Bill Nelson: The Russians have penetrated some Florida voter registration systems

Bill Nelson: The Russians have penetrated some Florida voter registration systems
Via:   freewill
Created:   4 days ago
Comments:   73

Tags

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



TAMPA — Russian operatives have "penetrated" some of Florida's voter registration systems ahead of the 2018 midterms, U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson said Wednesday, adding new urgency to concerns about hacking.

The state, however, said it has received "zero information" supporting his claim.

"They have already penetrated certain counties in the state and they now have free rein to move about," Nelson told the Tampa Bay Times before a campaign event in Tampa. He said something similar a day earlier in Tallahassee but declined to elaborate.

"That's classified," the Democrat said Tuesday.

Classified, eh? By whom, and why? If it is classified, then why are you leaking it to the press?   


"The Florida Department of State has received zero information from Senator Nelson or his staff that support his claims," agency spokeswoman Sarah Revell said in a statement. "Additionally, the Department has received no information from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation or the Florida Department of Law Enforcement that corroborates Senator Nelson's statement and we have no evidence to support these claims.
"If Senator Nelson has specific information about threats to our elections, he should share it with election officials in Florida."

Indeed.  Put up or shut up Billy!  Isn't that the very thing that he and Senator Rubio were stumping for last month?  More transparency and mutual cooperation between Federal, State and County election officials?  Come on Bill, either play your own game or quit insisting that others aren't.


Nelson's remarks immediately caused a major stir among county elections officials, who are testing equipment, training poll workers and counting mail ballots in advance of the Aug. 28 primary. Pinellas County elections officials immediately contacted the FBI, Homeland Security and other state and federal agencies in a futile attempt to find out more about Nelson's assertion.
"Our office has not seen any indication that we have had any penetration by any bad actions," said Pinellas election's office spokesman Dustin Chase.

It would be interesting to hear what officials from the other Counties are saying as well.  According to the Florida Department of State they are saying essentially the same thing as Pinellas, "WTF you talkin' about Bill???"

This looks suspiciously like a flimsy basis for an excuse or "explanation" for his increasingly likely loss in the upcoming election.  It's not a good look Bill. 

jrDiscussion - desc
96WS6
1  96WS6    4 days ago

Time to secure voting starting with a voter ID

 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  96WS6 @1    4 days ago
Time to secure voting starting with a voter ID

Voter ID would do nothing to prevent voter registration systems from being hacked by enemy foreign governments. And considering every non-partisan investigation into in person voter fraud has shown less than .02% of actual fraud, the onerous provisions of virtually every voter ID law imagined by the Republicans does nothing but disenfranchise eligible voters as was their intent proven in court in several cases so far.

"One of the most comprehensive studies on the subject found only 31 individual cases of voter impersonation out of more than 1 billion votes cast in the United States since the year 2000."

"the court found that North Carolina lawmakers requested data on racial differences in voting behaviors in the state. "This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)," the judges wrote."

"With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans," the judges wrote. "The bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess."

Most strikingly, the judges point to a "smoking gun" in North Carolina's justification for the law, proving discriminatory intent. The state argued in court that "counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black" and "disproportionately Democratic," and said it did away with Sunday voting as a result.

"Faced with this record," the federal court concludes, "we can only conclude that the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the challenged provisions of the law with discriminatory intent."

The judges found that the provisions "target African Americans with almost surgical precision."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.092429bc9889

So no, we don't need more idiotic voter ID laws to battle nearly non-existent in person voter fraud. We need an administration that's actually willing to invest in a robust counter intelligence and cyber warfare units to protect our voting infrastructure from enemy foreign governments like Russia. We need a President who is willing to accept the overwhelming conclusion of the intelligence community that it was Russia who not only hacked an American political party and stole documents in order to aid the political party they believe they could manipulate more easily, but also funded a propaganda campaign to manipulate Americans views of the political parties demonizing those on the left while casting the right as victims of some imaginary liberal attack on their values.

 
 
XDm9mm
1.1.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1    4 days ago

Maybe you're unaware, but voting is in fact a STATE responsibility, and not a federal one.

UNLESS, you're advocating for a federal takeover of federal elections, in which case it would then be up to the federal government to secure the ID's of voters and the machines and process.

 
 
MrFrost
1.1.2  MrFrost  replied to  XDm9mm @1.1.1    4 days ago

Weird, I thought the federal government, the preisdent included was tasked with protecting the USA from all enemies, foreign and domestic... Pretty sure I took that oath, and reasonably sure that our potus and all members of congress did as well. 

 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.1.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  XDm9mm @1.1.1    4 days ago
Maybe you're unaware, but voting is in fact a STATE responsibility, and not a federal one.

Where in my comment do I claim the Federal Government should be responsible for voter ID's?

I said "We need an administration that's actually willing to invest in a robust counter intelligence and cyber warfare units to protect our voting infrastructure from enemy foreign governments like Russia."

Our "voting infrastructure" happens to be in each State, but it still should be protected by our government from foreign enemies. That's their job. And while I don't believe the federal government should have "control of the machines and process", there should definitely be some federal oversight on methods so as not to expose us to foreign enemy attacks as happened in the 2016 election. Deciding what method you want to use then having it checked for holes by our intelligence community is not giving them "control" and there would be no need for federal ID's being issued.

 
 
XDm9mm
1.1.4  XDm9mm  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.2    4 days ago

Yeah...  I took that oath too.

BUT, that does not negate the FACT that elections are under the control of the STATES.

If you don't like that, amend the Constitution.

 
 
XDm9mm
1.1.5  XDm9mm  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1.3    4 days ago

Please explain how the federal government can protect the infrastructure of all the states when those same states refuse to provide the federal government the information necessary to determine if any fraud was actually accomplished?

 
 
Farnsworth Horatio Clapstonestacker III
1.1.6  Farnsworth Horatio Clapstonestacker III  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1.3    4 days ago
I said "We need an administration that's actually willing to invest in a robust counter...

You people want walls but you don't want walls.

 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.1.7  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  XDm9mm @1.1.5    4 days ago
Please explain how the federal government can protect the infrastructure

They do not need all voter data in order to certify electronic voting machines as safe or check to see if voter registration databases are secure. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

 
 
epistte
1.1.8  epistte  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1.7    4 days ago
They do not need all voter data in order to certify electronic voting machines as safe or check to see if voter registration databases are secure. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

It's time to get rid of voting machines and go back to paper ballots that cannot be hacked. We could vote either in a precinct place or just mail everyone an absentee ballot with a pre-paid envelope and be done with it.

 
 
XDm9mm
1.1.9  XDm9mm  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1.7    4 days ago

Then what the fuck may I ask are the states, who are the owners of the machines doing?

Having the Pakistani IT gurus Debbie Wasserman Shultz hired control them?

 
 
XDm9mm
1.1.10  XDm9mm  replied to  epistte @1.1.8    4 days ago

Actually, I like the idea of paper ballots.  Immediately scan them with a hardcopy print out the voter can validate before the ballot is finalized and becomes official.

BUT......   the hell with absentee ballots unless deployed with the government.

It's too easy to steal anything mailed on EITHER end of that stream.   The original recipient might not get it, or the completed ballot can also be stolen out of a mail box or as some postal workers have been known and caught doing.....  dumping any mail in a dumpster.

 
 
Ender
1.1.11  Ender  replied to  XDm9mm @1.1.10    4 days ago

Yes to paper ballots just no to hanging chads.

I would agree to an extent about absentee ballots yet there are some people that cannot get to a voting place. Infirm, paralyzed etc.

 
 
Freewill
1.1.12  Freewill  replied to  epistte @1.1.8    4 days ago
It's time to get rid of voting machines and go back to paper ballots that cannot be hacked. We could vote either in a precinct place or just mail everyone an absentee ballot with a pre-paid envelope and be done with it.

Interesting.  Who counts the ballots?  Who gets them to the counters (ever hear of ballot stuffing or entire precincts of ballots going missing - Google Daley-era Machine in Illinois)?  How are the people involved in the manual method any more trustworthy than the machines? Absentee ballots not a bad idea, but what if people don't have a stable mailing address, or they move a lot?  Watch out for screams of "Disenfranchisement!" there.

Sure - safeguard the machines and either don't leave them networked online until it is time to tally the votes or lock down the network.  That is what the counties of Florida are already doing.  No need to return to the stone ages and days of ballot stuffing, and untrustworthy ballot counting.

 
 
epistte
1.1.13  epistte  replied to  XDm9mm @1.1.10    4 days ago
Actually, I like the idea of paper ballots.  Immediately scan them with a hardcopy print out the voter can validate before the ballot is finalized and becomes official. BUT......   the hell with absentee ballots unless deployed with the government.

Absentee ballots are the only way for the elderly, the disabled, people who work unusual shifts and others to exercise their constitutional rights. I've used absentee ballots in the past and I might do it again in November. 

The state of Oregon uses absentee ballots for everyone and they don't have a problem with people stealing ballots.

 
 
epistte
1.1.14  epistte  replied to  Freewill @1.1.12    3 days ago
Sure - safeguard the machines and either don't leave them networked online until it is time to tally the votes or lock down the network.  That is what the counties of Florida are already doing.  No need to return to the stone ages and days of ballot stuffing, and untrustworthy ballot counting.

The scanners never have to be online. The ballots are scanned offline at the individual precincts and then the information is downloaded to multiple secure thumb-drives at the end of the voting day for counting at a central location by the country bureau of elections.  The paper ballots are kept for a recount if there are questions.  Its fast, cheap and very secure. 

Absentee ballots not a bad idea, but what if people don't have a stable mailing address, or they move a lot? 

You need to have a stable address to register to vote, unless people can use a fingerprint for electronic verification to permit the homeless to vote. 

 
 
Freewill
1.1.15  Freewill  replied to  epistte @1.1.14    3 days ago
The scanners never have to be online. The ballots are scanned offline at the individual precincts and then the information is downloaded to multiple secure thumb-drives at the end of the voting day for counting at a central location by the country bureau of elections.  The paper ballots are kept for a recount if there are questions.  Its fast, cheap and very secure. 

You talking in Florida?  If so, perhaps you should make that clear to Senator Nelson, before he makes even more of a fool of himself.

Ahhhh... never mind, you were talking about paper ballot scanners.  Sorry I misinterpreted that.

 
 
XDm9mm
1.1.16  XDm9mm  replied to  epistte @1.1.13    3 days ago
The state of Oregon uses absentee ballots for everyone and they don't have a problem with people stealing ballots.

You know that for a fact?   If the 'voter' does receive it and mails it back, how does that voter KNOW it actually was received unless sent return receipt or with another means of tracking?   Just because ballots have not been found in dumpsters, does not mean they weren't used for kindling in the carriers fireplace.

And an inability for someone to GET to a polling place is NOT//NOT stopping them from voting.   It is their responsibility to get there, not the governments responsibility to make sure they can.

 
 
epistte
1.1.17  epistte  replied to  XDm9mm @1.1.16    3 days ago
And an inability for someone to GET to a polling place is NOT//NOT stopping them from voting.   It is their responsibility to get there, not the governments responsibility to make sure they can.

If they cannot get to the polling place it most certainly does prevent them from voting. Logically it cannot be otherwise.  Your idea is extremely intellectually dishonest because you are claiming that they could have voted while ignoring the fact that there are obvious legitimate reasons that prevent them from doing so. 

Voting is a constitutional right and we must not put barriers in place to prevent all people from casting a ballot. Is there is a partisan reason why you want to disenfranchise many people from having their voice heard on election day? 

 
 
arkpdx
1.1.18  arkpdx  replied to  epistte @1.1.17    3 days ago
Voting is a constitutional right and we must not put barriers in place to prevent all people from casting a ballot

The right to own and bare arms is also a constitutional right but you have no problem putting up barriers  to it 

The right to express your religious beliefs if a constitutional right but you are OK with putting up barriers there. 

 
 
Enoch
1.1.19  Enoch  replied to  epistte @1.1.17    3 days ago

Dear Friend Episette: One of the things my B'nai B'rith lodge (Zerubavel) does is to pay for Medicabs to transport disabled voters of any party to the nearest polling place which is handicapped accessible.

For those who are able bodied, but have no transportation public or private, we work through any and all organizations (civil rights groups, Congregations, etc.) to offer rides in cars we own and drive to get them door to door to vote.

We don't care how they vote.

It matters not to us if their votes cancel out ours.

What is important to us as a service organization is to insure we do all we are able so anyone who wants to vote can.

Of course, if the government did this no one would fall through the cracks.

Until then, we do what we can to fill in as much of the void as we are capable.

Are we not Americans all?

No one more or less than any other?

Enoch.

 
 
epistte
1.1.20  epistte  replied to  arkpdx @1.1.18    3 days ago

Why do you seek to disenfranchise some voters, or is it just the voters who might not agree with your views that you seek to hinder casting their ballot? 

The right to own and bare arms is also a constitutional right but you have no problem putting up barriers  to it 

The 2nd implicitly states that it is "a well-regulated militia", so some regulation is not unconstitutional. 

The right to express your religious beliefs if a constitutional right but you are OK with putting up barriers there. 

What barriers do I support that prevent you or anyone else from exercising your religious rights as determined by the Free Exercise clause of the 1st Amendment?

 
 
96WS6
1.1.21  96WS6  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1    3 days ago

It was a smart-ass remark. I know it wouldn't do anything to solve this particular problem but it is part of a comprehensive system.  You know it's really funny that before this election most liberals called you crazy if you suggested tampering/rigging.  Remember this?   LMFAO!!! Now you are all SO concerned.  It's hilarious!  You gotta love the second video when he talks about crying about getting cheated.  You can't even make this shit up.laughing dude

 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.1.22  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  epistte @1.1.17    3 days ago
it most certainly does prevent them from voting.

Personally, I would like our Presidential election cycle to happen in April instead of November so every four years we could vote for the candidates for President on our tax return forms. That way every single American who files their taxes would be voting for the President. We would likely have far higher voter turn out as even those who do not pay any taxes still have to file their taxes. That would remove all the localized problems with ballots and remove any need for polling places. I never had to sign up to pay taxes, all it took was receiving a social security number and turning 18 and I was required to file tax returns. I can't really imagine anyone fraudulently filling out tax returns just to fake votes, so that takes care of the voter ID issues and no one will ever fall off the voter rolls just because they moved or got married.

 
 
96WS6
1.1.23  96WS6  replied to  epistte @1.1.17    3 days ago

There is something called absentee voting and it is the voters responsibility to make sure they get their vote in.

 
 
96WS6
1.1.24  96WS6  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1.22    3 days ago
Personally, I would like our Presidential election cycle to happen in April instead of November so every four years we could vote for the candidates for President on our tax return forms. That way every single American who files their taxes would be voting for the President. We would likely have far higher voter turn out as even those who do not pay any taxes still have to file their taxes.

I think that is a damn good idea that would help finish the debate about illegals voting as well.

 
 
Freewill
1.1.25  Freewill  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.1.22    3 days ago

I kinda like that idea!

 
 
Freewill
1.2  Freewill  replied to  96WS6 @1    4 days ago

Not sure if voter ID would help in the situation that Nelson fears (but for which no proof has been given), which is apparently Russian hackers deleting voter registration roles such that when voters arrive at the polls they are informed that they are not registered. 

"This is no fooling time and that's why two senators, bipartisan, reached out to the election apparatus of Florida to let them know the Russians are in your records and all they have to do, if those election records are not protected, is to go in and start eliminating registered voters," Nelson said Wednesday. "You can imagine the chaos that would occur on Election Day when the voters get to the polls and they say, 'I'm sorry Mr. Smith, I'm sorry Mr. Jones, you're not registered.' That's exactly what the Russians want to do. They want to sow chaos in our democratic institutions."

The truth is that those voters could still vote using a provisional ballot, but yeah that would be more of a hassle (essentially like registering all over again). 

I have always been amused by those who feel that requiring an ID to vote is "disenfranchisement", but yet requiring that people register with a specific party, and then not have to prove that you are indeed that registered voter at the polls, is not.  If we make the process for obtaining a voter ID no more difficult than registering to vote, then how is one akin to disenfranchisement while the other is not?

 
 
bbl-1
1.2.1  bbl-1  replied to  Freewill @1.2    4 days ago

Good points.

But.  Everyone that is of legal age and a citizen must have the right to vote and no law, hoop or hurdle should be permitted to infringe that right.

 
 
Trout Giggles
1.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Freewill @1.2    4 days ago

I'm going to be a little pissed if that happens to me. I have a voter registration card that I got when I registered.

 
 
Split Personality
1.2.3  Split Personality  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.2.2    4 days ago

In TX they are issued every 2 years, hence, only valid for 2 years.

 
 
Trout Giggles
1.2.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Split Personality @1.2.3    4 days ago

I don't think I ever registered to vote in TX, but I was in the military at the time.

I think here in Arkansas, your voter reg is good as long as you vote regularly

 
 
XDm9mm
1.2.5  XDm9mm  replied to  Split Personality @1.2.3    4 days ago

SP    are you a TX resident or is it a county thing.

I'm in Bexar TX and get a new one every year.   

 
 
Split Personality
1.2.6  Split Personality  replied to  XDm9mm @1.2.5    4 days ago

Tarrant County 

I just looked at the latest one, good from 01/01/2018 until 12/31/2019

I saved the older ones and they were only good for a year as you stated.

So maybe it's a cost saving thing?  Nothing on the website about changing it.

 
 
XDm9mm
1.2.7  XDm9mm  replied to  Split Personality @1.2.6    4 days ago

Interesting.

I spent a whole lot of time up in that area a few years back.   Put up a hangar over in Alliance airport.  

It used to be a pisser when Perot jr was in the area.  He'd have his pilots land the chopper by Sonny Bryant and stop in for some BBQ.

 
 
Freewill
1.2.8  Freewill  replied to  bbl-1 @1.2.1    4 days ago
no law, hoop or hurdle should be permitted to infringe that right.

Huh.  What of State laws requiring voter registration for Federal elections? At present every state in the nation except North Dakota requires voter registration for Federal elections, and most require a statement of party affiliation, which is then used to restrict voting in the primaries to only the party listed on the registration.  In most States some form of ID is required to register.  Even in California with very lax voter ID requirements, voter registration is limited to those not "currently imprisoned or paroled for a felony or found mentally incompetent".  Laws, hoops and hurdles are already in place when it comes to registering to vote, and in some states at the actual polls.  Most have been upheld by the Supreme Court.

If you want to get technical, the only Constitutional "protections" for the right to vote not being denied or abridged have to do with:

1.   15th Amendment (1870) -  "Race, color or previous condition of servitude".

2.   19th Amendment (1920) - "On account of sex".

3.   24th Amendment (1964) - "By reason of failure to pay a poll tax, or other tax for Federal elections".

4.   26th Amendment (1971) - "Who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age".

As I said before, if voter ID laws can be constructed so that they are no more burdensome than the current processes for voter registration (including those requiring party selection for crying out loud), then why would that be considered "disenfranchisement" while the current registration requirements are not?

 
 
96WS6
1.2.9  96WS6  replied to  Freewill @1.2    3 days ago
If we make the process for obtaining a voter ID no more difficult than registering to vote, then how is one akin to disenfranchisement while the other is not?

Exactly!

 
 
Skrekk
1.2.10  Skrekk  replied to  Freewill @1.2.8    3 days ago
As I said before, if voter ID laws can be constructed so that they are no more burdensome than the current processes for voter registration (including those requiring party selection for crying out loud), then why would that be considered "disenfranchisement" while the current registration requirements are not?

Of course they COULD be designed to not impose any additional burden but then what would be the point for the GOP to pass such a law since it wouldn't advantage them by making it more difficult for the poor, the elderly and racial minorities to vote?

 
 
epistte
1.3  epistte  replied to  96WS6 @1    4 days ago
Time to secure voting starting with a voter ID

How does that fix a potential problem with the voting systems being hacked?

 Go to paper ballots, Sharpies with offline scanners that cannot be hacked.

 
 
Tessylo
1.4  Tessylo  replied to  96WS6 @1    4 days ago
'Time to secure voting starting with a voter ID'

Yeah better have an ID when you buy groceries also.  chuckle

 
 
XDm9mm
1.4.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Tessylo @1.4    4 days ago

Can't get out of that grocery store with beer or wine if you don't have ID.   And if you use a check instead of a SNAP card, better have ID.

 
 
Tessylo
1.4.2  Tessylo  replied to  XDm9mm @1.4.1    4 days ago

I don't have a SNAP card dear.  I have a bank account/checking account where I directly deposit my 40 hour work week salary, that I buy my groceries with, which is a VISA credit/debit card.  I appreciate your concern.  winking 

I don't drink either.

Also, I don't have a problem with folks who need help regarding SNAP benefits.  

 
 
Jasper2529
1.4.3  Jasper2529  replied to  XDm9mm @1.4.1    4 days ago
Can't get out of that grocery store with beer or wine if you don't have ID.   And if you use a check instead of a SNAP card, better have ID.

What some people fail to realize is that even if they pay with a credit card in a grocery store, they initially needed to supply ID to the company/bank to obtain that credit card.

 
 
Tessylo
1.4.4  Tessylo  replied to  Jasper2529 @1.4.3    4 days ago
'they initially needed to supply ID to the company/bank to obtain that credit card.'

Really?  For serious?

 
 
Tessylo
1.4.5  Tessylo  replied to  XDm9mm @1.4.1    4 days ago

Anyone with any sense knows that you need your drivers' license if you use a check anywhere.    

 
 
XDm9mm
1.4.7  XDm9mm  replied to  Tessylo @1.4.2    4 days ago

EXACTLY where did I say YOU did?

Run along now tessy

 
 
badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη
1.4.8  badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη  replied to  Tessylo @1.4.2    4 days ago

I trade my snap card at 80% for drugs. It's a great deal really.

 
 
Tessylo
1.4.9  Tessylo  replied to  XDm9mm @1.4.7    3 days ago

Nah, I will do as I please.   

 
 
Freewill
2  Freewill    4 days ago

hqdefault.jpg

 
 
Trout Giggles
2.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Freewill @2    4 days ago

that's funny

 
 
bbl-1
3  bbl-1    4 days ago

Perhaps Nelson's concerns are legitimate.  After all, weren't Russians in Trump Tower and didn't 'the American president' have a secret meeting with 'the Russian president' and thus far the only information known about that meeting comes from Russian news media?  There is that ya know.

 
 
Freewill
3.1  Freewill  replied to  bbl-1 @3    4 days ago
didn't 'the American president' have a secret meeting with 'the Russian president' and thus far the only information known about that meeting comes from Russian news media

Not that I am aware of.  Trump and Putin have only met twice since Trump became President, and those meetings certainly weren't secret.  At least no more secret than meetings between previous presidents and Putin.  Can you elaborate?

What do either of Trump's meetings with Putin, or Russians doing business at Trump Tower before he was President, have to do with Nelson's specific uncorroborated concerns over Russians having allegedly gained access to voter registration roles in Florida?

 
 
Tessylo
3.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Freewill @3.1    4 days ago

'Not that I am aware of.  Trump and Putin have only met twice since Trump became President, and those meetings certainly weren't secret.  At least no more secret than meetings between previous presidents and Putin.  Can you elaborate?'

Well they certainly weren't secret in so many words but how about that 'private' meeting between Rump and Putin with only a translator and no transcript has ever been offered?

 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.1    4 days ago

Kind of like that other meeting on a plane?   Like that?

 
 
Jasper2529
3.1.3  Jasper2529  replied to  XDm9mm @3.1.2    4 days ago
Kind of like that other meeting on a plane?   Like that?

Oops!  Clapping

 
 
Tessylo
3.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  XDm9mm @3.1.2    4 days ago

'Kind of like that other meeting on a plane?   Like that?'

No, not like that.  

 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.5  XDm9mm  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.4    4 days ago

Oh....   Trump meetings were publicized while that plane thing they tried to keep secret.

Got it.

 
 
Freewill
3.1.6  Freewill  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.1    4 days ago
but how about that 'private' meeting between Rump and Putin with only a translator and no transcript has ever been offered?

What about it?  Putin met several times with Obama and other presidents behind closed doors with only interpreters present.  Why would you expect it to be any different now?  Obama had many private conversations with Putin with only his word as to what was discussed afterward.  Where was your uproar then?

 
 
Tessylo
3.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Freewill @3.1.6    3 days ago

Well since it was unheard of that Rump had a private meeting with Putin in Helsinki with no one but a translator I figured it was unheard of except according to Rump supporters I suppose 

 
 
Freewill
3.1.8  Freewill  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.7    3 days ago
Well since it was unheard of

Well perhaps only those with "Rump" derangement syndrome are those to whom private presidential meetings were "unheard of". Perhaps a bit of research and thinking for oneself might cure that ailment.

Obama met with Putin privately at the G20 summit in St. Petersburg 2013 and also at the G8 summit that same year. 

 
 
Tessylo
3.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  Freewill @3.1.8    3 days ago

Okey dokey 

 
 
bbl-1
3.1.10  bbl-1  replied to  Freewill @3.1    3 days ago

OIC.  Helsinki no sinki.

 
 
It Is ME
4  It Is ME    4 days ago

Just put the "Russian Bug" in voting folks ears....and It will run like wildfire. Face Palm

 
 
Freewill
4.1  Freewill  replied to  It Is ME @4    4 days ago

But put 20% of US uranium production in the hands of Russian investors, and nobody seems to notice.

 
 
It Is ME
4.1.1  It Is ME  replied to  Freewill @4.1    4 days ago
and nobody seems to notice.

Well.....The "People" did notice.

STFU about it, was the flavor of the day though. "Loose lips will sink YOUR ship." not listening

 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
5  The Magic Eight Ball    4 days ago

a couple days ago I was being sarcastic when I said a midterm loss will result in the left saying the machines were hacked by trump.

so not too far off... LOL

I also said the left would suddenly want paper ballots... again. not off the mark by much.

but my cash bet with a friend is for after the midterms... so slow down k? cant this wait a few months??

cheers :)

 
 
Freewill
5.1  Freewill  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @5    4 days ago

Just prepping you for your windfall my friend! Party

 
 
badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη
6  badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη    4 days ago

Lot of penetrating going on around here these days.

 
 
Freewill
6.1  Freewill  replied to  badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη @6    4 days ago

Giggle

 
 
lennylynx
7  lennylynx    3 days ago

Nothing is going to be done about it.  The Democrats might be able to do a little bit if they try really hard, but they have no real power to do anything.  The House and Senate will remain in Republican hands, and, if nothing is done about it, Trump will be re-elected too.  The Russians will hack actual voter machines and the Trump dictatorship will turn into reality if this bullshit is allowed to continue.  Republicans have no soul...

 
 
Split Personality
7.2  Split Personality  replied to  lennylynx @7    3 days ago
Republicans have no soul...

"We got a full tank of gas, a half a pack of cigarettes. It's dark and we're wearing sunglasses.'
 
 
Freewill
7.2.1  Freewill  replied to  Split Personality @7.2    3 days ago
We got a full tank of gas, a half a pack of cigarettes. It's dark and we're wearing sunglasses

Hit it!

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Studiusbagus
Bob Nelson


45 visitors