DNC election meddling and Russia

@Metal-Brain said
They were not doctored. You are making up lies as you go along.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign in disgrace and didn't deny she was election meddling.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/24/debbie-wasserman-schultz-resigns-dnc-chair-emails-sanders

Nor did the DNC itself. They won the court case by saying they are allowed to election meddle. ...[text shortened]... ivate-corporation-with-no-obligation-to-follow-our-rules

You can stop making up lies anytime now.

MB, why don't you take your talents and skip this tripe, get these people talking about the empaneled grand jury on history's greatest scandal unfolding right before our eyes.
FOX viewership is 2,500,000
CNN is 495,000

Tell them there will be better coverage on FOX News. They have a lot of viewers to safisfy and will report the facts.

@no1marauder said
Yes, the DNC is allowed to "meddle" in US elections (it's their primary job in fact) but the Russian military isn't.

Glad you finally got that.

The RNC too. They are both privately owned corporations.
Does that make it right? You are now an apologist for election meddling. It is fine when your party does it. If the RNC were to get caught doing it would you be just as indifferent to the election meddling?

The DNC was not hacked. It was an inside job. But if you still have faith it was Russia why don't you thank Russia for exposing election meddling in the DNC?

@Metal-Brain said
The RNC too. They are both privately owned corporations.
Does that make it right? You are now an apologist for election meddling. It is fine when your party does it. If the RNC were to get caught doing it would you be just as indifferent to the election meddling?

The DNC was not hacked. It was an inside job. But if you still have faith it was Russia why don't you thank Russia for exposing election meddling in the DNC?

Moron.

@AverageJoe1 said
MB, why don't you take your talents and skip this tripe, get these people talking about the empaneled grand jury on history's greatest scandal unfolding right before our eyes.
FOX viewership is 2,500,000
CNN is 495,000

Tell them there will be better coverage on FOX News. They have a lot of viewers to safisfy and will report the facts.

You mean make up the "facts".

You don't fool anyone.

@Mott-The-Hoople said
Meddle in an election is to do that which is illegal

Trying to backtrack now


😂

Go back to school.

Oh, wait, you can't any more, they outlawed the Dept. of Education.

Too bad, so sad!

@Mott-The-Hoople said
Its a liberal democrat creation

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/what-election-meddling-and-when-did-everyone-start-using-term

And a website called "Lawfare Media" uses a term made up by Trumpublicans.

Go figure.

@Suzianne said
You mean make up the "facts".

You don't fool anyone.

If the grand jury process is to impanel it, they would hardly do so if there were not facts.
So be the first on the Forum, so we can put it in our Journals as we begin looking into what appears to be a conspiracy of the highest order....be the first lib to say it is looking a bit dismal, as there ARE enough facts to warrant an investigation. Or, are you and sonhouse giong to bore hell out of everyone with yor flippant 'lies' remarks. Yawn
Are you saying that there are no facts.? Boredom to abound??

@AverageJoe1 said
If the grand jury process is to impanel it, they would hardly do so if there were not facts.
So be the first on the Forum, so we can put it in our Journals as we begin looking into what appears to be a conspiracy of the highest order....be the first lib to say it is looking a bit dismal, as there ARE enough facts to warrant an investigation. Or, are you and sonhouse ...[text shortened]... or flippant 'lies' remarks. Yawn
Are you saying that there are no facts.? Boredom to abound??

Do you even understand what a grand jury IS?

Or what its function is?

All the facts they could consider have already been discussed and it was found that Russia was involved in the 2016 election.

All of it is old news, yet you think there's reason they could come up with a new decision. I mean, besides unquestioning fealty to Trump.

@Suzianne said
Do you even understand what a grand jury IS?

Or what its function is?

All the facts they could consider have already been discussed and it was found that Russia was involved in the 2016 election.

All of it is old news, yet you think there's reason they could come up with a new decision. I mean, besides unquestioning fealty to Trump.

Stay with me here, you are so close. You simply need to replace your phrase "..Russia was involved in the 2016 election" with. "....that Obama and Clntion are being investigated to determine the Obama Administration's handling and assessment of the Russian Interference in the 2016 election".
Of course there is no doubt that Russia interfered, that fact is not an issue. The Obama and Clinton conspiracy has always been an issue.

Here is a synopsis of what the jury is about, but i don't know a thing about grand juries. I do know about Obama and Clinton, though. So does the Jury apparently.

Regarding former President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a grand jury investigation has been launched by the Department of Justice (DOJ) under the direction of Attorney General Pam Bondi. The purpose of this investigation is to examine the Obama administration's handling and assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election. The probe stems from claims of potential manipulation of intelligence and a "contrived narrative" suggesting Russia interfered in the election to benefit Donald Trump.

@AverageJoe1 said
Stay with me here, you are so close. You simply need to replace your phrase "..Russia was involved in the 2016 election" with. "....that Obama and Clntion are being investigated to determine the Obama Administration's handling and assessment of the Russian Interference in the 2016 election".
Of course there is no doubt that Russia interfered, that fact is not an iss ...[text shortened]... ce and a "contrived narrative" suggesting Russia interfered in the election to benefit Donald Trump.

🙄

@Suzianne said
🙄

If Trump pulls off ending Ukraine**, he will not only get the little Nobel prize,.. the populace will inherently form his advance to be as great a president as Lincoln and Washinton. Just sayin'

I will not ask you to compare Kamala to him. Did you see where he cooly influences corps like Apple to bring their production back to the USA. He makes them an offer they can't refuse!!! Genius. His first one was Intel, and more yet to come. Just think of the jobs. I know you are thinking of the jobs created by these moves. You know, Sonhouse just does not like him. I think his posts have won over quite a few disciples.

** I assume you know Putin wants Trump to meet with him next week for a chat. My, my

@AverageJoe1 said
If Trump pulls off ending Ukraine**, he will not only get the little Nobel prize,.. the populace will inherently form his advance to be as great a president as Lincoln and Washinton. Just sayin'

I will not ask you to compare Kamala to him. Did you see where he cooly influences corps like Apple to bring their production back to the USA. He makes them an offer the ...[text shortened]... disciples.

** I assume you know Putin wants Trump to meet with him next week for a chat. My, my

Oh, please. You're embarrassing yourself. Again.

@AverageJoe1 said
Stay with me here, you are so close. You simply need to replace your phrase "..Russia was involved in the 2016 election" with. "....that Obama and Clntion are being investigated to determine the Obama Administration's handling and assessment of the Russian Interference in the 2016 election".
Of course there is no doubt that Russia interfered, that fact is not an iss ...[text shortened]... ce and a "contrived narrative" suggesting Russia interfered in the election to benefit Donald Trump.

And there is simply no "there" there. As was reported at the time. No "contrived narrative". The entire intelligence community were in agreement that it was plain that there was Russian interference.

Where were you during that time? How thick do you have to be?

@Suzianne said
And there is simply no "there" there. As was reported at the time. No "contrived narrative". The entire intelligence community were in agreement that it was plain that there was Russian interference.

Where were you during that time? How thick do you have to be?

Everyone agrees that there was Russian interference. Sorry you did not get my saying that yesterday.

So, new day. Do you think there would be a grand jury wasting their time if there was no other evidence, today, to find these 5 people to be involved in nefarious activities???? Some of y'all want to know what the evidence is?? So does the grand jury, do you not see?????

@AverageJoe1 said
Everyone agrees that there was Russian interference. Sorry you did not get my saying that yesterday.

So, new day. Do you think there would be a grand jury wasting their time if there was no other evidence, today, to find these 5 people to be involved in nefarious activities???? Some of y'all want to know what the evidence is?? So does the grand jury, do you not see?????

No. Not everybody agrees.
Not that it matters if they did. The CIA did it to them so who could blame them if they tried? But I'll give you a chance to tell me how Russia interfered in our election. How did they interfere?