Charges from Mueller for Russian Hacking may be Forthcoming

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

The ONLY evidence of Russia tied to all this is a Russian IP address on a TOR exit node. On that same data transmission there were probably IP addresses from every country in the world. Thats the very purpose of using TOR. TOR randomizes the senders and receivers.

The technical community is in disbelief. They arent saying the DNC was hacked. The intelligence community manufacturing the Russia nonsense is.

originally posted by: NOprah
a reply to: theantediluvian

Goodie!

Most Americans can't wait for Hillary and Obama to be held accountable for their crimes.

No, "most" Americans voted for Hillary. No one is sitting around thinking that either Obama or Hillary committed a crime except some people who must believe it.

The irony is that the current president is the most obviously corrupt in a century, and Obama is about the cleanest.

originally posted by: Scrubdog

originally posted by: NOprah
a reply to: theantediluvian

Goodie!

Most Americans can't wait for Hillary and Obama to be held accountable for their crimes.

No, "most" Americans voted for Hillary.

Erm. No.

a reply to: Scrubdog

LOL! Hillary is literally the most unliked politician in America. Trump is currently sitting at a 50% approval rating (Obama was at ~45% at this point in his presidency). I suspect probably 70-75% of Americans would cheer if news broke showing Hillary being led away in handcuffs.

originally posted by: Scrubdog

originally posted by: NOprah
a reply to: theantediluvian

Goodie!

Most Americans can't wait for Hillary and Obama to be held accountable for their crimes.

No, "most" Americans voted for Hillary. No one is sitting around thinking that either Obama or Hillary committed a crime except some people who must believe it.

The irony is that the current president is the most obviously corrupt in a century, and Obama is about the cleanest.

Illegal alien votes do not count.

Only the delusional or intellectually dishonest think that Obama of all people is "clean".

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Where are you getting your numbers from? The only poll that puts him close to 50% is Rasmussen who have him at 49%. His average across all polls is 41%

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
What's the evidence they hacked the emails in question? Did the Dutch prove that? If I'm not incorrect, they saw evidence of general Russian hacking, which all nations do. Use your critical thinking and not extrapolate it to the DNC emails just because CNN and the DNC told you that... I'm still skeptical. Also Assange who released it said it wasn't the Russians. You would think that the very person who released them would know. Furthermore, DHS said there is no evidence that Russia "hacked the election." Also, to date I have seen little evidence of "collusion" by Trump. I'm a liberal, and I'm still waiting. Questioning the narrative is not being pro trump. Finally, my view is that this is one huge cynical political strategy by the DNC and complicit media to deflect from Clinton's loss. I think that you have fallen victim to convenient propaganda.
a reply to: Scrubdog

I am no fan of the DNC, I am a Bernie Sanders supporter first and foremost, and then a Never Trump supporter second, though Clinton was imminently qualified and no more corrupt than any other big time candidate, including Cruise and Kasich. But, I do not believe that the DNC is simply deflecting. No point in it, it's over. I know that I fully believe that Russia meddled extensively on behalf of the Trump campaign - the meeting in Trump Tower is just one example, that IS meddling, and colluding, but I also know that I personally don't know or care whether Hillary would have won without Russians assisting Trump. I really don't, and since it is truly unknowable, I haven't spent a second thinking about it.

I have spent far more time wondering just how deeply this will cut into our voting power in years to follow, and there, I care a lot. I look at Trump's unwillingness to even enforce sanctions, or even tell his cyber-command to "do something" about Russian interference in 2018 and the simplest explanation, by far, is that Russia holds "kompromat" over Trump, spoken or unspoken. But, even if they do not, the result is the same, Trump won't do anything to Russia.

We know that Russian intervention was greater than we had thought given the indictments already filed - those companies still exist, the twitter accounts still exist, I've read the pleadings, it's all verifiable. And we know the Russian government was involved bc the top guy was "Putin's Chef" a billionaire the world knows to be close enough to Putin that there's no way it could have come about without Putin's authorization.

The "work" I see being done here by the "Q" crowd is both hilarious and sad. Important things are happening in our country, by our country and against our country, and all I see are Republicans attempting to get in the way. You tell ME that I'm being manipulated by propaganda, and yet I am looking at people here who believe that the real criminals are Clinton and Obama, which is laughable.

Trump's people keep either getting indicted, quitting, or can't get security clearances. Trump is trying to fire Sessions, fortunately Sessions has figured out that the one way he can stay on history's right side is to ignore Trump. Trump fired Comey specifically for investigating Russia ....

We could go all day.

It's not all that hard. The guy who gets most of his money (according to his son) from Russia, who had SO MANY staff inextricably linked to Russia, is the guy Russia owns, and Russia tried to help. It's not all that complicated unless one needs it to be. I don't. I know that Hill ran a terrible campaign and the DNC is worthless, those are non-issues to me.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
What's the evidence they hacked the emails in question? Did the Dutch prove that? If I'm not incorrect, they saw evidence of general Russian hacking, which all nations do. Use your critical thinking and not extrapolate it to the DNC emails just because CNN and the DNC told you that... I'm still skeptical. Also Assange who released it said it wasn't the Russians. You would think that the very person who released them would know. Furthermore, DHS said there is no evidence that Russia "hacked the election." Also, to date I have seen little evidence of "collusion" by Trump. I'm a liberal, and I'm still waiting. Questioning the narrative is not being pro trump. Finally, my view is that this is one huge cynical political strategy by the DNC and complicit media to deflect from Clinton's loss. I think that you have fallen victim to convenient propaganda.
a reply to: Scrubdog

I am no fan of the DNC, I am a Bernie Sanders supporter first and foremost, and then a Never Trump supporter second, though Clinton was imminently qualified and no more corrupt than any other big time candidate, including Cruise and Kasich. But, I do not believe that the DNC is simply deflecting. No point in it, it's over. I know that I fully believe that Russia meddled extensively on behalf of the Trump campaign - the meeting in Trump Tower is just one example, that IS meddling, and colluding, but I also know that I personally don't know or care whether Hillary would have won without Russians assisting Trump. I really don't, and since it is truly unknowable, I haven't spent a second thinking about it.

I have spent far more time wondering just how deeply this will cut into our voting power in years to follow, and there, I care a lot. I look at Trump's unwillingness to even enforce sanctions, or even tell his cyber-command to "do something" about Russian interference in 2018 and the simplest explanation, by far, is that Russia holds "kompromat" over Trump, spoken or unspoken. But, even if they do not, the result is the same, Trump won't do anything to Russia.

We know that Russian intervention was greater than we had thought given the indictments already filed - those companies still exist, the twitter accounts still exist, I've read the pleadings, it's all verifiable. And we know the Russian government was involved bc the top guy was "Putin's Chef" a billionaire the world knows to be close enough to Putin that there's no way it could have come about without Putin's authorization.

The "work" I see being done here by the "Q" crowd is both hilarious and sad. Important things are happening in our country, by our country and against our country, and all I see are Republicans attempting to get in the way. You tell ME that I'm being manipulated by propaganda, and yet I am looking at people here who believe that the real criminals are Clinton and Obama, which is laughable.

Trump's people keep either getting indicted, quitting, or can't get security clearances. Trump is trying to fire Sessions, fortunately Sessions has figured out that the one way he can stay on history's right side is to ignore Trump. Trump fired Comey specifically for investigating Russia ....

We could go all day.

It's not all that hard. The guy who gets most of his money (according to his son) from Russia, who had SO MANY staff inextricably linked to Russia, is the guy Russia owns, and Russia tried to help. It's not all that complicated unless one needs it to be. I don't. I know that Hill ran a terrible campaign and the DNC is worthless, those are non-issues to me.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Where are you getting your numbers from? The only poll that puts him close to 50% is Rasmussen who have him at 49%. His average across all polls is 41%

Rasmussen is the only daily poll.
It was at 50% and now at 49%.
Regardless of where you look his favourability is rising.

That said, all these polls are rubbish anyway.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

There are no questions about who it was.

a reply to: Sillyolme

It is irrelevant who Mueller brings charges against because it will never lead to anything like having Trump removed from office. It appears you and others like you (i.e. OP) have entirely forgotten what the entire purpose of Mueller was supposed to be. To indict Trump.

This will NEVER happen.

a reply to: UKTruth

Uh yeah.
Of those who voted.

a reply to: NOprah

Yeah how's that committee again? Still waiting.
You'll get back to us.

a reply to: Outlier13

Sure it will. Just open your eyes.
Or you're going to be sadly surprised.
And it's going to be pretty quick because they can see how dangerous he is.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

There are no questions about who it was.

Actually there is, as many have laid out. Congratulations on being manipulated by propaganda! #staywoke .....

Oh please, the amount of social media effort by Russia not only is minuscule it's legal. Literally. Secondly, much of it occurred AFTER the election. Third, anybody who thinks minuscule effort by Russia was a primary explanatory variable for Hillary's loss is delusional. There is no real evidence that's true. It's on you and the DNC to prove extraordinary claims, not the other way around. a reply to: Scrubdog

There's no evidence that anything Russia did had a significant impact on the election. Sorry. Much of the social media efforts were not only minuscule as far as elections go but occurred AFTER. Prove otherwise or PLEASE spare us further hysteria. Please... It's on you guys to prove your claims, and you haven't yet. a reply to: kurthall

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
Oh please, the amount of social media effort by Russia not only is minuscule it's legal. Literally. Secondly, much of it occurred AFTER the election. Third, anybody who thinks minuscule effort by Russia was a primary explanatory variable for Hillary's loss is delusional. There is no real evidence that's true. It's on you and the DNC to prove extraordinary claims, not the other way around. a reply to: Scrubdog

No one will ever be able to prove one way or another how much influence the Russians had, whether it made a definitive difference or not. We know that Trump won through flipping 100,000 votes over 3 states, that he lost the popular vote by 3 million. That's an exceedingly close election. Regardless, it doesn't matter one whit to me whether the Russian influence was definitive or not. Hillary lost the election, and nothing can absolve her or the DNC from the loss, nothing. It's not about absolution or excuse. It's about retaining the integrity of the vote, a vote that is already under assault from the right through many different means, whether voter ID or gerrymandering.

The DNC doesn't need to "prove" anything. Robert Mueller has been tasked with investigating and prosecuting the matter, and he seems to be both the single most qualified person on Earth to do it, and doing just fine.

Instead of putting it on me as seeking absolution from a loss, I wonder why the Right (whether you are on the Right or not doesn't matter to me) and other Russian apologists keep insisting that Russia had no impact on the election? Doesn't matter, again, neither side can prove what the outcome might have been absent interference.

I am far more concerned about Russian hacking into state databases, because I can easily foresee these attempts as succeeding in removing voters from the roles, and I do not trust Trump or Republicans like Walker to protect the vote if the Russians are going to be attacking Dem votes. I am also highly interested and worried about Russian money infused into the NRA and then spread out through the Republican party.

The noose is tightening. None of us will be able to prove anything until such time as the evidence is spread out before us, until we've heard the interviews, seen the taxes (you can bet that Mueller subpeoned Trump's taxes on the first day), all that, until such time there's little else we can do but sit and wait, and watch Trump act like for all the world that he's a Russian agent terrified of crossing Russia.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
There's no evidence that anything Russia did had a significant impact on the election. Sorry. Much of the social media efforts were not only minuscule as far as elections go but occurred AFTER. Prove otherwise or PLEASE spare us further hysteria. Please... It's on you guys to prove your claims, and you haven't yet. a reply to: kurthall

Ha, I hadn't even seen this.

"Prove otherwise" must be a joke. You do realize that there's no element of the crime that the actual Russian activity had to play a measurable role, right?

You seem to confuse me with someone who needs this as an excuse. Hardly. I need this to protect my vote going forward, AND to rid the country of a Russian asset sitting in the oval office. I don't care about the election, haven't since the day after it occurred.

The "hysteria" you might hear is the energy from those of us tired of having an incompetent, corrupt, Russian plant as president. It's not like Pence is better or more liberal. It's just that Pence might favor Americans first. That matters to those of us who hear the cyber-command talk about needing an order to do something to stop the Russians in 2018, and waiting, and waiting, and waiting

I doubt you're a progressive. Most of us are concerned about our votes going forward. We like the idea of living in a democracy, even if in 2 of the last 3 Repub presidential elections our candidate won the popular vote.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: network dude

Except that the emails were pretty benign and boring. What corruption are you talking about?

Oh, Silly, that question wasn't meant for you to even see. There is no corruption in politics, well, only on the Republican/Russian side, the Democrats operate a "by the book" kind of operation. I think it's time to feed your Unicorn, he's been pooping rainbows, but as of late, he can only fart a few incandescent clouds.