Quote from: Bitbobb on April 27, 2017, 02:55:58 PM

Quote from: GreenBits on April 25, 2017, 07:16:26 PM

Quote from: Bitbobb on April 25, 2017, 05:53:09 PM

Quote from: GreenBits on April 22, 2017, 02:07:41 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on April 22, 2017, 12:59:01 AM

Quote from: GreenBits on April 19, 2017, 02:43:30 AM

.....
Let me.cite a bit for the sake of ease:

December 2016 CIA report....

Problem is, you are not citing anything but the content of an alleged report. You are not citing the report. I'm not even sure it matters if you were.

Everyone's aware that the Demos have obsessively harped on the "Russian angle."

Everyone will agree that the Wikileaks releases, showing the true nature of Hillary and her criminal associates, influenced the election.

But nobody has to agree that the material was given to Wikileaks by the Russians. There does not seem to be evidence for that. You seem to think "someone said it says so in a CIA report" is evidence. It isn't.

I personally find Julian Assauge's story about where the material came from more believable.

Dude, wake the fuck up, man.

I cited Wikipedia, that was clearly stated.

And man, this shit isn't alleged, this is an intelligence report produced by your country. You can not accept the shit, but that does not make it go away. You are free to take the word of an enemy of the state over all intelligence agencies in your country, it speaks to your intellectual stubbornness. I'm not making this shit up. These are the unfortunate facts, I don't want to deal with this shit as much as you.

Remove your fingers from your ears, Spendulus.

Is the entire Intelligence community Democratic?/

I waited to see how this member reacted.. and now I have my answer.

Greenbitz, the cia report you cite has no credibility.. have you read it? Did you know it was a repackaged report from several years ago when there was no election taking place?

It was redone with little change to serve a fake news purpose. So yes our own intelligence agency is making and selling fake news and you bought it.

They can produce such fake news since the smith-bundt act was blocked when the NDAA was reauthorized in concert with executive orders domestically..

..obviously the deep state is pushing the US into a war and Trumps supporters do not want to go

We have some very smart people reading here so please consider posting primary and secondary sources only for review if you wish to be taken seriously.

Calling names and using social pressure tricks will only make you seem like a deep state shill. And BTW the term "deep state" is not a term of endearment... never has been... thanks for playing!

A fan! I'm flattered, and I'd blush, but I'm too fucking dark.

I made allusion to multiple sources..Which, of the many, has no credibility? I didn't think anyone here would be 'intellectually resistant' enough to doubt official reports from multiple government agencies, on the same topic, which have all reached the same conclusion. And not pussy ass agencies like the EPA, I'm talking letter agencies that can make you dissappear.

So you are telling me the multiple reports by multiple agencies have no credibility, and are all based off of old evidence before the election? And if the aim is to see if they interfered in the election, would all the actions in question not have occurred before the election? So, they could, you know, influence it?

See, I don't believe in that deep state shit, at least as y'all do. Hell yes there are agencies that exist to supress public interest, secrecy is required for certain agencies to be able to do their jobs. They are no saints, however. But the idea of some monolithic shadow government controlled by intelligence agencies is some paranoid bullshit. That being the case, every branch of government would have its own version of 'the deep state' instead of just the enforcement arm. The 'deep state' is the military industry complex, it exists to make money and protect the state, in that order. They don't want to turn you gay with flouride, or whatever tin foil poppycock is being sold as news on Breitbart and InfoWars.

And the hilarious thing is, why would the 'deep state' have an issue with Trump? His policies would lead to the civil unrest that Hillary, Obama and Soros want. Can't move to a police state if everyone is happy, you need strife to make the policy changes necessary. Kinda like the shitshow 45 has brought to bear.

I used to be into conspiracy theories more than you, I promise you. Then, I woke up.

Wake up.

Edit: Had a few fingers of an AMAZING bourbon, came up with 'Obama, Hillary, Soros and the Jews will form Voltron and take over the planet, ushering in a reign of terror'.

The visual of Big O and H Dog forming the head (I don't know what the fuck Soros looks like, from conservative descriptions, he should.look like Emperor Palpatine, I think) is fucking hilarious to me at the moment.

yes if the 19 agencies are all basing their conclusions upon an old report that shows nothing of substance then yes they are wrong. And since you do not cite any specifics then I can only conclude that this is the report that you are mentioning..

It is an obvious attempt to demilitarize the sitting president which is a treasonous act. So they do it in these backhanded ways. And these forums are the incubator to see what the public will and will not accept. Thanks for playing!

Well, it isn't quite so obvious for those of us that read the 'regular news'. It looks like Russia wanted him to win, and started a psy op /disinfo campaign to increase his chances to win. When you really on trusted, vetted news sources that have been around for decades like MSNBC, CNN, you get alot of information on Russia because this is the biggest shit since Watergate, just with Flynn's proven, known involvement at this point. We both know damned well 19 intelligence agencies didn't regurgitate that information; they don't even all have the same investigative capacities, as they all exist in distinct, separate spheres of influence.
Even if they did collaborate, so? If anything, the consensus by such a diverse group of actors should speak to the certainty of the conclusion. OUR ENTIRE INTELLIGENCE community.

So, the Air Force Intelligence, Army Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, Coast Guard Intelligence, Defense Intelligence Agency, Energy Department, Homeland Security Department, State Department, Treasury Department, Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Marine Corps Intelligence, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, National Security Agency, Navy Intelligence and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence all decided to risk their reputations forever, to demilitarize the president? Who, in his ineptitude, has already given them (some) pretty much free reign to do as they see fit? Who has increased their budgets (some) by 30 percent? And duh, shit like the the NGIA didnt launch a complete, independant investigation; you collaborate with your peers, to save money and time (small government is good, no)?

Seems like Trump is the best thing that's happened to military spending since Bush. Why in the world would they want to undermine Trump? Recycled investigation be damned, even if it was, they felt the need to represent it again. I don't know how a foreign government hacking the emails of our political bodies sits with you, but it feels like an act of aggression to me. Not 'nothing of substance'. And nothing of this magnitude is done half ass, Russia didn't meddle just to play around. Would the CIA waste time playing with someone's election? Yes, if they wanted to influence it. Otherwise, why bother? Why waste effort to no effect? Are you telling me one of the foremost Intelligence agencies in the world paid hackers to dick around on email servers, for the LULZ?

Maybe they were looking for more Pizzagate evidence (kill yourself if you believe in Pizzagate).

And if anything, the IRS watches this forum. Especially the 'I'm going to protest taxes out loud' threads.

How far will you divorce reality, to defend your vote? I'm not saying that as an asshole, that's a legit question.