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.

 

Senator Mark Warner Says Foreign Interference Didn’t Favor Any Party

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: conscientiousobserver
a reply to: xuenchen

They didn't have to change votes all they had to do was release Hillary's emails and take democratic voters off the voting rolls.


The State Department was "forced" to release the emails by court order.

No Russians involved at all 😁

In fact, the SD is still releasing some recovered emails and are having trouble "redacting".

What precincts had Democrat voters removed ❓

😃




posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: luthier

We're talking about hacking the DNC or voting machines, not a poster campaign.
I'll wait for your evidence of the hacks.


You will wait for my evidence, than discredit it because your tribe has a narrative.

I know how identity politics works.


If it's not evidence then yes it will be discredited.
I am trying to learn about the US Intel Cabinet you mentioned... can you help?


Probably not if you are acting like an expert but have no idea how it works.

From the state dept to doj and military of Trump's cabinet picks. NSA, State, DOJ, FBI, DHS, Defense, Intel commities in house and senate, judicial commitees, advisers to Trump, all of this administration's picks that would have this information.


Oh, I didn't realise the Intel Committees were in the US "Intel Cabinet"...


I didn't realize you were so petty


Perhaps that will teach you to be more careful about assuming what people understand because of where they live. When it comes to the machinations of your govt. you threw that accusation at the wrong person. Given your use of the term 'US Intel Cabinet' it would, however, be reasonable for me to assume that YOU don't know what you are talking about, but I'll refrain and just put it down to you being lazy in your communication.


Lol so to get back to reality.....

All of the people in the Intel cabinet positions say Russia interfered.

So keep spinning as much as you like. The identity politics may fall out eventually.


Which members of the Cabinet are you talking about that make up the 'intel cabinet'?

Is this still your definition of the mythical 'US Intel Cabinet'?

From the state dept to doj and military of Trump's cabinet picks. NSA, State, DOJ, FBI, DHS, Defense, Intel commities in house and senate, judicial commitees, advisers to Trump, all of this administration's picks that would have this information.



Let's make this easy for you. Who besides trump anywhere in politics has said Russia did not meddle in the election. Which cabinet member supports trumps narrative. Which policy or sanction passed by trump says there is no evidence?

Lol....


Eh? Why would a policy or sanction passed by Trump say there is no evidence?
Fella, you are all over the place. You really have no clue about this do you?

Why would you ask me for names when you made the claim that the following said that Russia hacked the DNC and voting machines:
"From the state dept to doj and military of Trump's cabinet picks. NSA, State, DOJ, FBI, DHS, Defense, Intel commities in house and senate, judicial commitees, advisers to Trump, all of this administration's picks that would have this information".

Why don't you link the people's quotes you are referring to?

Having said that I will use the Senate Intelligence Committee's own report as this thread is about Warner.

Quote:



The Committee finds that the Intelligence Community met President Obama’s tasking and that the ICA is a sound intelligence product. While the Committee had to rely on agencies that the sensitive information and accesses had been accurately reported, as part of our inquiry the Committee reviewed analytic procedures, interviewed senior intelligence officers well-versed with the information, and based our findings on the entire body of intelligence reporting included in the ICA. 3 The Committee finds the difference in confidence levels between the NSA and the CIA and FBI on the assessment that "Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump's election chances" appropriately represents analytic differences and was reached in a professional and transparent manner. In all the interviews of those who drafted and prepared the ICA, the Committee heard consistently that analysts were under no politically motivated pressure to reach any conclusions. All analysts expressed that they were free to debate, object to content, and assess confidence levels, as is normal and proper for the analytic process.


The above simply says that the committee agrees with the Intelligence report put out by the NSA, FBI and CIA.

That Intelligence report provides no evidence (none at all) of any hacks committed by Russia and indeed they would only refer to their analytical findings in broad terms of 'high' and 'moderate' confidence, which is actually not in line with their own standards (directive 203) - something the Senate Intel Committee got wrong in their report.
The NSA in particular did not conclude with any certainty.
They have not been able to provide any evidence since (over a year later).

In fact no one has provided any evidence.



edit on 3/8/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 08:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: luthier

We're talking about hacking the DNC or voting machines, not a poster campaign.
I'll wait for your evidence of the hacks.


You will wait for my evidence, than discredit it because your tribe has a narrative.

I know how identity politics works.


If it's not evidence then yes it will be discredited.
I am trying to learn about the US Intel Cabinet you mentioned... can you help?


Probably not if you are acting like an expert but have no idea how it works.

From the state dept to doj and military of Trump's cabinet picks. NSA, State, DOJ, FBI, DHS, Defense, Intel commities in house and senate, judicial commitees, advisers to Trump, all of this administration's picks that would have this information.


Oh, I didn't realise the Intel Committees were in the US "Intel Cabinet"...


I didn't realize you were so petty


Perhaps that will teach you to be more careful about assuming what people understand because of where they live. When it comes to the machinations of your govt. you threw that accusation at the wrong person. Given your use of the term 'US Intel Cabinet' it would, however, be reasonable for me to assume that YOU don't know what you are talking about, but I'll refrain and just put it down to you being lazy in your communication.


Lol so to get back to reality.....

All of the people in the Intel cabinet positions say Russia interfered.

So keep spinning as much as you like. The identity politics may fall out eventually.


Which members of the Cabinet are you talking about that make up the 'intel cabinet'?

Is this still your definition of the mythical 'US Intel Cabinet'?

From the state dept to doj and military of Trump's cabinet picks. NSA, State, DOJ, FBI, DHS, Defense, Intel commities in house and senate, judicial commitees, advisers to Trump, all of this administration's picks that would have this information.



Let's make this easy for you. Who besides trump anywhere in politics has said Russia did not meddle in the election. Which cabinet member supports trumps narrative. Which policy or sanction passed by trump says there is no evidence?

Lol....


Eh? Why would a policy or sanction passed by Trump say there is no evidence?
Fella, you are all over the place. You really have no clue about this do you?

Why would you ask me for names when you made the claim that the following said that Russia hacked the DNC and voting machines:
"From the state dept to doj and military of Trump's cabinet picks. NSA, State, DOJ, FBI, DHS, Defense, Intel commities in house and senate, judicial commitees, advisers to Trump, all of this administration's picks that would have this information".

Why don't you link the people's quotes you are referring to?

Having said that I will use the Senate Intelligence Committee's own report as this thread is about Warner.

Quote:



The Committee finds that the Intelligence Community met President Obama’s tasking and that the ICA is a sound intelligence product. While the Committee had to rely on agencies that the sensitive information and accesses had been accurately reported, as part of our inquiry the Committee reviewed analytic procedures, interviewed senior intelligence officers well-versed with the information, and based our findings on the entire body of intelligence reporting included in the ICA. 3 The Committee finds the difference in confidence levels between the NSA and the CIA and FBI on the assessment that "Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump's election chances" appropriately represents analytic differences and was reached in a professional and transparent manner. In all the interviews of those who drafted and prepared the ICA, the Committee heard consistently that analysts were under no politically motivated pressure to reach any conclusions. All analysts expressed that they were free to debate, object to content, and assess confidence levels, as is normal and proper for the analytic process.


The above simply says that the committee agrees with the Intelligence report put out by the NSA, FBI and CIA.

That Intelligence report provides no evidence (none at all) of any hacks committed by Russia and indeed they would only refer to their analytical findings in broad terms of 'high' and 'moderate' confidence, which is actually not in line with their own standards (directive 203) - something the Senate Intel Committee got wrong in their report.
The NSA in particular did not conclude with any certainty.
They have not been able to provide any evidence since (over a year later).

In fact no one has provided any evidence.




Why would you ask me for names when you made the claim that the following said that Russia hacked the DNC and voting machines

Lol

Strawman

Didn't mention this at all.

Second why would trump.sign sanctions for meddling if there is no evidence.

He is either a mindless drone or saw the evidence as congress did (republicans) to make the sanctions over meddling.
Sorry if you can't keep up fella.
edit on 3-8-2018 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Hmm.
I am still waiting for the links to quotes from the 'US Intel Cabinet' who all apprently said Russia hacked the DNC and voting machines.
Are you providing the links or not?
As for Trump passing sanctions - you statement was...


Which policy or sanction passed by trump says there is no evidence?

...which makes no sense at all.

I must admit it is indeed quite difficult following the ramblings of someone like yourself who has zero clue about your own govt.
I did at least not waste my time on you completely, however, as I got a great laugh out of your 'US Intel Cabinet' definition.

edit on 3/8/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 09:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: luthier

Hmm.
I am still waiting for the links to quotes from the 'US Intel Cabinet' who all apprently said Russia hacked the DNC and voting machines.
Are you providing the links or not?
As for Trump passing sanctions - you statement was...


Which policy or sanction passed by trump says there is no evidence?

...which makes no sense at all.

I must admit it is indeed quite difficult following the ramblings of someone like yourself who has zero clue about your own govt.
I did at least not waste my time on you completely, however, as I got a great laugh out of your 'US Intel Cabinet' definition.


It's hard to speak slowly online but why would trump pass sanctions over Russian interference if there wasn't any?

Is that clear enough, maybe you can spin that small statement too and be actively obtuse.
edit on 3-8-2018 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: luthier

Hmm.
I am still waiting for the links to quotes from the 'US Intel Cabinet' who all apprently said Russia hacked the DNC and voting machines.
Are you providing the links or not?
As for Trump passing sanctions - you statement was...


Which policy or sanction passed by trump says there is no evidence?

...which makes no sense at all.

I must admit it is indeed quite difficult following the ramblings of someone like yourself who has zero clue about your own govt.
I did at least not waste my time on you completely, however, as I got a great laugh out of your 'US Intel Cabinet' definition.


It's hard to speak slowly online but why would trump pass sanctions over Russian interference if there wasn't any?

Is that clear enough, maybe you can spun that small statement too and be actively obtuse.


You've struggled to string together a cogent sentence, so I am not sure the speed in which you release the words from the mouth is going to help you that much.

As for why the President agreed to sanctions, he had no choice. The Senate voted 98-2 on sanctions following the earlier passage of the House Bill, a margin that would make any attempt to veto by the President a futile effort. If you knew anything at all about your govt you'd have known this before asking the question.

You really shouldn't get into debates on subjects you know nothing about, fella.




posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 09:11 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: luthier

Hmm.
I am still waiting for the links to quotes from the 'US Intel Cabinet' who all apprently said Russia hacked the DNC and voting machines.
Are you providing the links or not?
As for Trump passing sanctions - you statement was...


Which policy or sanction passed by trump says there is no evidence?

...which makes no sense at all.

I must admit it is indeed quite difficult following the ramblings of someone like yourself who has zero clue about your own govt.
I did at least not waste my time on you completely, however, as I got a great laugh out of your 'US Intel Cabinet' definition.



Hmm.
I am still waiting for the links to quotes from the 'US Intel Cabinet' who all apprently said Russia hacked the DNC and voting machines.
Are you providing the links or not?
As for Trump passing sanctions - you statement was...


Well when the imaginary person in your mind pops up who said those things adress your concerns with them.

However, trumps entire cabinet of officials who deal with subject of national security think Russian interfered in the election. They also think it's happening now.

In fact if you were a researcher you would know the DNC was warned in 2015 by the Dutch and the fbi.

You would also know trump has admitted the DNC was hacked and they should be ashamed of it.

It's hard to see without the rose glasses bit it is possible.



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

To give you some credit you do have the fortitude to handle humiliation and keep on going.




posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: luthier

Hmm.
I am still waiting for the links to quotes from the 'US Intel Cabinet' who all apprently said Russia hacked the DNC and voting machines.
Are you providing the links or not?
As for Trump passing sanctions - you statement was...


Which policy or sanction passed by trump says there is no evidence?

...which makes no sense at all.

I must admit it is indeed quite difficult following the ramblings of someone like yourself who has zero clue about your own govt.
I did at least not waste my time on you completely, however, as I got a great laugh out of your 'US Intel Cabinet' definition.


It's hard to speak slowly online but why would trump pass sanctions over Russian interference if there wasn't any?

Is that clear enough, maybe you can spun that small statement too and be actively obtuse.


You've struggled to string together a cogent sentence, so I am not sure the speed in which you release the words from the mouth is going to help you that much.

As for why the President agreed to sanctions, he had no choice. The Senate voted 98-2 on sanctions following the earlier passage of the House Bill, a margin that would make any attempt to veto by the President a futile effort. If you knew anything at all about your govt you'd have known this before asking the question.

You really shouldn't get into debates on subjects you know nothing about, fella.



Fella your slow withdrawal and admittance of reality is palatable and refreshing.

It's true nearly everyone agrees the Russians want us divided. They love identity politics players like yourself.

What is great when debating people without a sense of philosophy is they think they are doing well when they sank in the swamp.

Russia did not decide trump won silly. They are the ones who want us fighting over it.

They certainly hacked the DNC and several republican conservative judges have offered indictments over it.

But I get it you like to play word salad and identity politics because you don't understand nuance.

It's OK. The extreme left and right are the same.
edit on 3-8-2018 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


“This does make [Mueller] bulletproof, does remove the witch hunt, does remove the president's sort of prerogative in-your-face criticisms of Mueller,” he told FOX Business’ Neil Cavuto on "Cavuto: Coast-to-Coast."



“This is a serious march by Mueller in the direction of finding out what happened in the 2016 election,” Napolitano added, “and I think he has a lot more marching to do.”



Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats said that Russia is continuing to pursue its efforts to interfere in the US political system and said President Donald Trump has "specifically directed" the US intelligence community to make countering election interference a top priority



CIA Director Mike Pompeo still believes Russia was responsible for hacking the Democratic National Committee, the agency said Tuesday amid reports that Pompeo met a skeptic at President Trump’s urging.



The DNC should be ashamed of themselves for allowing themselves to be hacked. They had bad defenses, and they were able to be hacked,” Trump said in a CBS News interview with Jeff Glor, aired Sunday on "Face the Nation." “I heard they were trying to hack the Republicans, too. But, and this may be wrong, but they had much stronger defenses.”



posted on Aug, 3 2018 @ 11:59 PM
link   
Nah after seeing your threads throughout the campaign I think they were extremely biased for Trump.



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 12:36 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


Did you know that Senator Mark Warner is very corrupt, and very scared? He worked with indicted Senate intel chief James Wolfe, to leak anti-Republican secrets to the press.

Wolfe Indicted: www.rollcall.com...

Just before Wolfe's indictment, Warner told the DOJ to RESIST Republican Congressman's requests for documents.

ATS Thread on the RESIST Request: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Now, Wolfe says he's calling Warner (among other Senators) as a witnesses, when his trial starts.

edit on 8/4/2018 by carewemust because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 12:40 AM
link   
I am sure Russia interfered in the elections but I am also sure their efforts did not pay off. The reason and the only reason Trump won was because the FBI came out with a bogus claim against Clinton days before the election.

They will not be there for him the next time and the only way he gets re-elected is by cheating because the majority of the people are not with him despite what his people think.

Russia attempted to throw the last election but failed because there was not enough people to elect Trump and the same will happen again. Like, I said, the only reason Trump won was because of the FBI and people thought Clinton was guilty of something she wasn't..if a re-vote was taken after the FBI cleared her of wrong doing, Trump would not be president.
edit on 4-8-2018 by damonster because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 05:31 AM
link   
a reply to: damonster

But the FBI "cleared" her before the election remember.

That's the sticky wicked part.

Bwaaaaaa😃



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Smart play on Warner's part. As I've said in other threads, it looks like Warner is gearing up for a presidential run in 2020. It's always been his ultimate goal. This will differentiate him from the other Dems that will be running and will make him more palatable to those people on the Right that aren't fans of Trump.

If the Dems decide to go with a more establishment candidate over a maverick Warner probably gives them the best chance at beating Trump. He's fairly moderate and he has a strong economic track record. He's a self-made millionaire that is currently the richest member of Congress and when he was governor of Virginia it was the only state with a surplus. If he can tone down the anti-Trump rhetoric, like we're seeing here, he could easily see a large number of moderate Right Wingers flocking his way.



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 08:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Warner will make a great candidate.

He's "Perfect"

💥😁💥



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Warner will make a great candidate.

He's "Perfect"

💥😁💥


Agreed - i really really hope its Warner.



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I think its clear there are no Russians.

These morons have lied so much (or parroted the otherwise unsubstantiated word of a small minority within the IC as absolute truth) that I am starting to doubt Russia even exists as a nation.

(Not really)

However, we're not too far off. What doesn't this government (and especially FBI/DOJ/IC) understand about IT HAS NO CREDIBILITY LEFT, and has taken no real steps to restore that credibility

That only happens if/when Hillary and the previous admin's co-conspirators are doing 25+, Mueller is discharged for cause, Rosenstein is discharged for cause and Congress begins enforcing the ENTIRE Constitution (instead of bending it in favor of government)

Until then, what they say doesn't matter and I assume it is false (or at least mere speculation - read: a guess) until hard evidence is presented otherwise. The days where their mere word/statements counted for anything, sadly, are long gone.
edit on 8/4/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Warner must finally realize it is the Democrats acting as a tool of division not the GOP.

They are the ones who ate up the bogus and entirelly unsubstantiated Russia conspiracy theories. They have disrupted our nation, wasted our time and created deep wounds that are unlikely to heal.

I personally despise the far-left (not mainstream patriotic Democrats)




top topics



 
24
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join