@kazetnagorra saidNumerous criminals can be snagged in any administration if you look hard enough. Criminals are attracted to politics. That is where the money is.
Numerous criminals, many of them high-ranking Trump administration and election campaign officials, have already been indicted or sentenced, and more are likely to follow.
@mghrn55 saidThe FBI never even looked at the DNC computers because the DNC would not let them. How can the Mueller investigation find evidence if they never examined the computer?
I think that is the whole purpose of the Mueller investigation.
That is, to find the evidence.
Or come to the conclusion that there is no evidence.
If Trump and his supporters and FOX Propaganda Network constantly tell the world that there is nothing there, and if they are right, wouldn't Mueller's final report just confirm that ?
What is apparent to me is that the co ...[text shortened]...
If Trump keeps acting like he has something to hide, the public will eventually believe just that.
The allegation came from the DNC, not the Mueller investigation. That is one of the reasons there is no evidence. The other is that good hackers don't get caught. The Russian government has really good hackers. They cover their tracks well.
The assertion that Russian hackers are that incompetent is simply absurd. Especially since wikileaks exposed the CIA's UMBRAGE. Every government in the world knows how to false flag hack now. Claiming there is proof of hacking by the Russian government is just ridiculously stupid.
@metal-brain saidYou've made these baseless claims many times before, but the Mueller indictments of the Russians show specific dates and times when hacks were done. You simply don't have the knowledge and/or resources available to the US government and it's national security agencies.
The FBI never even looked at the DNC computers because the DNC would not let them. How can the Mueller investigation find evidence if they never examined the computer?
The allegation came from the DNC, not the Mueller investigation. That is one of the reasons there is no evidence. The other is that good hackers don't get caught. The Russian government has really good h ...[text shortened]... hack now. Claiming there is proof of hacking by the Russian government is just ridiculously stupid.
It's been explained to you many times that physical examination of the DNC servers was unnecessary and such would be highly unusual in an FBI investigation. I have quoted you articles showing this again and again.
@sonhouse saidNow you are finally making sense. His taxes are the real scandal, not this Russia nonsense. The Russia investigation is probably just an excuse to prolong an investigation until they want to squeeze Trump with his taxes if he gets to disobedient.
Oh he has a LOT to hide. It is no coincidence he has fought giving out his tax forms.
For starters.
Do you really think Mueller hasn't already examined Trump's taxes carefully? I'll bet it is impeachable stuff, but expect them to take a long time to reveal what they know. They cannot control Trump if he is being impeached. If he is an obedient puppet you will never hear about it.
@no1marauder said"It's been explained to you many times that physical examination of the DNC servers was unnecessary and such would be highly unusual in an FBI investigation. I have quoted you articles showing this again and again."
You've made these baseless claims many times before, but the Mueller indictments of the Russians show specific dates and times when hacks were done. You simply don't have the knowledge and/or resources available to the US government and it's national security agencies.
It's been explained to you many times that physical examination of the DNC servers was unnecessary an ...[text shortened]... be highly unusual in an FBI investigation. I have quoted you articles showing this again and again.
No, you have never explained it to me ever. Nobody on this forum has. What is your source of information?
2 edits
@metal-brain saidNo, I'm not wasting my time quoting the same articles you've ignored before.
"It's been explained to you many times that physical examination of the DNC servers was unnecessary and such would be highly unusual in an FBI investigation. I have quoted you articles showing this again and again."
No, you have never explained it to me ever. Nobody on this forum has. What is your source of information?
EDIT: Screw it, you've seen this before: https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-missing-dnc-server-is-neither-missing-nor-a-server
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/17/dnc-server-hack-russia-trump-2016-219017
EDIT2: Contrary to your claims that " you have never explained it to me ever. Nobody on this forum has" see: https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/debates/dnc-hack-an-inside-job.177935/page-3
@no1marauder saidI probably did ignore them if you never posted an excerpt from the links. Quite often you do that when you know the information in the link is not really proof.
No, I'm not wasting my time quoting the same articles you've ignored before.
EDIT: Screw it, you've seen this before: https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-missing-dnc-server-is-neither-missing-nor-a-server
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/17/dnc-server-hack-russia-trump-2016-219017
EDIT2: Contrary to your claims that " you have never explained it t ...[text shortened]... this forum has" see: https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/debates/dnc-hack-an-inside-job.177935/page-3
It isn't really proof, is it?
@metal-brain saidActually I did post a rather sizeable excerpt from the Daily Beast article.
I probably did ignore them if you never posted an excerpt from the links. Quite often you do that when you know the information in the link is not really proof.
It isn't really proof, is it?
You'd probably do well by at least looking at articles other people post rather than ignore them if they do not fit into your preconceived ideas.
@no1marauder saidHere is an excerpt from the link below:
Actually I did post a rather sizeable excerpt from the Daily Beast article.
You'd probably do well by at least looking at articles other people post rather than ignore them if they do not fit into your preconceived ideas.
MYTH:
“We have 17 intelligence agencies that know — with great certitude — that [the DNC hacking] was done by the Russians [to help Trump],” House Intelligence Committee member Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) recently said, echoing AP, CNN, The New York Times, NBC and CBS, among others.
FACT:
The Obama administration’s Jan. 6 assessment reflected the views of just three intelligence agencies — and one of them, the NSA, which captures Russian signals, expressed only “moderate confidence” in the conclusion. The others, the CIA and FBI, cautioned their judgment “might be wrong.”
The FBI and CIA reached their conclusion based on the forensic analysis of a private contractor who was hired by the DNC to examine its hacked e-mail server. “We didn’t get direct access [to the server],” former FBI Director James Comey testified.
https://nypost.com/2017/11/19/here-are-some-of-the-biggest-myths-of-the-russian-collusion-story/
1 edit
@metal-brain saidA lot more information has come to light since that article including that in indictments of Russians providing specific dates of hacks.
Here is an excerpt from the link below:
MYTH:
“We have 17 intelligence agencies that know — with great certitude — that [the DNC hacking] was done by the Russians [to help Trump],” House Intelligence Committee member Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) recently said, echoing AP, CNN, The New York Times, NBC and CBS, among others.
FACT:
The Obama administration’s Jan. 6 ...[text shortened]...
https://nypost.com/2017/11/19/here-are-some-of-the-biggest-myths-of-the-russian-collusion-story/
The "DNC server" nonsense has already been dealt with; the FBI doesn't need to seize servers from cooperating victims and doesn't. Seizing all 140 DNC servers was unnecessary and in effect would have put the DNC out of business.
@no1marauder saidyeah lets just pretend Obama didnt corrupt those agencies. your premise on the dnc servers is outright laughable.
A lot more information has come to light since that article including that in indictments of Russians providing specific dates of hacks.
The "DNC server" nonsense has already been dealt with; the FBI doesn't need to seize servers from cooperating victims and doesn't. Seizing all 140 DNC servers was unnecessary and in effect would have put the DNC out of business.
@mott-the-hoople saidSo Obama is the corrupt one and Trump is an angel. Got it.
yeah lets just pretend Obama didnt corrupt those agencies. your premise on the dnc servers is outright laughable.
1 edit
@metal-brain saidThe real deal about T's taxes is showing how much money the Russians pumped into his coffers. Word on the street is he took in literally hundreds of millions directly from Russia over the years. That is why we say he is in Putin's pocket. BTW, did you see the image of Trump at that Euro meeting when Putin showed up? Merkle and Macron, the M&M's, faces were grim but Trump was grinning like a kid in a candy shop. That alone says the whole story.
Now you are finally making sense. His taxes are the real scandal, not this Russia nonsense. The Russia investigation is probably just an excuse to prolong an investigation until they want to squeeze Trump with his taxes if he gets to disobedient.
Do you really think Mueller hasn't already examined Trump's taxes carefully? I'll bet it is impeachable stuff, but expect th ...[text shortened]... ot control Trump if he is being impeached. If he is an obedient puppet you will never hear about it.
@sonhouse saidWord on the street? Get real.
The real deal about T's taxes is showing how much money the Russians pumped into his coffers. Word on the street is he took in literally hundreds of millions directly from Russia over the years. That is why we say he is in Putin's pocket. BTW, did you see the image of Trump at that Euro meeting when Putin showed up? Merkle and Macron, the M&M's, faces were grim but Trump was grinning like a kid in a candy shop. That alone says the whole story.
@no1marauder saidIndictments are not convictions. Russia is being punished for helping Assad stay in power. It has nothing to do with elections. Besides, nothing revealed from the DNC hack/leak affected the elections. What was revealed was simply factual information about Debbie Wasserman Shultz conspiring to affect the elections.
A lot more information has come to light since that article including that in indictments of Russians providing specific dates of hacks.
The "DNC server" nonsense has already been dealt with; the FBI doesn't need to seize servers from cooperating victims and doesn't. Seizing all 140 DNC servers was unnecessary and in effect would have put the DNC out of business.
The dossier made false claims about Carter Page that you conveniently ignored. There is enough false info in it to consider it discredited.
CIA's UMBRAGE shows good hackers can cover their tracks. The assertion that the Russians can't hack competently is laughable.
https://www.techworm.net/2016/04/infamous-cyber-attacks-hackers-never-caught-identified.html