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.
Those wanting to play up the Russian angle are just digging their own graves even deeper, as what they are really saying is that the truth cost Hillary the election.
It's history. Tomorrow's a new day.
This is true and kind of the bottom line. The media was devoted more time to innuendo about Trump than it did the real findings from these leaks. There's only so much indignation one can muster when the truth is exposed. I don't generally condone leaks and hacking, but I don't generally condone stacking the deck in one candidate's favor, either.
Yeah, not exactly sure what you mean that it was just the "perception"..... No one, not even Podesta, has come out and said that these emails were made up or fake. So if the emails really did cost Hillary the election as the Democrats assert ( which I find to be a specious argument in and of itself ), that means the truth is what derailed her campaign.
And tomorrow manafort and others will STILL be under investigation.
Tough talk from a member of a party who sold their State Department, whose presidential candidate illegally deleted 33,000 emails, whose DOJ wouldn't allow the FBI access to a server facilitate a complete investigation of their candidate, who interfered in the democratic process to defeat a potential nominee from their own camp, who paid for protestors and agitators, whose candidate's campaign was 1/5th funded by the Saudis, whose members co-signed Russian disinformation to the sociopolitical detriment of this nation, and who might still instigate the opposing administration into ordering fuller investigations into any or all of this.
Q Thank you, sir. Are you concerned, Mr. President, that commuting Chelsea Manning’s sentence will send a message that leaking classified material will not generate a tough sentence to groups like WikiLeaks? How do you reconcile that in light of WikiLeaks’ connection to Russia’s hacking in last year’s election? And related to that, Julian Assange has now offered to come to the United States. Are you seeking that? And would he be charged or arrested if he came here?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, let’s be clear,....
***
So with respect to WikiLeaks, I don't see a contradiction. First of all, I haven't commented on WikiLeaks, generally. The conclusions of the intelligence community with respect to the Russian hacking were not conclusive as to whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in being the conduit through which we heard about the DNC emails that were leaked.
Well, there you go.
Obama says the DNC E-Mails were leaked.
So, in the end, the hacking story was just government propaganda to justify Obama's actions toward Russia.
.
.... and Seth Rich paid for it, to set an example.
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.
