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

Can't wait for the 007 movie to be made on this to be made for when we see this whole thing for the fiction that it truly is.

I just wonder who James Bond will be played by in this future fiction movie........

 

Obviously the "investigation" is just a ploy, not all Democrats realize this, but it is clear to me. There will never be evidence of collusion, there will be evidence of "contacts", communications, deals, financing, support, cooperation, coordination, but they aren't going to find evidence of some secret conspiracy to illegally affect the election.

The investigation only purports to be aimed at finding evidence of collusion, it is just to provide a basis to question Trump's legitimacy and it works well for that. Trump will be dogged by speculation over his motives, questions about his policies, uncertainty on his true aims. These will always lend themselves to an alternative interpretation that supports the suggestion they reflect some deal with the Russians.

Even though we already have plenty of policy expressions patently adverse to Russia taken specifically by Trump (missiles at Syrian air bases, Montegro in NATO, ratcheted sanctions over Crimea, overtures towards Georgia...) these will be dismissed as insignificant or just distractions to conceal dome hidden support.

The ploy seems to be working for those who oppose Trump, a complicit media keeps the public informed with constant anonymous leaks supporting their thesis, investigative journalists often uncover the falsity of these leaks, but by then there's another, so the investigation will continue indefinitely.

Conservatives may find solace in the fact all this investigating is providing a lot of evidence of the Democrat establishment's wrongdoing, the politicization of the intelligence community, law enforcement and the judiciary is not an attractive development by any measure. All citizens regardless of party affiliation know this development is very detrimental to the nation.

 

You are quoting a false news story about 17 intelligence agencies saying Russia was trying to meddle in our elections. Only THREE agencies were actually involved in processing intelligence that could possibly verify such a claim. The other 14 did nothing more than sign off on the report stating that Russia interfered.

Meetings with diplomats in a Senator's office are quite common. Should we investigate every single Senator that meets a diplomat in their office for possible collusion with the diplomat's country?

I've not heard or read a single word about Hillary's campaign being investigated for collusion with Russia. Can you point to any evidence that such is going on?

 

The whole huge lie that -----------the Russians did it------------is collapsing around the democrat party. They look like the fools they are.

 

According to Brennan the CIA began spying on Trump's campaign back in April, 2016 because of contacts between Russians and campaign officials. And apparently since then no evidence of collusion has been presented to anyone!
Exactly what "web" are you speaking of? You mean the "web of accusations"? Accusations are proof of nothing. They don't even constitute probably cause.
Again, how do you have obstruction of justice when collusion isn't a crime?

 

If the media was still run by moral human beings, reporters who spout all this B.S. would be fired and never work again....except for the Inquirer or Star.

 

And if Trump had properly vetted Flynn, this story wouldn't have the legs to run on. Trump is his own worst enemy.

 

yes

 

Hillary Clinton's group started this hoax 24 hours after Trump won. Evidently, the rest of the Democratic Party doesn't seem to understand the consequences of a manufactured story that can't be resolved in their favor.

The coastal media celebrities are running around thinking that this ongoing narrative is working in their favor. Little do they realize that they are waking a sleeping giant.

 

Is it actually illegal to ask for investigations of possible illegal conduct in the US?

 

This is why I can't trust the news media. No, you're wrong, there was no conclusion by "17 different intelligence agencies" that Russia was interfering with our elections. I've been hearing that meme for months but it's simply false. Do you actually think the NGA actually issued a report or opinion on Russia hacking? The NRO? NGIC? The Treasury Department?

This myth is because the Russia hacking intel report was released by DNI. But when you ( I don't mean you personally but the media) keep saying a pretty obvious lie, why should I believe anything they say?

 

Yeah, the Plame "scandal" is a pretty good template on how this is likely to play out. Two years of breathless daily news on Bush's scandal, I don't know how many times they reported on Hardball that Cheney's arrest was imminent, and then finally they charge someone with a process crime that had nothing to do with the issue.

If you were a Democrat, it was a success, even though they never convicted or even charged the person who was actually guilty of the crime they were charged with investigating. They found that out the first week but continued with their snipe hunt for two years anyway.

Now, most Democrats actually think the leaker was convicted.

 

Oh man, this is funny

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/05/50835...lutely-behind-finding-of-russia-election-hack
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...y-clinton-blames-russia-putin-wikileaks-rele/

I guess the Director of National Intelligence is fake news

That's a fair enough argument, and as I acknowledged earlier, we don't know the actual number of investigations. It wasn't my intention to imply that there were 17 investigations from 17 agencies, however the 17 agencies do have access to the same information that came from the investigations, and they (the 17 agencies) have made a joint statement through the Director of National Intelligence that Russia did try to interfere with our elections.

and of course we should investigate the campaign officials who met with Russia during that time. Whether or not Russia tried to meddle with our elections is hardly in question, we know they did. So yes, we need to investigate that. Now you do have a point that Jeff Sessions was a part Armed Forces Committee, so him meeting with Russian officials would be pretty customary. In regards to your question on whether we should investigate every single senator that met with Russia.. it is worth noting that Jeff Sessions was the only member of the Armed Forces Committee who met with Russia during the campaign. My answer to your question would be yes, regardless of whether Jeff Sessions was the only one to meet with Russia during that time. Not only did Jeff Sessions meet with Russia during the campaign, but he did not disclose his meetings with Russia on his security clearance application, and he denied meeting with Russia during the campaign while he was under oath.

Now, it should be fully understood that no one is being charged of any wrong doing. All an investigation means is we take an official course of action to uncover the truth. Jeff Sessions' meetings with Russia could have been nothing out of the ordinary for a member of the Armed Forces Committee, and it could be that no US state or campaign official colluded with Russia at all. However, we shouldn't just make the assumption that there was no collusion with Russia when we know that Russia did in fact try to meddle with our elections. I should also note that Russia has infiltrated our federal government before, so it is not out of question for them to be operating with either state officials or campaign officials.

 

That's weird. I'm gripping about the media stating that 17 intelligence agencies determined there was Russian hacking, and you provide a link to a media post doing exactly what I'm complaining about.

 

yeah.. a report on the Director of National Intelligence saying they stand by the joint statement of 17 intelligence agencies, and a fact check on the statement itself.

but you know.. the Director of National Intelligence is fake news.. so is every fact checking source

 

Clapper didn't say "17 Intelligence agencies." That was in the media report. So yeah, that is fake news. Although considering Clapper's credibility issues, I'm not sure I would have believed him anyway. If he would lie to Congress, why wouldn't he lie to an NPR reporter?

 

but again, a joint statement from the National Intelligence community represents 17 agencies. If you are arguing that it is not a joint statement, then I am going to have to ask for a source on that. Note that this does not mean there was a joint investigation of any kind, we don't know the total number of investigations, but the National Intelligence community which has access to the same information made a joint statement that Russia did in fact attempt to meddle in our elections.

 

"Democrats"? Charges? I thought this was a bipartisan investigation?
Anyway, the "Democrats" who apparently are the only one's who care about this investigation according to you, don't really need collusion. There are a mountain of charges already to nail Trump with, that we already know about;

 

Three agencies, not 17. And of them, they're backing each other. It smells and quacks like the Iraq war vote and after they got that wrong, I'm not inclined to believe them.

 

We know who contributed to the DNI report, CIA, NSA, and the FBI. That leaves 14 other intelligence agencies?

The way the the US IC is currently constituted, the DNI is sort of the head of the IC, in the same way the CIA director used to be, but that doesn't mean "17 Intelligence agencies" either contributed or participated in that report.

So why use the term "17 Intelligence agencies" when it's not true? You've used that term several times just in this thread, but virtually every every news report does. Why is that phrase used when it's never been applied to any other DNI finding?

I know of course why the media uses it, but why do you?

 

Mike...go back and read what was posted.You seem to keep missing it intentionally

a joint statement from the National Intelligence community represents 17 agencies. If you are arguing that it is not a joint statement, then I am going to have to ask for a source on that

 

We know it's not a joint statement due to plausibility. The Coast guard most likely had NO information pertaining to the election lol. We're not talking picking up Submarine transmissions. No, obvious lie is obvious and not even sugarcoated from you. It's the Paulson thing all over again: We just wanted a really big number.

17 is more convincing than 3, so we'll say 17. The Intel community has had us chasing the dog's tail for a while now, but its most obvious lie was the 17 agency claim. After Iraq, we should really question these people and not fall for cheap lies like that one.

 

Would be nice, but the only legal recourse would be civil.

 

Hold politicians accountable for their crimes ? These are now treasonous words in these times of Orwellian doublespeak.

 

When the Russian collusion hoax is revealed there will be a lot of finger pointing among Democrats, leakers, media and intelligence, then, hopefully there will be reform: