Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Funny how Dems now trust the CIA so much. in 2014, Dianne Feinstein blasted the CIA for hacking the House Intelligence Committee's computers to determine how the committee staff had gotten documents reflecting CIA interrogation methods. She told reporters that she had hidden the documents in a safe to keep them from the Agency. On July 31, 2014 (not that long ago), the CIA admitted the hacking and apologized to Feinstein: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/w...on-report.html
The current CIA director, John Brennan, in a different intelligence post during the Bush administration, was also found to have distributed bogus information to Bush, but the Obama administration claimed that he had just been doing his job passing the intel along. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_O._Brennan
Funny how Dems now trust the CIA so much. in 2014, Dianne Feinstein blasted the CIA for hacking the House Intelligence Committee's computers to determine how the committee staff had gotten documents reflecting CIA interrogation methods. She told reporters that she had hidden the documents in a safe to keep them from the Agency. On July 31, 2014 (not that long ago), the CIA admitted the hacking and apologized to Feinstein: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/w...on-report.html
The current CIA director, John Brennan, in a different intelligence post during the Bush administration, was also found to have distributed bogus information to Bush, but the Obama administration claimed that he had just been doing his job passing the intel along. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_O._Brennan
Trust and pay attention to are different matters. It could all be nothing. Do you think we should just start ignoring what the CIA says now?
Funny how Dems now trust the CIA so much. in 2014, Dianne Feinstein blasted the CIA for hacking the House Intelligence Committee's computers to determine how the committee staff had gotten documents reflecting CIA interrogation methods. She told reporters that she had hidden the documents in a safe to keep them from the Agency. On July 31, 2014 (not that long ago), the CIA admitted the hacking and apologized to Feinstein: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/w...on-report.html
The current CIA director, John Brennan, in a different intelligence post during the Bush administration, was also found to have distributed bogus information to Bush, but the Obama administration claimed that he had just been doing his job passing the intel along. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_O._Brennan
Democrats have always "trusted" the CIA.
Dianne Feinstein in particular was a sterling example of a Democrat lobbying for the CIA.
I say "was" because of that whole "spying on Congress" affair that came back to bite her.
Trust and pay attention to are different matters. It could all be nothing. Do you think we should just start ignoring what the CIA says now?
By all means pay attention, but trust must be earned. The best thing to do it what others have already decided to do -- have a bipartisan Congressional investigation to (hopefully) figure out who did what to whom. Too bad we have to spend the time and money.
Its amazing how this story has snowballed, when we still have no idea what the CIA actually found.
Last edited by CapnTrips; 12-12-2016 at 12:11 PM..
Actions taken by Hillary Clinton and her political allies within the DNC were made regarding party messaging, polling, stumping, benefits, meetings, schedules, volunteer work, rallies, and other events with respect to her presidential campaign.
I'm going to pretend your accusations about President Obama are true only for purposes of this comparison.
Clinton and the DNC were running an election campaign with Clinton as the Democratic Party's nominee.
President Obama and his political allies would be foreign state actors using external influence in a completely unrelated election.
I should think the difference would be glaringly obvious. The materiality of the concern is different by scope, scale, and goal.
Do you also want to know what the material difference is between my goal in opening a bottle of Perrier and a street crew repairing a broken road? Is that not something you need explained?
LOL at least you know how to say things that sound authoritative.
nonsensical but authoritative none the less.
What we learned from the wiki leaks was that the DNC and the Hillary campaign did some pretty underhanded things. What did not happen was Russia hacking the election machines or interfering with voting.
Yes CIA seems sure it was the Russians. but the FBI seems to have a different take.
none the less, wikileaks gave us information that has never been denied, and clearly was dirty politics on the part of the Clinton campaign. Further, it illustrates things that were already assumed or at least accused by Clintons detractors.
At the same time, this wringing of hands over Russian involvement stands in stark contrast with the FACT that Obama and his political team worked diligently to defeat Bebe in Israel. our president was involved in the presidential elections of another nation, where he sought to oust a sitting president.
That is directly related to what we see here with the Russians... maybe what Obama did was worse, in that in losing, he then had to deal with the man he tried to oust.
In addition to his actions in Israel, Mr. Obama worked directly to insure the election of the Muslim Brotherhood candidate in Egypt. It proved to be the backing of an evil man who eventually was arrested. There were other candidates that had greater desire for Modernity and democracy.
If in fact the Russians did act in some measure to gain some or all of the information Wikileaks used, is worthy of some consideration. HOWEVER it is utter hypocrisy that YOU and the democrats now crying foul, are doing so considering you did not take issue with your leader doing even worse where at least 2 nations are concerned.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyp25
First it was the recount, now its the Russians.... Whats next?
Lil' Donny Thin Skin continuing his search for a Hawaiian birth certificate?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
