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.

 

James Clapper Says Obama Behind Entire Russia Witch Hunt

page: 5
67
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gandalf77

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Greven

A bunch of people indicted and facing trial or plea deals, some are in jail, and you still call it a 'witch hunt.'

I don't care who goes to jail - Democrats or Republicans - as long as wrongdoing is punished. That you don't care about that, and instead want to demean an investigation simply because it's looking at 'your side' is absurd.


The people you are talking about are not in jail/plea deal etc for Russian collusion. They are there because of whatever the FBI could find in any direction on them. Once an investigation starts anything is game. Much like Clinton that went from a land sale scam to sperm on a blue dress.


I love how people pretend if a special counsel crawled up anyone's ass they wouldn't be able to find something to indict you on. "But he did find stuff!" is such a dishonest defense, and most of the people pushing that angle know that. Most of the stuff in those indictments, you could likely indict half of DC on the same #. It's lipstick on a pig so they can say it wasn't a complete waste of taxpayer money. It is.


I respectfully disagree. The indictment of the Russian GRU operatives is hardly a waste of taxpayer money.
Mueller’s team has enough evidence to show exactly what those guys were doing and when.
Yes, they were carrying out an operation to disrupt our election and mess with our democratic process.
Certainly I don’t know what else, if anything, Mueller’s team has, but the fact that they know who in Russia perpetrated these crimes and how is reality biting the right-wing ‘witch hunt’ narrative right in the rear.

To your point, I’m sure there are all kinds of folks in DC guilty of all kinds of similar crap, but the special counsel wasn’t tasked with crawling up their ass. Mueller’s team is running the classic prosecutorial playbook—starting with the little fishy and their crimes, indict them, then pressure them to squeal on the bigger fishy. Given the guilty pleas he’s obtained, it seems to be working. Where it goes? We’ll see. It’s a wonderful use of my tax dollars—much better than border walls and nuclear weapons. Comparatively speaking (and I’m no Hillary fan), we’re getting much more bang for the buck then the Benghazi investigation.


Yeah they exposed Hillary's and the overwhelming corruption of the DNC.

But you call it election meddling...

(Another example) Exposing voter fraud= election meddling to the left.

Exposing felony crimes which jeopardize a candidate's ability to be elected is called "election meddling by democrats..

Those indictments of Russians are indeed worthless because those Russians showed up and the prosecutors were flabbergasted because they didn't expect that (because they don't actually have evidence of any crimes. The reason is because it is all BULLSH)t.. It being proven it's all just smoke and mirrors to help the democrat party is like very old news at this point.
How many Garbage scows full of lipstick can you put on a pig?




posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Sorry, but I think the Russians you’re referring to are in a separate indictment—the one from February or thereabouts.
That involved Russian media companies, I believe, and yes they’re fighting it in court.

I’m talking about the GRU (Russian military intel) operatives who were just indicted.
They were HACKING, and yes, that’s a CRIME, no matter how the right-wing nut burgers try to spin it.
Doubtful they’ll ever see the inside of a US courtroom, of course.

Oh, and if you want to talk about putting lipstick on a pig, look no further than the lifetime supply of lipstick that came with Sarah Suckabee Sanders’ job. Good grief...



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Gandalf77

That older indictment thing didn't work so now they just came up with this new one you are referring to...LOL

Nah the entire thing is just a scam on the American people because Hillary was supposed to win. Remember them all laughing in scorn at the very mention of the idea that Trump would be president?

And remember Obama coming out right after the election saying with absolute certainty that no foreign agents of any kind hacked the election in any way?

So what did these Russian hackers do? Did they add 30 million votes for Trump now?

The story keeps getting more exciting every day with new BOGUS revelations of Russian interference..

Next thing you will be saying is everyone in the white house is eating Borsch three times a day..



edit on 22-7-2018 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Uh, that older indictment is still happening, and it covers a different facet of the investigation than the recent hacking indictment.

If you think these revelations are bogus, then please present some facts that contradict the points they made in the indictment; there’s quite a bit to undo there.

From what you’re saying, it doesn’t appear as if you’ve been actually following the story.
No, their actions did not directly impact a vote tally, but they did in fact try to do that very thing.
They hit several states’ elections systems, and ironically, they couldn’t get to the vote tallies because the machines are all separate and not connected into one, state-wide system; they’re typically county specific.
But that was just one aspect of this deal; that doesn’t get into the influence/propaganda operations—ahem, Pizzagate?



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Man, what is wrong with you people? The same James Clapper that one hundred percent lied under oath and you still believe him?

Should be in jail, as well as Obomba



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
The FISA warrant is 400 pages of justification to focus on Carter Page.
No, its 400 pages of heresay and half of it is redacted.

There is currently a couple threads on it and it shows, so far, nothing good for your part, sucks to be on the wrong side of history, lmfao.



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:38 PM
link   
www.judicialwatch.org... _campaign=press%20release

I'm just going to leave this here....



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: rockhndr
www.judicialwatch.org... _campaign=press%20release

I'm just going to leave this here....
Thanks for that.

Tom Fitton -

"These documents are heavily redacted but seem to confirm the FBI and DOJ misled the courts in withholding the material information that Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the DNC were behind the “intelligence” used to persuade the courts to approve the FISA warrants that targeted the Trump team. Given this corruption, President Trump should intervene and declassify the heavily redacted material."

Poor leftist dims, it's coming apart 🤣

Glorious ending 😏



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

both sides of the aisle are bad.
neither side wants to see a united people.
if they did, we'd have it by now.



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   
ooooooh....THIS one is good too!!...

www.judicialwatch.org... os-copied-decisions/?utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=corruption%20chronicles



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Of course that is not what he said. No "witch hunt," no "illegal spying," etc, etc, etc. Right wing propagandists have put words in his mouth and you idiots believe that's what he actually said. As president, Obama was responsible for the national defense, and if Russia was backing Trump, it was a legitimate line of inquiry. Why is Trump opposed to investigating Russian information war?



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: damonster

Well that won't fly. It destroys the story.
Just shows some people will believe anything if it supports their world view.
Oh I know, we've dismantled your narrative and sleazy leftist liberal media to shreds 😌

"These documents are heavily redacted but seem to confirm the FBI and DOJ misled the courts in withholding the material information that Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the DNC were behind the “intelligence” used to persuade the courts to approve the FISA warrants that targeted the Trump team. Given this corruption, President Trump should intervene and declassify the heavily redacted material."

Muah, you're welcome Silly, enjoy CROW 😜



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:43 PM
link   
You're very welcome... WWG1WGA
a reply to: Arnie123



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: xuenchen

Of course that is not what he said. No "witch hunt," no "illegal spying," etc, etc, etc. Right wing propagandists have put words in his mouth and you idiots believe that's what he actually said. As president, Obama was responsible for the national defense, and if Russia was backing Trump, it was a legitimate line of inquiry. Why is Trump opposed to investigating Russian information war?
Surrrre, nobody believes you 😪

Just another poster pushing BS and disinfo, you've been dismissed 😴



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: xuenchen

Of course that is not what he said. No "witch hunt," no "illegal spying," etc, etc, etc. Right wing propagandists have put words in his mouth and you idiots believe that's what he actually said. As president, Obama was responsible for the national defense, and if Russia was backing Trump, it was a legitimate line of inquiry. Why is Trump opposed to investigating Russian information war?
Surrrre, nobody believes you 😪

Just another poster pushing BS and disinfo, you've been dismissed 😴


Well then, just show the tape of the interview and point out at what time he says the words "witch hunt" and "illegal." And yes, you are pushing BS and disinfo.

ETA: Why was en edited version posted instead of the complete one?


edit on 22-7-2018 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:53 PM
link   
JudicialWatch



Note the use of the term “junk news.” The paper’s definition of it includes a wide variety of sites and sources — yes, many what would broadly be considered “fake news,” but also partisan sites, especially conservative ones like Breitbart, the Drudge Report, the Daily Caller, and NewsMax (plus liberal ones like Crooks and Liars and Occupy Democrats). And it also includes some real headscratchers: the National Review, the New York Daily News, Mediaite, the polling site Rasmussen Reports, and the conservative nonprofit Judicial Watch.

You may disagree with some or all of those sites from day to day, but it’s an odd choice to lump them all together with “‘Spirit cooking’: Clinton campaign chairman practices bizarre occult ritual” and “Breaking: FBI confirms evidence of huge underground Clinton sex network,” as the paper does. (“Junk news” publishers “deliberately publish misleading, deceptive or incorrect information purporting to be real news about politics, economics or culture,” according to the authors. “This content includes various forms of propaganda and ideologically extreme, hyper-partisan, or conspiratorial news and information.” The paper outlines a multilayered test to determine a publisher’s junkiness; among the criteria are “emotionally driven language with emotive expressions,” “misleading headlines,” and “excessive capitalization.”)


Judicial Watch




They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy





Factual Reporting: MIXED

Notes: Judicial Watch is a conservative educational foundation that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Unfortunately, Judicial Watch is not always accountable and publishes false information according to Politifact and Snopes. (7/19/2016) Updated (2/25/2017)


Why do guys always scream fake new and then turn around and use fake news to counter it? LMAO



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: damonster

Invalid, try again.



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Clapper was talking about Trumps criticism of Obama not doing anything about the Russia meddling.

ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES




COOPER: The 2017 assessment that the President says he now agrees with, that was done while you and then NCI Director John Brennan were still in office. So, how can we reconcile the President attacking you, but apparently after a very long time finally, allegedly saying -- or saying he allegedly agrees with the product of the intelligence community that you, yourself oversaw?

CLAPPER: Yes, well, this is -- yes, as we've come to know the President, he is not a stalwart for a consistency or coherence. So it's very hard to explain that. [20:35:06] One point I'd like to make, Anderson, that I don't think has come up very much before, and I'm alluding now to the President's criticism of President Obama for all that he did or didn't do before he left office with respect to the Russian meddling. If it weren't for President Obama, we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set off a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today, notably, special counsel Mueller's investigation. President Obama is responsible for that, and it was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assess in the first place. And they got the important point when it comes to critiquing President Obama.


They will never show you what was really said nor what he was replying to. 40 flags based on a lie..crazy.
edit on 22-7-2018 by damonster because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: damonster

Invalid, try again.


Yep Judicial Watch is invalid due to spreading fake news, like gateway pundit, true pundit..etc



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 04:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gandalf77

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Greven

A bunch of people indicted and facing trial or plea deals, some are in jail, and you still call it a 'witch hunt.'

I don't care who goes to jail - Democrats or Republicans - as long as wrongdoing is punished. That you don't care about that, and instead want to demean an investigation simply because it's looking at 'your side' is absurd.


The people you are talking about are not in jail/plea deal etc for Russian collusion. They are there because of whatever the FBI could find in any direction on them. Once an investigation starts anything is game. Much like Clinton that went from a land sale scam to sperm on a blue dress.


I love how people pretend if a special counsel crawled up anyone's ass they wouldn't be able to find something to indict you on. "But he did find stuff!" is such a dishonest defense, and most of the people pushing that angle know that. Most of the stuff in those indictments, you could likely indict half of DC on the same #. It's lipstick on a pig so they can say it wasn't a complete waste of taxpayer money. It is.


I respectfully disagree. The indictment of the Russian GRU operatives is hardly a waste of taxpayer money.
Mueller’s team has enough evidence to show exactly what those guys were doing and when.
Yes, they were carrying out an operation to disrupt our election and mess with our democratic process.


I would agree with you if there was any chance of them actually being prosecuted. There isn't. So essentially all this is worth is establishing which specific Russians were trying to influence the election, something our intelligence community could have told us. The same people who don't believe them aren't going to believe Mueller either, and since it's never going to see the inside of a courtroom, it's a waste of time/money. Mueller hasn't publicly uncovered anything about the election the IC couldn't have told us, and so far he appears to have nothing on any of the key players the left was hoping he'd take down. All this other crap is smoke and mirrors.

That may change, but as it stands, this has been a giant # show that has done nothing substantial but further the division that Putin was trying to cause.




top topics



 
67
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join