Сделаем Америку снова великой! Trump - Russia megathread

[SeattleGriz]

They had proof way earlier. Mike Rogers of NSA fame went and told Trump 10 days after he was elected what was going on. Why do you think he packed up Trump Tower and left. It was after this meeting Trump tweeted that Obama wiretapped him (702 queries)

In addition, FISA court judge Rosemary Colyer even issued a report on the shenanigans. Of course you can tell it was all fake anger because nothing happened.

To add insult to injury, you then got the new FISA court Judge Boasberg created another report about two years later as an update and essentially said the same things Colyer said.

Now to tie this into a nice little bow, you had Kevin Clinesmith was the one who lied on Carter Pages FISA application and who approved it? Judge Boasberg. So when Boasberg finally gets Clinesmith before him on charges of lying on the FISA, what did he do? Did he throw the book at him? Fuck no. He slapped him on the wrist. Clinesmith is already in the good graces of DC law again.

Trump simply isn't part of their club.

I remember the Obama wiretaps, just not sure of the timelines. I honestly have forgotten so much about that mess. WOuld be nice if Skelly or some booger-eater would make a timeline for those of us that didn't follow this stuff with all our time and energies.

The Conservative Treehouse baby! You knew it was coming.

The easy recap:

1) Obama admin caught using NSA to "spy" on political opponents.
2) After being caught and losing access to domestic spying, they created Russia collusion with bogus FISAs and now could surveil via 2 hop rule.
3) Mueller brought in to clean up mess and hound Trump.

[AZGrizFan]

So……given that Trump’s “conspiracy theory” about being wiretapped in the Trump tower ends up being true, and the Russiagate conspiracy AGAINST him proving mostly false, does it change anybody’s mind about even the possibility that me might have been right about the 2020 elections? Or is he still just a kook who happened to be right about those two instances?

[CID1990]

So……given that Trump’s “conspiracy theory” about being wiretapped in the Trump tower ends up being true, and the Russiagate conspiracy AGAINST him proving mostly false, does it change anybody’s mind about even the possibility that me might have been right about the 2020 elections? Or is he still just a kook who happened to be right about those two instances?

Just because Hillary id corrupt as fuck and her campaign invented pretty much all of this doesnt mean Trump isnt a kook. He lost the 2020 erection


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AZGrizFan]

So……given that Trump’s “conspiracy theory” about being wiretapped in the Trump tower ends up being true, and the Russiagate conspiracy AGAINST him proving mostly false, does it change anybody’s mind about even the possibility that he might have been right about the 2020 elections? Or is he still just a kook who happened to be right about those two instances?

[UNI88]

So……given that Trump’s “conspiracy theory” about being wiretapped in the Trump tower ends up being true, and the Russiagate conspiracy AGAINST him proving mostly false, does it change anybody’s mind about even the possibility that me might have been right about the 2020 elections? Or is he still just a kook who happened to be right about those two instances?

Just because Hillary id corrupt as fuck and her campaign invented pretty much all of this doesnt mean Trump isnt a kook. He lost the 2020 erection

Was Trump capable of an erection in 2020 without a little blue pill?

[SeattleGriz]

So……given that Trump’s “conspiracy theory” about being wiretapped in the Trump tower ends up being true, and the Russiagate conspiracy AGAINST him proving mostly false, does it change anybody’s mind about even the possibility that he might have been right about the 2020 elections? Or is he still just a kook who happened to be right about those two instances?

I think Trump only lost in as much as bullshit ballots were dumped in to beat him. There is a huge amount of "slop" in the voter rolls that allows many people to vote that are actually dead.

For example, my mother has not voted in a Washington election in over 12 years and has been passed away for almost two years and I am still getting ballots for her to this day.

I've said it before. With all the fighting the Secretary of States are doing to prevent actual audits, you get the feeling none of them wants to look bad by having the process exposed. Typical government inefficiency.

[UNI88]

I think Trump only lost in as much as bullshit ballots were dumped in to beat him. There is a huge amount of "slop" in the voter rolls that allows many people to "vote" that are actually dead.

For example, my mother has not voted in a Washington election in over 12 years and has been passed away for almost two years and I am still getting ballots for her to this day.

Take away the bullshit ballots and any other fraudulent votes and Trump still would have lost.

[SeattleGriz]

I think Trump only lost in as much as bullshit ballots were dumped in to beat him. There is a huge amount of "slop" in the voter rolls that allows many people to "vote" that are actually dead.

For example, my mother has not voted in a Washington election in over 12 years and has been passed away for almost two years and I am still getting ballots for her to this day.

Take away the bullshit ballots and any other fraudulent votes and Trump still would have lost.

Sorry, no. The statistical analysis and the canvassing by independent groups shows that's not the case.

[SDHornet]

Take away the bullshit ballots and any other fraudulent votes and Trump still would have lost.

Sorry, no. The statistical analysis and the canvassing by independent groups shows that's not the case.

Yeah this was covered in the other thread(s). Let's not distract ourselves in this thread from the never ending entertainment that is jellybelly's stupendous fail in pedaling this narrative for 4 years.

[Ibanez]

So……given that Trump’s “conspiracy theory” about being wiretapped in the Trump tower ends up being true, and the Russiagate conspiracy AGAINST him proving mostly false, does it change anybody’s mind about even the possibility that me might have been right about the 2020 elections? Or is he still just a kook who happened to be right about those two instances?

He's still a nutcase that lost the 2020 election. Even with all the illegal ballots voting for him he still lost to an addled-minded sniffer.

[CID1990]

Um

There’s only room for one booger eating conspiracy theory in this thread and the 2020 election one ain’t it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

Um

There’s only room for one booger eating conspiracy theory in this thread and the 2020 election one ain’t it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah Ibanez! Take your booger eating conspiracy to the proper thread. I'm excused because UNI moved my post. He's my friend.

[SDHornet]

[JohnStOnge]

Oh.

Another bogus right wing conspiracy theory. The filing does not say anybody was spying on Trump or that anybody was "wiretapped." See https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/14/us/p ... ussia.html.

When John H. Durham, the Trump-era special counsel investigating the inquiry into Russia’s 2016 election interference, filed a pretrial motion on Friday night, he slipped in a few extra sentences that set off a furor among right-wing outlets about purported spying on former President Donald J. Trump.

But the entire narrative appeared to be mostly wrong or old news — the latest example of the challenge created by a barrage of similar conspiracy theories from Mr. Trump and his allies.

Upon close inspection, these narratives are often based on a misleading presentation of the facts or outright misinformation.

This is not what it's being presented as being by right-wing media.

[JohnStOnge]

False. Or at least it's false to say that Durham's filing alleges that. The depicted Post article is misinformation.

[kalm]

Oh.

Another bogus right wing conspiracy theory. The filing does not say anybody was spying on Trump or that anybody was "wiretapped." See https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/14/us/p ... ussia.html.

When John H. Durham, the Trump-era special counsel investigating the inquiry into Russia’s 2016 election interference, filed a pretrial motion on Friday night, he slipped in a few extra sentences that set off a furor among right-wing outlets about purported spying on former President Donald J. Trump.

But the entire narrative appeared to be mostly wrong or old news — the latest example of the challenge created by a barrage of similar conspiracy theories from Mr. Trump and his allies.

Upon close inspection, these narratives are often based on a misleading presentation of the facts or outright misinformation.

This is not what it's being presented as being by right-wing media.

Shhh…quiet. Let them have their jollies. People like Trump and Hillary don’t get in trouble.

But Benghazi!?!

[JohnStOnge]

Here is the New York Post article: https://nypost.com/2022/02/13/hillary-c ... nnections/. Here is the opening paragraph:

Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign paid an internet company to “infiltrate” servers at Trump Tower and the White House in order to link Donald Trump to Russia, a bombshell new legal filing alleges.

I think it's reasonable to say that using quotes means the Post is saying it's quoting the legal filing. Here is the filing:

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 35.0_1.pdf

Do a find on the word "infiltrate." You will not get any hits. In fact, if your "Find" function works like mine it will indicate 0 occurrences when you get to "infi."

All the motion is about is potential conflicts of interest on the part of the defendant.

[JohnStOnge]

From the story at https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/14/us/p ... ussia.html:

The conservative media also skewed what the filing said. For example, Mr. Durham’s filing never used the word “infiltrate.” And it never claimed that Mr. Joffe’s company was being paid by the Clinton campaign.

Most important, contrary to the reporting, the filing never said the White House data that came under scrutiny was from the Trump era. According to lawyers for David Dagon, a Georgia Institute of Technology data scientist who helped develop the Yota analysis, the data — so-called DNS logs, which are records of when computers or smartphones have prepared to communicate with servers over the internet — came from Barack Obama’s presidency.

“What Trump and some news outlets are saying is wrong,” said Jody Westby and Mark Rasch, both lawyers for Mr. Dagon. “The cybersecurity researchers were investigating malware in the White House, not spying on the Trump campaign, and to our knowledge all of the data they used was nonprivate DNS data from before Trump took office.”

Conservatives are chasing vapors again. I probably shouldn't say "conservatives" anymore. What we now call the "conservative movement" is really the "nut job" movement.

[JohnStOnge]

What the heck. I'll post the Politifact assessment of it. Yes I know many who call themselves "conservative" don't like Politifact because it confronts them with the truth and the truth hasn't been working out real well for them in recent history. But I'll post it anyway:

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ion-claim/

A lot to quote there. But I think this pretty much sums it up:

A recent filing in one of two cases stemming from special counsel John Durham’s investigation spawned a flurry of false and misleading claims from pro-Trump pundits.

Durham has charged an attorney linked to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign with making a false statement to the FBI. The filing added new details about a 2017 meeting between the attorney and the CIA. It alleged that the attorney relayed concerns raised by another client, a technology executive, about internet traffic data from servers associated with the White House and Donald Trump’s business.

Durham’s filing never alleged what Watters falsely claimed: that Clinton paid hackers to spy on Donald Trump before and during his presidency, break into his computers, and then fraudulently frame him for colluding with Russia.

[AZGrizFan]

Mother of pearl. Slow down, homeslice.

[Skjellyfetti]

Durham's filing did not say what y'all wanted it to say.

Durham's investigation has gone on ~50% longer than Mueller's. And, this thread is ~50% about the Deep State conspiracy that has much less to show for it.

[CID1990]

Boy the booger eaters sure are triggered

Like I said in this same thread right here years ago…

We’ll just wait and see, won’t we?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

Analjelly feels very proprietary about “his” thread.

[CID1990]

Analjelly feels very proprietary about “his” thread.

A Vanity Fair “splainer” article about a NYT article drops, Hillary points to it, and 2 hrs later Reek pops up with talking points.

You’d think the little ankle biter would have learned his lesson by now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Analjelly feels very proprietary about “his” thread.

A Vanity Fair “splainer” article about a NYT article drops, Hillary points to it, and 2 hrs later Reek pops up with talking points.

You’d think the little ankle biter would have learned his lesson by now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What does Hot Air say about it?