UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
you claimed that they were verified to be authentic. still waiting on that, holocaust denier.
Russia didn't do it
- Thread starter Jimdamick
- Start date
squarepush3r
Well-Known Member
read em and weep son
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_National_Committee_email_leak
Maybe Putin has one of these? possible
Also you need to lay off the booze, you don't seem to be handling it well lately and turning into more of an angry drunk than normal
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
read em and weep son
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_National_Committee_email_leak
Maybe Putin has one of these? possible
Also you need to lay off the booze, you don't seem to be handling it well lately and turning into more of an angry drunk than normal
why are you citing a source that confirms that it was the russians who did the hacking?
doesn't that contradict everything you've been saying?
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
"On December 9, 2016, the CIA told U.S. legislators that the U.S. Intelligence Community concluded Russia conducted operations during the 2016 U.S. election to prevent Hillary Clinton[14] from winning the presidency.[15] Multiple U.S intelligence agencies concluded people with direct ties to the Kremlin gave WikiLeaks hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee."read em and weep son
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_National_Committee_email_leak
Maybe Putin has one of these? possible
Also you need to lay off the booze, you don't seem to be handling it well lately and turning into more of an angry drunk than normal
From the link you posted.
Cuck.
squarepush3r
Well-Known Member
You said you "couldn't confirm" my source, so here is the source of the hack dates.
May 2016
Tell me again how Putin used a time machine to go back in time?
Last edited:
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Milliardo Peacecraft
Well-Known Member
See this is exactly what I mean. Nothing there, just conjecture and pedestrian magic tricks.
"direct ties to the Kremlin" - Yeah, how so? Any elaboration on who those individuals are or what their "direct ties" might be? That is an assertion, dressed up to look like something else.
"conducted operations during the 2016 U.S. election to prevent Hillary Clinton [14] from winning the presidency." - There has to be more detail there. What sort of operation was conducted, was it lawful, and how do you quantify the damage from said operation?
A Saudi Prince tweeted Donald Trump to bow out of the race. Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Alsaud represents the House of Saud, the standing monarchy of Saudi Arabia. He conducted a twitter operation to prevent Donald Trump from winning the presidency. A direct state actor and known sponsor of global terrorism tried to influence the election in Hillary's favor. Where's the outrage, liberals?
Any state media outlet like AJ+ or the BBC having any stated bias against Trump in favor of Clinton is the exact same kind of interference the CIA is wagging their finger at Russia for. I think Moscow did want Trump to win. Is that illegal? No. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily. No more so than Saudi Arabia and Qatar wanting Clinton to win. And I'll be the first to say I'd prefer the Russian endorsement of those three.
HAF2
Well-Known Member
Why don't you call the media's "bias against trump" what it really is? Intellegent eductated people voicing their opion based on his actions and the things he says. The media is reporting what he says and does; the things he says make him look bad. Not the media who reports it.
Milliardo Peacecraft
Well-Known Member
And Clinton earning the animus of the FBI for running a phony foundation (investigation still open and ongoing), destroying state property that was illegally kept on a secret server deliberately to avoid congressional oversight through FOIA, and championing a war that created a failed state in Libya and a neo-nazi coup in Ukraine made her look worse. We're talking about the difference between trite comments about women's genitals and war crimes.
Intelligent educated people like the head-chopper-in-chief of Saudi Arabia? I don't mind them having a bias, but being TOTALLY WRONG with every poll showing a blatant misrepresentation of reality and every pundit manufacturing enthusiasm for Clinton that simply didn't exist, that's a little more than bias. The leaks showed collusion with media outfits like NPR, CNN, MSNBC, et al. with off-the-record dinners for anchors sponsored by the party. Donna Brazile giving the debate questions to Hillary straight from the writer's desk at CNN.
These people were all having their palms greased by DNC money. The media did what they were paid to do: shill for Clinton at all costs. The cost was their credibility, and they lost all of it.
HAF2
Well-Known Member
Clinton isn't president. And anything she has done that irks you does nothing to diminish the things trump does.
Trump looks like a douche bag in the media; because he is a douche bag. No bias, fact.
Big_Lou
Well-Known Member
Milliardo Peacecraft
Well-Known Member
Lost cause? That's funny, I'm pretty sure Trump is being inaugurated in less than a week.
A lost cause would be bitching about the same talking points for months after your candidate conceded. Zing.
potroastV2
Well-Known Member
A "lost cause" would be someone who thinks that the inauguration is in less than a week!
HAF2
Well-Known Member
Same as bitching about Clinton when she isn't even president and deflecting blame from Trump for anything?
A "lost cause" would be someone who thinks that the inauguration is in less than a week!
A dog week, maybe?
Big_Lou
Well-Known Member
To be fair, he is mentally enfeebled. It tends to be the result of inbreeding/fetal alcohol syndrome. Just a small example:A "lost cause" would be someone who thinks that the inauguration is in less than a week!
Sure doesn't sound like an angry, uneducated teenager to me.....
Milliardo Peacecraft
Well-Known Member
My country now losers
Milliardo Peacecraft
Well-Known Member
oh, a week and THREE DAYS OMG gottim xDDDD
that's almost as good as the time Hillary won the election, right lol?
that's almost as good as the time Hillary won the election, right lol?
potroastV2
Well-Known Member
And you're calling US losers! 
