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

During the build up to the ill advised wars that Cheney/Bush started in the Middle East, the main stream news outlets shaped public opinion and got them support for these costly and bloody ventures. The NY Times was a major player in spreading false information during the build up. Remember Ahmed Chalabi, (Cheney's buddy who was also a fugitive bank swindlers) and his friend, "curveball" interacting with Judith Christ?

After 8 years of this bloody, costly idiocy, the public finally realized that they had been duped by war profiteering scumbags who used the press to advance their agenda. Trump, like Bush ran as a non interventionalist and against nation building. He even disparaged Clinton for voting to give Cheney/Bush the go ahead on Iraq.

Hopefully Trump will not repeat Bush's idiocy and get us involved in another bloody trillion dollar turd hunt. What created the mess over there was that Cheney/Bush, with the help of the mainstream media lied us into two wars in order to create a cash cow for themselves and their cronies. Trump should be watched like a hawk by the press and the people who narrowly elected him. He has been proven to be a pathological liar ( exact words of Texas GOP Senator Ted Cruz) who will do or say anything in order to enrich himself. I do not mind that the media is pointing out his lies at every turn and holding his feet to the fire. Cheers

 

Moving the goalposts now?

The issue is about a conspiracy to subvert the Law of the Land. If you want to change the Law of the Land there is an appropriate process to follow.

 

I am unclear as to where the goalposts are.

What Law of the Land is that? I don't think it is illegal to secure communications against eavesdroppers, even if they are government eavesdroppers.

 

Please read post #382 in this thread.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ld-accountable.505596/page-20#post-1067553637

 

I neglected to mention that part. Yes. The news people did create the public support for our invasion of Iraq. They really beat the war drums.

Just like they created the public support to get out.

 

What law is supposed to have been prevented, hindered or delayed?

 

Have any formal charges been made against anyone?

 

You all are lame as hell! Investigate every President all the time! Never take your eye off any of them! Any investigation against any President is a good investigation, whether it leads to anything or not!

Quit this partisan bullshit!

EDIT: Whoa! We get to curse again, finally! Sweet!

 

When I quoted that part of your fact check you said I was cherry picking.

Then in other words, you disavow this post?

If you are now saying that you were wrong, then I guess I can let you off the hook, so is that what you're saying?

 

I'm not saying they did anything together, all I am saying is the Director of National Intelligence made a statement last October on behalf of the USIC, which is a federation of 17 agencies. I referred to it as a joint statement from the USIC because they are represented twice in the statement that was written by the head of the USIC himself. Once in the opening sentence

"The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations"

and then again in the following paragraph

"The USIC and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) assess that it would be extremely difficult for someone, including a nation-state actor, to alter actual ballot counts or election results by cyber attack or intrusion"

Again, this was written last October, the following winter there was an ICA report conducted by four of the agencies that make up the USIC, which was completed the following January. The NYT article refers to this ICA report, there is no reference to the October statement. This discussion should have ended at post #134 when me and another poster agreed that the October statement was nothing more than the Director of National Intelligence (who is the head of the USIC) writing a statement to make the USIC nod in agreement with what the Department of Homeland Security concluded.

Everyone but one poster has had no problem coming to an understanding with my posts, and that one poster is the only reason why this discussion is still going.

 

That is not what happened at all actually. I explained to you that I was never arguing that the 17 agencies independently came to a conclusion on the matter, and that you had been misinterpreting me the entire time by constantly referencing the part of the fact check that no one in this thread ever argued against to begin with. Rather than face the embarrassment that you had been arguing with your own misinterpretation of everyone else this entire time, you outright denied that you ever made that quote the base of your argument.

I responded by referring to 5 different posts where you used that quote as the base of your argument, in which you responded by only addressing one of them, while completely ignoring the other 4. I responded that you were cherry picking, because you only acknowledged the one post which allowed you the wiggle room to continue denying that you ever used that quote as the base of your argument

The fact that you now acknowledge using the same quote that you previously denied using as the base of your argument is friggin brilliant. Thank you

No, because we've already clarified how the 17 agencies were represented in the Director's statement. I was challenged for the remark, so I clarified how the agencies were represented, and yielded that it was not as significant as what was originally put on. When clarifications was made the first time, the discussion should have been over with then and there

Your comprehension skills continue to impress

 

Thier job was done getting the wars started and Cheney/Bush along with their war profiteering cronies had already stolen trillions in phony no bid contracts. Investigative reporters from both main stream and alternative news sources had exposed the fact that we were lied to and duped into these idiotic wars.

 

The investigations were enacted by the GOP controlled House of Representatives, the GOP controlled Senate and the GOP controlled DOJ...Yes, they should all be charged with starting an investigation...lol

 

I'll admit, you do make comprehension challenging! The part of your post that I highlighted, " We have 17 different intelligence agencies who are saying that Russia was attempting to interfere with our elections," you've said that you will not disavow, even though it contradicts your most recent statement, I explained to you that I was never arguing that the 17 agencies independently came to a conclusion on the matter. "

My issue has been your (and others-not just you) use of the phrase "17 Intelligence Agencies" when throughout this story, going all the way back to October, it was patently obvious that "17 Intelligence Agencies" didn't do ****. Your insistence both that they did and they didn't when it suits you is very revealing, which is why I've allowed your nonsense to continue this long.

 

Alright, and that's understandable, but at no point in that post or any other post in this thread did I argue that the 17 agencies independently make the conclusion. I see why you would take an issue with that particular post, but I already clarified exactly what the facts were a month ago. The discussion should have ended right then and there, but you kept insisting that I was arguing that the 17 agencies all independently came to their own conclusion on the matter, when I never argued that. Again, it was the head of the USIC that made a statement on their behalf.

You say that I make comprehension challenging, but no one else seemed to have this issue.

 

If it were a joint statement of those 17 agencies, the directors of those agencies would have signed it. That is not the case.

It is, in fact, a "Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security." No other agencies involved.

By asserting that the DNI was speaking on behalf of those 17 agencies, it implies that they concurred with his conclusions. They did not, at least not all of them.

 

Several people over the course of this thread have tried to make the same point to you. Now, even the AP is.

 

Several people have expressed their dismay for the statement, but for everyone else I only needed to explain once that I was never arguing that the 17 agencies independently made the conclusion. At this point you have no one to blame but yourself, you went from arguing with your own misinterpretation, to outright denying what you were arguing, to unwittingly admitting to what you previously were denying, to then blaming your own misinterpretation on me.

 

They didn't sign off on the statement, hence why I said he was speaking on their behalf. As the head of the USIC, the Director has it within his authority to speak on their behalf. Kind of like how the president can speak on behalf of the United States

It is also not an "assertion" that he spoke on behalf of the USIC, again he wrote "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations"
"The USIC and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) assess that it would be extremely difficult for someone, including a nation-state actor, to alter actual ballot counts or election results by cyber attack or intrusion"

If he was speaking on behalf of his office alone, then he would have wrote "DNI" instead of "USIC"

.

 

I think the Russian "scandal" is propagandistic BS, but damn that was a hilarious GIF.

 

Let it go and move on.

 

LMAO...Sure, but let's also file charges against trump for spreading the birther lie for 4 years, eh?

 

I just pulled your quotes, actually gave you the opportunity to correct the record, and you've refused each time. Don't blame me for both denying and sticking to your story. That's your irrational path.

 

You thought it would be a good idea to use my own quotes/source to argue AGAINST me, while somehow not realizing that very source did not go against what I was saying to begin with. Again, you misinterpreted me and spent an entire month arguing against your own misinterpretation. I addressed a month ago that the 17 agencies did not independently come to the conclusion or conduct an investigation, but that the Director of National Intelligence wrote a statement on their behalf.

What part of that needs to be corrected? it is in perfect accordance with the fact check that I used at the beginning of this discussion.. the same fact check you decided to base your argument on


The fact check that I used from the beginning of this discussion has been updated to include exactly what I explained in post #673 and post #685

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

So as I explained before, the exchange that Clapper had with senator Feinstein (as well as the NY Times article and the AP article) are referring to the January ICA report and NOT the October statement in which the Director spoke on behalf of the USIC.

Nothing needs to be corrected

 

Ha! Yes, I actually thought it made sense to use your own quotes against you, when they contradict what you say now. And of course as you say, "nothing needs to be corrected."

Hilarious! So do you both confirm and deny that you still agree with your statement, "What's false about it, are you suggesting there aren't 17 intelligence agencies saying Russia was trying to interfere with our elections?"

I'm loving looking down at you as you continue to shovel away in your hole. Keep digging!