Quote:At a certain point, if compelling evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia to steal the election did not materialize, the much more interesting question becomes: How did the government obtain all this information that has been leaked to the media to prop up the story?

The most plausible answer to that question: The Obama administration, through the Justice Department and the FBI, was investigating the associates of the opposition party's presidential nominee, and perhaps even the nominee himself, during the campaign. Otherwise, what explanation can there be for all of the investigative information — much of it classified, and thus illegal to disclose — that has been funneled to the press?

Now that they've been called on it, the media and Democrats are gradually retreating from the investigation they've been touting for months as the glue for their conspiracy theory.

In short, the media and Democrats have been playing with fire for months. The use of law-enforcement and national-security assets to investigate one's political opponents during a heated election campaign has always been a potentially explosive story. Let's not kid ourselves: If the roles were reversed, and a Republican administration had investigated officials tied to the campaign of the Democrats' nominee, we would be drowning in a sea of Watergate 2.0

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2017/03...04347.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/44...-overreach


Nemesis per the Greeks or Karma from South Asia hitting the Democrats.

I'm totally sure The National Review feels this way.

In other news, water is wet.

(03-07-2017 10:05 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I'm totally sure The National Review feels this way.

In other news, water is wet.

Afraid to read it, aren't you?

(03-07-2017 10:09 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 10:05 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I'm totally sure The National Review feels this way.

In other news, water is wet.

Afraid to read it, aren't you?

I read enough of it...and I totally disagree with the premise. He seems to dismiss the possibility that the target of all this was Russian spies, etc. Instead opting for the outlandish possibility that Obama AND the FBI AND all the other intelligence agencies are all conspiring against Trump personally. It's ridiculous.

Also, as I've said on numerous occasions, Russia's sole goal was not to install Trump IMHO. They were trying to undermine our democratic process and ANY eventual winner.

And they've achieved that.

(03-07-2017 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 10:09 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 10:05 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I'm totally sure The National Review feels this way.

In other news, water is wet.

Afraid to read it, aren't you?

I read enough of it...and I totally disagree with the premise. He seems to dismiss the possibility that the target of all this was Russian spies, etc. Instead opting for the outlandish possibility that Obama AND the FBI AND all the other intelligence agencies are all conspiring against Trump personally. It's ridiculous.

Also, as I've said on numerous occasions, Russia's sole goal was not to install Trump IMHO. They were trying to undermine our democratic process and ANY eventual winner.

And they've achieved that.

Does it outrage you that Russia would do such a thing?

No...I welcome Russian interference in our affairs.

(03-07-2017 10:23 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  No...I welcome Russian interference in our affairs.

Does it outrage you that Trump might have colluded with the Russians to influence our election?

Tom, ya there?

Dude...relax...I work for a living.

No clue why you're asking such ridiculous questions. Does it bother you that Trump might have colluded with Russians?

Do we seriously have to ask?

If the situation were reversed it *** **** WELL would have INFURIATED the right. I disagree with Tom too that they just wanted to destabilize. They wanted TRump. They needed Trump to win. All about removing the sanctions from Crimeria. It's crippled them. Don't be so freaking naive tech. It's unbecoming.

Does it bother you that Trump might have colluded with Russians?


Well.... what do you think Baghdad Bob????????????????????????

(03-07-2017 10:35 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  Tom, ya there?

Ground Control to Major Tom!

Mach appears really upset that Trump might have sought the help of the Russians to influence a US election, is that correct Mach?

(03-07-2017 03:00 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  Mach appears really upset that Trump might have sought the help of the Russians to influence a US election, is that correct Mach?

Dude, send him a PM if you're that interested. Your repeated questions are tiresome.

(03-07-2017 11:43 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Does it bother you that Trump might have colluded with Russians?

does it bother you that there's no evidence of said collusion ...

TRIFLING DETAILS

It's not a might. He asked he Russians to hack her emails.

(03-07-2017 04:07 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's not a might. He asked he Russians to hack her emails.

C'mon Mach, he's never to be taken literally. 'Member?

Obama spied on the leaders of Germany, France, Brazil, Mexico, Russia, and others. What makes you think he wouldn't spy on Trump?
#Vault7 documents expose the CIA's ability to launch false flag cyberattacks and make them look like they came from Russia.

(03-07-2017 04:07 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's not a might. He asked he Russians to hack her emails.

WHERE'S THE BEEF