narrative has and will prove to be false.

It is so blatantly apparent it is a contrived narrative that anyone who actually believes it lacks basic reasoning skills. Either that or they are riddled with ego driven feelings of inadequacy.



posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 12:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13

But those Fake moon landing guys, they know whats up...




top topics



 
36
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join