When The Russian Hoax Is Exposed, Should The Democrats Be Held Accountable?

You've continued to stand by your "17 Intelligence Agencies" comments, so you are trying to split a difference where none exists. However keep going. I admit I want to see how far down you're going to take this.

 

Individual rights ONLY apply WITHIN the jurisdiction of the USA.

This was a CONSPIRACY with a FOREIGN STATE and so there is no "right to privacy".

 

You don't even seem to understand what the 17 intelligence agencies "claim" actually is... no one is saying that 17 agencies conducted or took part in an investigation. You're arguing with your own misinterpretations again. No one here is claiming that there were 17 agencies who were a part of an investigation.

This has already been explained, I don't know how on earth you still don't understand.. yet here we are again

edit:

for reference sake, here are a few of my comments from a month ago

post #63

post #67

post #91

 

If the American voter is smart enough, they will have retribution.

 

So you agree this meme you posted is inaccurate?

 

Can you cite precedents for that opinion?

 

Your comprehension skills are legendary. No one in this thread EVER claimed that the 17 intelligence agencies all conducted an investigation.. not in this discussion, not in that meme, not anywhere. All anyone is saying is that the Director of National Intelligence's joint statement is the head of the USIC speaking on behalf of the USIC, which in fact represents 17 different intelligence agencies. Once again I will refer to the fact check I provided a month ago

"the 17 separate agencies did not independently come to this conclusion, but as the head of the intelligence community, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence speaks on behalf of the group"

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...y-clinton-blames-russia-putin-wikileaks-rele/


So again, what has been going on here is you have been misinterpreting everyone else, and then forming an argument based on your own misinterpretation. Amazingly, after an entire month of this being explained to you, somehow you have gone back to believing that we're claiming that all 17 agencies in the USIC conducted an investigation. No one here ever tried to claim such a thing, this is simply your own misinterpretation.

 

Or, in other words, the investigation hasn't gotten very far.

 

It is at a very early stage. Mueller nvestigation only began a couple weeks ago..

 

The DNI was not speaking on behalf of 17 agencies. The jointness of the statement refered to the DNI and DHS, not of the 17 agencies.

The NYT retraction reads.

“The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.”

(emphasis mine)

elsewhere you asked about Clapper's testimony. He said:

"As you know, the I.C. was a coordinated product from three agencies; CIA, NSA, and the FBI not all 17 components of the intelligence community. Those three under the aegis of my former office."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...election-interference/?utm_term=.cdf6285ee349

You were misled by Clinton and the NYT into believing 17 agencies concurred in this Russian hacking finding. It is simply not true. Why do you want to die on this rather insignificant Hill? The NYT doesn't.

Clinton claimed:

"We have 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyberattacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin, and they are designed to influence our election," Clinton said. "I find that deeply disturbing."

Can we agree that Clinton was wrong?

 

Seems to me I've been hearing about various investigations for months. Don't they count?

 

They have not yet released thier findings so I assume they are still investigating. Aren't they still calling witnesses to testify?

 

I find it odd that none of these "findings" have been leaked. All I keep hearing is that there is no hard evidence. It really seems they haven't gotten very far.

 

That could be true. At any rate, I don't see it as a problem for Trump as he has a full three years before he has to run again. I think he should just ignore all of the speculation and try to go forward with his agenda. In my opinion, this guy is too worried about what cable news hacks are saying and wastes too much energy on it. The guy is 71 years old and only has so much gas left in the tank.

 

______
NYT Finally Retracts Russia-gate Canard – Consortiumnews
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/06/29/nyt-finally-retracts-russia...
Jun 29, 2017 · By Robert Parry The New York Times has ... they had to retract Comey’s statement of Trump’s non ... “17 intelligence agencies” Trump Russian ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~​

New York Times Forced To Retract False Statement - USA ...
www.usarelated.com/new-york-times-forced-retract-false-statement
New York Times Forced To Retract False Statement. ... The New York Times ... in late May that all 17 intelligence agencies agreed that Russian attacks against her ...

 

He's running on fumes and with any luck on the side of most of the American people, he'll get nothing of his corrupt anti-American agenda accomplished.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act

 

I am talking about the agenda he promised in his campaign such as a more cost effective and efficient health care program and a multi trillion dollar infrastructure package that would greatly Or bigly upgrade our country while putting millions to work at high paying jobs rebuilding America. If he would focus on those noble goals instead of getting into petty pissing contests with cable news hacks he might be able to accomplish something of value. I know it seems like a real long shot, but so was his winning the GOP nomination and especially the general election. Maybe he can pull his head out of his ass and the pull another rabbit out of his hat....

 

But those were total lies and he has no interest in governing. He's also inept and not capable of comprehending what it means to be a leader.

 

It certainly seems that way, but things are not always what they seem to be.

 

I have no reason to believe otherwise. When someone shows you who they are...believe them and despite the fact that nothing he says is believable, his actions throughout the years have clearly put on display who and what Donald Trump is. He's a bad seed.

 

Minor correction: It's not only cable news hacks. It's also broadcast network news hacks and print media news hacks.

He has to fight those groups. They form the basis of the people's understanding of issues. They shape and mold public opinion. Public opinion is what gets legislation passed. It sets foreign policy and economic policy.

Public opinion is what elected Obama. Obama's policy was to get the US out of the Middle Eastern battlefields prematurely. The American public opinion also was to get out regardless. That public opinion was crafted by the news media. As a result we've had many years of effort wasted and more problems came about.

It was the shaping of public opinion by the media that created the mess were in over there. So yeah, he has no choice. He has to fight the media. He has to win that fight.

 

Well first off I want to address the testimony that I asked about in post #47 of this thread. I am aware of Clapper's exchange with senator Feinstein, I was not asking about that exchange, I was asking about the supposed testimony from the CIA director John Brennan, and if you go back and read the post, I even mentioned him by name when I asked for the source of his testimony. I did not ask about Clapper, I am already aware of Clapper's exchange with senator Feinstein.

but getting into Clapper's exchange with senator Feinstein, he was being asked about a report (an ICA) made near the end of his (Clapper's) term that involved multiple members of the Intelligence Community who investigated and concluded that Russia was responsible for the cyber attacks during the election cycle, which at the time of that exchange was 3 agencies. At the time of the joint statement that was made in October however, it was only 1 agency that had completed an investigation on the issue, which was the Department of Homeland Security. The Director's office itself does not conduct investigations, so it was just DHS alone who had completed an investigation at the time, and the exchange that the Director made with senator Feinstein was in reference to a followup report that was conducted the following winter to the October statement

I want to make myself perfectly clear, when I am speaking of the USIC being represented in the joint statement, I am referring to the very first sentence of the written statement, which reads "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of emails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations"

The above statement is the head of the USIC speaking on their behalf to say that they are confident that Russia was responsible for the cyber attacks. Early in this thread I had another poster express how he does not give the statement the significance that was intended, because the inclusion of the USIC in the statement was essentially the Director orchestrating them to nod in agreement. I responded to this poster's assessment with my agreement in post #134 of this thread. I expressed again in post #349 and #352 that the 16 agencies in the USIC outside of the Director's office did not independently declare that the Russians were the perpetrators behind the cyber attacks.

So to make myself perfectly clear, the Director of National Intelligence did make a statement on behalf of the USIC, which is a federation of 17 different agencies when you include the Director's office itself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Intelligence_Community

However, not all 17 agencies that make up the USIC reached their own conclusion on the matter, much less conduct their own independent investigations. I addressed this again in post #64, #67, and #91 of this thread (and many more times) that the 17 agencies did not all conduct their own investigations. This was all addressed a month ago in this thread

In regards to the NY Times article, it does not at any point discuss the Director's joint statement (before or after the edit), it merely addresses the agencies who have independently concluded that Russia was behind the cyber attacks

Again, I am not saying that there were 17 agencies who separately conducted or took part in an investigation, and I trust like most people I will only have to explain this to you once to get you to understand this.. but there are some people on these forums who require a greater effort of explanation before they fully understand.

 

OK, I understand what you are not saying.

What are you saying those 17 Agencies did together?

They didn't all investigate (per your admission.)

They didn't all approve the investigation that was conducted (per the NYT.)

The didn't participate in the joint statement, only the DHS and DNI (per the title of the joint statement).

What is it that you claim those 17 agencies did together?

 

I don't see anything there to suggest that a US citizen cannot encrypt communications to oversea nationals.

Liberals usually support the right to encrypt communications. Are you an exception to this observation.

https://www.amnestyusa.org/reports/encryption-a-matter-of-human-rights/