╌>

No collusion: How Americans were fed a false tale about Donald Trump's 2016 campaign

  
Via:  Just Jim NC TttH  •  3 years ago  •  73 comments

By:   James S. Robbins (MSN)

No collusion: How Americans were fed a false tale about Donald Trump's 2016 campaign
The investigation is laying bare the extent of the conspiracy to derail the Trump campaign and thwart his presidency.

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

And "some" ate it up and are STILL doing so today. Right here................LMAO


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Does anyone still believe the story that Donald Trump colluded with Vladimir Putin to win the 2016 presidential election? If so, special counsel John Durham's indictment of Igor Danchenko should put their minds at rest.

© The Associated Press Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation was supposed to have been the grand reckoning for Donald Trump, the comprehensive exposure of the colluders and how they undermined American democracy. Mueller's 2019 report was long on how Moscow attempted to interfere in the 2016 election. But on the matter of collusion with the Trump campaign, Mueller came up empty.

The 39-page document is rich with detail on the origins, use and abuse of the Russian collusion story as a means to undermine the 2016 Trump campaign.

Danchenko is identified as the person who collected information "that ultimately formed the core of the allegations" in the infamous dossier by Christopher Steele. Danchenko was indicted on lying to the FBI in 2017 about who he was working with and where his information came from.

Source linked to Hillary Clinton


The indictment exposes former Hillary Clinton aide Charles Dolan, identified only as "PR Executive-1," as an important Danchenko source. Dolan allegedly fed Danchenko information he claimed he had obtained when he "had a drink with a GOP friend," but later admitted he had fabricated the story. The indictment also shows that PR Executive-1 was an important source for reporting by The Washington Post and the Times of London when the Steele dossier scandal broke in January 2017.

The Danchenko indictment is particularly telling in detailing how the fake story was inserted into the political ecosystem, starting with Dolan and perhaps others. Danchenko allegedly fed the falsehoods to Steele, a British former intelligence operative hired by Fusion GPS to conduct the research.

Fusion GPS had been retained by Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias, whom law professor Johnathan Turley has called a "potential apex target" of the Durham probe. Clinton supporters in the government slipped the information to sympathetic operatives in the Justice Department, who used it to mount a spying campaign on Trump. And the American news media spread the rumors, which undermined the Trump presidency.

While the Danchenko indictment offers many new details on what was sold as a "well-developed conspiracy of cooperation" between the Trump campaign and Russia, ample evidence of the falsehood of this notion has been available for years.

As early as October 2017, The Post reported that the "Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund research that resulted in a now-famous (Steele) dossier containing allegations about President Trump's connections to Russia and possible coordination between his campaign and the Kremlin."

As was later revealed, the dossier became the basis for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants against Trump aide Carter Page, and unprecedented FBI surveillance on the Trump campaign before the election.

Accusations were a political dirty trick


By 2017, it was clear that "Russian collusion" was just a political dirty trick. But the narrative was firmly embedded in the liberal mind, and the wheels of the Washington investigative apparatus were turning, so the false story lived on.

Its legitimacy was bolstered in 2018 by Pulitzer Prizes awarded to The New York Times and The Washington Post for "deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage" of "Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect's transition team and his eventual administration."

Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation was supposed to have been the grand reckoning for Trump, the comprehensive exposure of the colluders and how they undermined American democracy. Mueller's 2019 report was long on how Moscow attempted to interfere in the 2016 election. But on the matter of collusion with the Trump campaign, Mueller came up empty, and for good reason. The collusion never existed.

Now the Durham investigation is laying bare the extent of the conspiracy to derail the Trump campaign and thwart his presidency. The probe has so far led to the arrest of three people accused of spreading the false Russia conspiracy theory.

This is good news, and hopefully more indictments will follow. It is important to understand how operatives connected to the Hillary Clinton campaign conspired to harness the political system to undermine American democracy and weaken a legitimately elected president.

James S. Robbins, a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors and author of "This Time We Win: Revisiting the Tet Offensive," has taught at the National Defense University and the Marine Corps University and served as a special assistant in the office of the secretary of Defense in the George W. Bush administration. Follow him on Twitter: @James_Robbins

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: No collusion: How Americans were fed a false tale about Donald Trump's 2016 campaign


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH    3 years ago

Wonder if this will EVER soak in to some people's heads...............Several not here it seems.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
1.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1    3 years ago

From the article " Like the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who released his findings in April 2019, the Senate report did not conclude that the Trump campaign engaged in a coordinated conspiracy with the Russian government"

Contacts of course. But no evidence of a conspiracy to collude.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.1    3 years ago

Contacts of course. But no evidence of a conspiracy to collude.

Trump admits son met Russian for information on opponent

From the horse's mouth, so to speak.

conspiracy to collude

LOL!  Where do you come up with this shit?  How can you conspire to collude, when colluding is not a crime?

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
1.1.3  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.1    3 years ago
But no evidence of a conspiracy to collude.

Yea, no secret meeting with Trumps hierarchy at Trumps' Hotel as Trump Jr, Son in Law Jared, and who else, Manafort was it, Trumps' campaign manager occurred now did it, but i;m sure dirt on Hillary and such never came up, as it was all about 'adoptions and humam rights', right? Yet for some reason Trumpstated he had NO CONTACT with Putin ornthe Kremlin all while having in the works, plans to build Moscows largest skyscraper,another Trump Tower of Pissa with hookers, lines, and enuff to sin her , and him, say he were a Dem. Yet Repubs swallow LIES like prostitutes pissing on insecure unstable guys, named Johns and Dons.  Do you recall his polling data being shared with Putins' Russia to point out where Moscow Moles were to Catfish for lost pussies with short whiskers, and possibly feeble minds, cause i do recall having a lot of FUn with those Russian Hacks portraying Joe Average American pushing bullship and no Tugs required, as the Russian Trolls had an E Z pass thatbtookantoll on US All. There was plenty to pull Trump down but the GOP refused to consider all the litter as those pussies just burried and covered up what they would have crucified Obama for, cause their candidate should of been buried inn that litter box, not scating out of the Hern House like a sly Red Fox who just stole candy from some little girl Trump was accused of Raping, or Beauty Pagent that Trump was underwear over seeing while Russian pro's werre over European....   As Trump would be in jail if not for being a sittin potUS that could NEVER stand up to the one who Putin him in office, just like his attorney as he was a codefendant, without any efficient coefficient she's to sees hear ?

  I never heard Trump say a neghative word about Putin. All he did was attempt to reduce sanctions when we were supposed to be imposing more, but Trump was Putins' whore named Don not John , with what 199 or so charged by Mueller who was not tasked with CHARGING Trump, only bringing forth facts that shjould have dumped Trump, butb the GOP refused to put COUNTRY over their PATHETIC PARTY, and it disgusts me and many, cause moral and ethically, do the Repbs have any ?        There was plenty of evidence Trump LIED about connections with Russia, and whyb would he need to LIE if innocent...? As the only message that sends is I'm guiltyb andn Hell bent on LYING my way throiugh and never standing up to our top adversary, because it is quite obvious to Stevie Wonder why the GOP still doesn't see, see ?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.4  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.2    3 years ago

We all know about the "meeting" that was a meeting that was SUPPOSED be shit on Clinton that turned out to be a meeting on the adoption of Russian children.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.4    3 years ago

Donald Trump Jr, Manafort and Kushner intended to collude with a representative of the Russian government to get dirt on Hillary Clinton. That it fell through does not erase their intention. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.6  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    3 years ago

And.........................

The whole bait and switch thing was a farce. And yes, there may have been intent. So what? Collusion is not against the law................nor is intent in this case.

"Email released by Donald Jr. himself showed he had been keen on the meeting because his father’s campaign was being offered potentially damaging information on Clinton.

Donald Jr. said later he realized the meeting was primarily aimed at lobbying against the 2012 Magnitsky sanctions law, which led to Moscow denying Americans the right to adopt Russian orphans."

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
1.1.7  Greg Jones  replied to  igknorantzrulz @1.1.3    3 years ago

You still haven't made a valid point, or provided any relevant facts

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.8  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.6    3 years ago

I thought there was no collusion. 

The truth is , Trump Jr did "collude" with Russians. The fact that a meeting where exchange of damaging information on the Trump campaign's opponent was supposed to occur is evidence of collusion. 

Mueller didnt indict Trump  Jr and Kushner because he could not prove they understood well enough that what they were doing was illegal, and intent was necessary to charge them with conspiracy. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.9  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.8    3 years ago

No collusion John. Never happened............unless Junior started lobbying for the reopening of Americans to be able to adopt Russian children..........which he didn't.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.10  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.9    3 years ago

President’s son releases statement and posts full text of email chain

Donald Trump Jr. went on the defensive Tuesday, releasing a series of emails from last summer with an acquaintance who claimed to have damaging information about Hillary Clinton from the Russia government and to which the president’s son responded, “I love it!”

Trump Jr. tweeted out what he said was the full correspondence with U.K.-based music promoter and tabloid reporter Rob Goldstone shortly after the New York Times published the text of the emails.

It was Goldstone who helped to broker the meeting last June between Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and Trump Jr., the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort — a meeting that has become a major focus of inquiry since it was first disclosed last weekend by the Times.

In one email, Goldstone promised to provide information that “would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father. … This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”

Trump Jr. replied within minutes, “If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”

In a later email, Goldstone offered to set up a meeting with Veselnitskaya, whom he described as a “Russian government attorney.”

It’s unclear what the damaging information might have entailed and there is no evidence that it was linked to the Russian government’s hacking of emails at the Democratic National Committee and their subsequent leaking to the public.

Trump Jr. has dismissed the value of any information Veselnitskaya might have provided. “Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense,” he told the Times on Sunday. “No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”

The emails also show that Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort were included (at least partially) in the email thread about setting up the media.

The president’s eldest son has denied any wrongdoing and said he posted the emails in an effort to be “totally transparent.”

“Media and Dems are extremely invested in the Russia story,” he tweeted earlier on Tuesday. “If this nonsense meeting is all they have after a year, I understand the desperation!”

Here's my statement and the full email chain   pic.twitter.com/x050r5n5LQ — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr)   July 11, 2017

Here is page 4 (which did not post due to space constraints).   pic.twitter.com/z1Xi4nr2gq — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr)   July 11, 2017

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.11  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.10    3 years ago

256

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.12  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.11    3 years ago

The fact that the meeting happened is evidence of collusion. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.1.13  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.12    3 years ago
evidence of collusion.

Your "research" is failing you again.  Despite what you've been brainwashed to believe, collusion is not a criminal offense under US Code.  

 
 
 
goose is back
Junior Guide
1.1.14  goose is back  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    3 years ago
Donald Trump Jr, Manafort and Kushner intended to collude with a representative of the Russian government

No they didn't, had they colluded they would have been charged, STOP with the made up bullshit! 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.15  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.13    3 years ago
collusion is not a criminal offense under US Code.

The Federal Election Campaign Act makes it illegal for a foreign national to contribute to a candidate’s campaign in any American election – federal, state, or local.  Similarly, American candidates can also violate the statute by receiving, soliciting, or accepting foreign contributions.

col·lu·sion
/kəˈlo͞oZHən/
noun
secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others..

AND before you argue it, a contribution is not limited to money, it can be information or favors.  Or even sexual favors from a former porn star.

 
 
 
goose is back
Junior Guide
1.1.16  goose is back  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.15    3 years ago
illegal for a foreign national to contribute to a candidate’s campaign

What contribution?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
1.1.17  Ronin2  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.15    3 years ago

You mean like they did to the Obama and Clinton campaigns? Oh wait that was real money that they received from foreign sources. Don't remember anyone in either of their campaigns being forced to do the perp walk. Or do you think influence peddling is the only form of collusion.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.18  Ozzwald  replied to  goose is back @1.1.16    3 years ago

What contribution?

It's like you guys jump into the middle a conversation without bothering to read the comment thread first.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
1.1.19  igknorantzrulz  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    3 years ago

No, didn't you hear, they were there  meeting on the adoption of Russian Children, as it was an TOP Priority for Trump, you know how he loves young girls, cause rewmeber all thew work done by the Trump Administration to ensure it was made easier ton adopt Russian Children after that meeting ??? Cause me neither. Why would possibly THREE of the Highest ranking memebers with the Most influence on the campaign at the time,  not be there to discuss the adoption of Russian Children ??? People are scarily stupid whenn it comes to this abomination.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.1.20  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.15    3 years ago
Federal Election Campaign Act

What part of the US Code does that fall under?

AND before you argue it, a contribution is not limited to money, it can be information or favors. 

I see you're moving goalposts before anybody has a chance to respond.  At any rate, would that be a favor as in getting information about a candidate then using it for a fictitious investigation?  You know like the Steele Dossier. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.21  JohnRussell  replied to  goose is back @1.1.14    3 years ago

You dont know what you are talking about. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.22  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.13    3 years ago
Despite what you've been brainwashed to believe, collusion is not a criminal offense under US Code.  

I dont care if it is a criminal offense. It happened. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.1.23  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.22    3 years ago

So for you it really is a TDS related delusion that there was something criminal happening.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.24  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.20    3 years ago
I see you're moving goalposts before anybody has a chance to respond.

Wow, you do understand that the term "moving the goalposts" can only be used after the response, correct? 

Just ask many of the posters on the right, here on NT forums.  They ask a question, but when they get an answer they don't like, they "move the goalposts" so they can pretend the answer wasn't valid.

At any rate, would that be a favor as in getting information about a candidate then using it for a fictitious investigation?

Not only do you not understand the term "moving the goalposts", you also appear to be ignorant about the definition of "favor".

favor
1: a kind or helpful act that you do for someone
do/grant a friend a favor = do a favor for a friend = grant a favor to a friend

For example:  We will do you a "favor" and try to hack into Hillary's email as you asked us to.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.25  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.22    3 years ago
Despite what you've been brainwashed to believe, collusion is not a criminal offense under US Code.  
I dont care if it is a criminal offense. It happened. 

I love the right's evolution of denial about Trump's collusion with Russia.

  • It started with, "he never colluded".
  • Then it changed to, "Don Jr. colluded at Trump towers, but Trump himself never knew about it".
  • To finally, "So what, collusion isn't illegal".

And yes, I know I missed several steps between each bullet point.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.1.26  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.24    3 years ago
Wow, you do understand that the term "moving the goalposts" can only be used after the response, correct?

Then what do you call what you attempted to do?  The stipulation you gave isn't in the definition.

 
 
 
goose is back
Junior Guide
1.1.27  goose is back  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.18    3 years ago
It's like you guys jump into the middle a conversation

I am well aware of the conversation, what I am not aware of is this fantasy that some kind Russian conspiracy exists due to this meeting.  You feel there was something of value exchanged, but you can't define it. Please tell us what crime do you think took place?

 
 
 
goose is back
Junior Guide
1.1.28  goose is back  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.21    3 years ago
You dont know what you are talking about. 

Right......there is no Russian collusion or conspiracy but, I don't know what I am talking about. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.29  Ozzwald  replied to  goose is back @1.1.27    3 years ago
I am well aware of the conversation, what I am not aware of is this fantasy that some kind Russian conspiracy exists due to this meeting.

You do know the reason for the meeting, don't you?  What did Don Jr. and Sr. say it was about?

You feel there was something of value exchanged, but you can't define it.

I kow you won't answer, but exactly where did I state that anything of value was exchanged?  Specifically where?

Please tell us what crime do you think took place?

Don't you guys ever read any of the previous comments in the same thread you are commenting in????

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.30  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.29    3 years ago

So what's the crime? Here's what you said earlier

" AND before you argue it, a contribution is not limited to money, it can be information or favors.  Or even sexual favors from a former porn star."

That being said, what crime was committed? None of that shit actually happened. 

jrSmiley_103_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Silent
1.1.31  mocowgirl  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.4    3 years ago
We all know about the "meeting" that was a meeting that was SUPPOSED be shit on Clinton

There were valid reasons to suspect that the Clintons were susceptible to taking bribes to back Russian interests.  

Wouldn't the Russian(s) expect a return on the $500,000 given to Bill?  

FBI surprised Bill Clinton took $500,000 from Russia | Daily Mail Online

When former President Bill Clinton received a $500,000 check from a Kremlin-linked bank in 2010 to give a speech in Moscow it served, to the FBI, as further evidence the Russians had unleashed an influence campaign designed to get access to Secretary of State   Hillary Clinton .

The   Hill newspaper reported Sunday night   that the FBI had been keeping close tabs on a Russian spy network that was trying to inch closer to the Clintons at the dawn of the Obama administration, with one spy – who was eventually arrested and deported – briefly posing successfully as an American accountant and working for a top Democratic donor. 

FBI agents were 'surprised by the timing and size,' the Hill wrote, of Bill Clinton's half-million dollar speech, which has raised conflict-of-interest questions about Hillary Clinton, as the transaction occurred around the same time she was being asked to sign off on a uranium deal, which gave   Russia   20 percent of the U.S.'s deposits.
 
 
 
goose is back
Junior Guide
1.1.32  goose is back  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.29    3 years ago
I kow you won't answer, but exactly where did I state that anything of value was exchanged?

Right here:

1.1.15 Ozzwald   AND before you argue it, a contribution is not limited to money, it can be information or favors. 

Stop beating around the bush, if there is a crime show me the indictment or stfu!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2  Vic Eldred    3 years ago

 Charles Dolan will be next. Durham was slow but steady.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3  Sparty On    3 years ago

If the left doesn't manage to wash it, this will go down as one of the worst cases manipulation and disinformation in the history of the USA.

The crickets are getting louder and louder .......

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @3    3 years ago
The crickets are getting louder and louder .....

They are too busy trying to figure out why lefties are late night people.

I really don't want to tell them.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
3.2  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Sparty On @3    3 years ago
go down as one of the worst cases manipulation and disinformation in the history of the USA.

good thing Trump gets his disinformation from Putin in Helsinki, and not the US intelligence Agencies

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
4  Jeremy Retired in NC    3 years ago
The indictment exposes former Hillary Clinton aide Charles Dolan

I'm betting we may be hearing about Dolan's "suicide" soon.

The fact that "collusion" isn't in the US Code as crime, should tell people this was nothing more than an attempt to oust a duly elected President.  Democrats were so upset that their guarantee candidate lost that they had to do something.  So in Democrat fashion they concocted the "Russia collusion" farce and subsequent hoax after hoax.  

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
4.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4    3 years ago

yea, it was all a fckn hoax, as Trumped said NOTHING when Puitin put bounties on our men and women in harms way

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
4.1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.1    3 years ago
s Trumped said NOTHING when Puitin put bounties on our men and women in harms way

Probably becuase it never happened. 

You are probably confusing it with the bounties Iran put on American soldiers and who were then rewarded by Obama with cash and a path to nukes. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
4.1.2  Greg Jones  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.1    3 years ago

You're seriously uniformed...about everything

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
4.1.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.1    3 years ago

Yes it was hoax after hoax after hoax. 

Just like the bounty BS you mentioned.  We had bounties on our heads going back to at least 2007 during one of my MANY deployments to Afghanistan.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
4.1.4  Ronin2  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.1    3 years ago

Maybe you should speak to Biden, who is suddenly unsure of facts when it comes to the subject. What else is new? 

While he was campaigning for president, Joe Biden treated as fact that U.S. intel agencies had determined Russia had paid the Taliban to kill Americans in Afghanistan.

"I don't understand why this president is unwilling to take on Putin when he's actually paying bounties to kill American soldiers in Afghanistan," Biden said of President Trump, speaking to Kristen Welker of NBC News during the Oct. 22 presidential debate.

Such a definitive statement was questionable even then . On Thursday, it became more clear that the truth of the matter is unresolved.

Last fall, while Biden was a candidate, Pentagon officials told NBC News they could not substantiate that such bounties were paid.

They still have not found any evidence , a senior defense official said Thursday. And the Biden administration also made clear in a fact sheet released Thursday that the CIA's intelligence on the matter is far from conclusive, acknowledging that analysts labeled it "low to moderate confidence."

The White House fact sheet explaining new sanctions over Russian misbehavior made clear that Russia was not being sanctioned over the issue. It used careful language, referring to "reported Afghanistan bounties."

"The administration is responding to the reports that Russia encouraged Taliban attacks against U.S. and coalition personnel in Afghanistan based on the best assessments from the Intelligence Community," the fact sheet says. "Given the sensitivity of this matter, which involves the safety and well-being of our forces, it is being handled through diplomatic, military and intelligence channels."

In intelligence parlance, moderate confidence means the information is plausible and credibly sourced, but not quite corroborated enough to merit a higher rating.

Low confidence means the analysis was based on questionable or implausible information — or information too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid inferences. It can also reflect problems with the credibility of the sources.

It's perhaps the latest example of how much uncertainty pervades the gray world of espionage, in which sources aren't always reliable and intercepted communications don't always mean what they seem to. As former CIA director Michael Hayden has said, "If it was a fact, it wouldn't be intelligence."

Maybe ask Joe why he didn't go after the Russians about it. Seems that the word Intelligence should be removed from many of our government agencies- as well as this administration.

"Let's go Brandon!"

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
4.1.5  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Ronin2 @4.1.4    3 years ago
with

So do you think Russia ands Putin DID NOT REWARD our enimies abroad when they inflicted casualties on US Soldiers ? Cause Jeremy who i'm fairlyb sure retired from the Military stated as much prior. It's common knowledge that Russia is on any side that would be against US, and believe the staement had to be walked back to protect sources, but youb go with yours and Trumps', cause we all know TRUMP WOULD NEVER LIE TO US

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.6  Sparty On  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.3    3 years ago

You'll get no response because he's basically just full of nothing but rhetoric and bullshit.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
4.1.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.6    3 years ago

There seems to be a number of them here.  I do have to admit that it is kind of fun to get them triggered.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.8  Sparty On  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.7    3 years ago

Like stealing candy from a baby ....

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
4.1.9  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.8    3 years ago
ike stealing candy from a baby ....

is that a pastime for you, cause if anyone wishes to put me in my place, i'll be back later, have to deal with something a tad more serious that enlightening the indoctrinated thinking and drinking Kool Aid Consuming always huffing and fuming about their ignorance on what Donald Trump actually did to this once "Great' Country of ourd. Are you goys like a gaggle of giggling girl ostriches ? Cause heads buried in sand for the sewer grate view you guys surely do, have, is disturbing. No one enjoys admitting they Fckd up, but WTF already.  Youn watched Trump LIE to youy all for the past 6 yeasrs or so, yet you still believe him, cause you know nhow important Russian Orphans was and had been to his administration, Leave your heads in your and asz sum more questions based in reality , not NOTHING WAS FOUND LINKING TRUMP TO RUSSIA, cause it just makes you look silly, strung along like a piece of string , dangled to lure you away today and every other, cause i doubt you guys are all as foooled as you speak, you just can't admit you got taken by the poorest excuse of a human being any will see in their lifetimes be elected potUS, cause Trump IS themain reason we nhave a country this divided and his defenders are either too ignorant or too proud, to admit Trump FCKD this country over, LIED through his teeth constantly telling the small mind it where to find it, and i really don't believe you [peep holes will ever see the actual TRUTH, as you cannot handle it, and what it says about one, so for now i'm done, off to help with arrangements for another dead friend, but when i return, condolances i will send to whomever wishes to steal my candy, cause don't find Denial so easy, and with joint in handy probably listening to 'Oh Mandy" as to even  your selves you all do defile and can't be true, and as you make America from what i've Red White, it has also become blue, from ignorance galore, and possibly a few things more...

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.10  Sparty On  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.1.9    3 years ago
is that a pastime for you

Nope, because i'm not a politician or a liberal.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
4.1.11  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.10    3 years ago

so its a post, of present time, cause sometimes on my waztch, i need chronological increments to unwind the wind blown leaves that season my Torrid Autumn till inn i stay, yet i noticed you had not much to say, only addressing my ice breaker with a straight that doesn't flush due to a full house and filled septic system, and four of and you're so kind, can only be beaten when higher ore the irony of a straight flush at the gay bath house where their always happy, and never colluding against us, and with Russia, collusion will always be the defining Max factor not maid to B made up, asz not a makeup artist, cause that's Maybelean... or, maybe knot, cause that's what she likes to Tie in sudden death and get paid, overr time. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.12  Sparty On  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.1.11    3 years ago

Pythagorean, Rumpelstiltskin, Avocado, Stink bug, Alfalfa ........    

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Quiet
4.1.13  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.12    3 years ago

do you have serum for that theorem, rumplestilt4skin, was that learned at the bath house, while feeding a young sgtrapper Avocado's while Alfalfa is gettin something bout Mary, in your hairy, while calling yoiu Darla...?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.14  Sparty On  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.1.13    3 years ago

Later ....  i'm gonna mombo jombo my dogface down to the banana patch .... McRib ..... Asteroids ..... Paniolo .....

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
4.1.15  XXJefferson51  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.7    3 years ago

Lol!  

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
4.1.16  Ronin2  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.1.5    3 years ago

No, this is what Biden now thinks. Did you read the link, even the damn little snippet? Did you look at the source? NBC news- they are definitely pro Trump. 

The incestuous pedophile in Chief fucked up again!

Let's go Brandon!

Will the left ever hold Brandon accountable for one damn thing?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
4.1.17  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  igknorantzrulz @4.1.5    3 years ago
It's common knowledge that Russia is on any side that would be against US,

If Russia is so against the US, then why do they work with the US on various projects like the ISS?

During a deployment to Bosnia my US Field Artillery Battalion trained side by side with Russian Field Artillery.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.18  Sparty On  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.17    3 years ago

Redleg in the house!

I guess Uncle Joe must not have gotten the message that Russian is bad since he helped pave the way for their new pipeline to Germany that will help enrich Russia.

The Trump admin stops that pipeline with sanctions and Biden removes them but Trump is the Russian agent.

Hilarious!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
4.1.19  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.18    3 years ago
Redleg in the house!

I haven't heard that is a long time!!!!!!

I guess Uncle Joe must not have gotten the message that Russian is bad since he helped pave the way for their new pipeline to Germany that will help enrich Russia. The Trump admin stops that pipeline with sanctions and Biden removes them but Trump is the Russian agent.

I wonder how many times I'd have to bash myself in the head with a hammer to get to that level of idiocy.  

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Silent
5  mocowgirl    3 years ago
It is important to understand how operatives connected to the Hillary Clinton campaign conspired to harness the political system to undermine American democracy and weaken a legitimately elected president.

Amen.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6  Vic Eldred    3 years ago

"Wemple also called out MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, who he noted once heralded Steele's "deep cover sources inside Russia," for downplaying the findings in the Danchenko indictment and suggesting the purpose of the Durham probe is to "discredit the whole Russia investigation by arresting various sources for that investigation, to discredit the Steele dossier because so many people have been led to think that was the reason for the investigation."




maddow.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

The day of reckoning is getting close.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Silent
7  mocowgirl    3 years ago

I wonder when the Democrats will demand an investigation into their own coup attempt that played out over 3 years in world media?

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Silent
7.1  mocowgirl  replied to  mocowgirl @7    3 years ago

Why aren't there more liberals demanding an investigation on being used and lied to by their own political party?  

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1    3 years ago

Wow, he unpacks that very well.  

He's very cogent, i thought he was a wastoid.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7.1    3 years ago
Why aren't there more liberals demanding an investigation on being used and lied to by their own political party? 

Maybe because you hate Hillary Clinton and most "liberals" dont ? 

If we get enough people with your attitudes about things Trump will be president again. 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
7.1.3  Ender  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.2    3 years ago

Glad you said most. She has gotten to the point I almost cringe when she pops up.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Ender @7.1.3    3 years ago

I have noticed over the years that she is a liberal who has issues with most liberals.  People like that exist, but it doesnt mean they are right, or wrong. It depends on the facts. 

Donald Trump's campaign colluded with Russia. The rest is semantics. 

I think she hates Hillary. What can you do? 

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Silent
7.1.5  mocowgirl  replied to  Sparty On @7.1.1    3 years ago
Wow, he unpacks that very well.  

Yes, he does.  

Here's another viewpoint from a man worried about how US politics affects the world.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Silent
7.1.6  mocowgirl  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.2    3 years ago
If we get enough people with your attitudes about things Trump will be president again

If the Democrats cannot find an electable candidate, then it won't matter who runs against them.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
7.1.7  XXJefferson51  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1.2    3 years ago
If we get enough people with your attitudes about things Trump will be president again. 

That is America’s fondest hope at this point in time!

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Silent
7.1.8  mocowgirl  replied to  XXJefferson51 @7.1.7    3 years ago
That is America’s fondest hope at this point in time!

I sincerely doubt that.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.2  JohnRussell  replied to  mocowgirl @7    3 years ago

Do you know that you just posted a climate change denier ?

Andrew Bolt is an Australian conservative social and political commentator, and climate change denier.   (2) andrew bolt - Bing
 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7.2.1  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @7.2    3 years ago

Do you know you are a Trump conspiracy theorist? 

So using your logic that makes you wrong about everything.

 
 

Who is online

Thomas
Sparty On


411 visitors