What do you think will be the ultimate outcome of the Russia investigation?

[Lionhearte0]

Whatever point you thought you were making ended at "who probably".

Do point out where the timeline of events was different in any way that what I outlined.

[Gestopft]

The GOP isn't going to impeach Trump if they lose the midterms or if he becomes unpopular. Unlike the very small chance that he gets mired in a scandal damaging enough that he is forced out of office, there is zero chance that he is impeached over being shitty at his job.

Ehhh, I was about to go to bed when I typed that. I think GoP's willingness to turn on him will relate to his popularity. He still has to do something that they deem impeachable for them to pull the trigger, but losing voter support will lower the bar of what they deem impeachable. I'm not saying it's likely, but I think we need to keep in mind that most Republican politicians have never particularly liked Trump.

Remember, though, that the atmosphere in the current Democratic party is a direct result of the Reagan losses. The New Democrat era of Bill Clinton still permeates the whole structure.

What are you suggesting that implies as it pertains to this?

Nothing, because nothing will be proven. How did this all start anyways?

It started because the DNC didn't have proper security and John Podesta's password was literally "p@ssword" and got """""hacked"""" by someone who probably wasn't even Russian but used a Russian IP address (which anyone can do) so that when the DNC paid another company (not the FBI) to look at their servers they saw the fingerprints of a Russian IP address (again, which any dumbass could do) and told the FBI that, which somehow means "all 17" intelligence agencies (which turned out to be a Fake News story by the NYT and was actually 4 agencies) agreed was Putin's doing and all of that is somehow evidence that Russia interfered in our election and therefore Trump is Hitler.

If you actually believe that, you probably have the IQ of an inbred Potato (:

Translation: "I trust a serial liar and grandstanding narcissist more than the US government"

[Wikiy]

Something already "happened". He got a Special Prosecutor sicced on his orange ass. Like that is actually something. I'm not sure on what planet "nothing will happen to him" is a thing, when, six months ago, he was a highly controversial President with a lot of accusations, and today, because Mueller is on the job, he is officially under Federal Investigation for Obstruction and his campaign and Administration under investigation for collusion.

On the latter point - some of his lackeys may be charged with collusion/attempted collusion (or whatever the actual crimes involved may be), but not he himself. That's why he had the lackeys go around and do everything for him. And none of them will admit that they were told by Trump to do it. They'll say they did it without his direction. In any case, actually proving collusion may be impossible. For example, what may be needed is some record of a conversation where a Trump lackey and Russia-connected person made a deal where Russia hacks the DNC, while the Trump side promises to eventually lift sanctions or something of the sort. I doubt that record will swim up eventually.

Ultimately, this leaves the House voting on whether to impeach Trump for attempted collusion through his surrogates. Now, people are actually debating whether this is a crime, which means the House will be divided too. And what, the House needs a 2/3 majority to impeach him? With most of them being Republicans? Yeah, it's not really going to happen, at least not because of the Russia thing.

As for obstruction of justice... Mueller will present memos from Comey, and maybe something similar that is testimony-based as evidence that Trump attempted to obstruct justice. But again, all the Trumpkins think he didn't cross any lines an outright reject Comey's testimony. This gives Republicans a cover to not vote for impeachment on this point.

They might do it to make Pence president, though. I'm not even sure that's an upgrade.

[Pterodactylus]

The fact free universe would have evolution and climate change in cause both are not facts.

My first comment was about how I knew you were a member of the cult of ignorance just from your profile pic, but thanks for all of that confirmation in subsequent posting.

[want my Slimjim]

My first comment was about how I knew you were a member of the cult of ignorance just from your profile pic, but thanks for all of that confirmation in subsequent posting.

What confirmation?

[Skroe]

What confirmation?

You actually posted that the Civil War was about taxation. Like that thought exists between your ears and beyond your eyes. And then you typed it.

. . .

/slap

I'm sorry but no. Just. No.

And so you don't forget.

/slap.

*points*

No.

[Realitytrembles]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.7f6038fc724f



If Trump tried to do it, it would further the Obstruction of Justice case against him. Just like it did with Nixon, who tried the same thing.

I'm thinking it would happen as he sees the axe about to come down, and he pardons all the people in his campaign/administration and then promptly resigns. Basically, without any offer of doing so for their silence; just as a way to flip the bird at his enemies.

[Orbitus]

They should be only teaching mathematics. Everything else what they teach they think is right is indeed a joke. Evolution nor climate are real. They need to research better in what it is the mysteries earth and the history if it aswell as the universe. The creationist research is a good start on finding that out.

- - - Updated - - -



There was nothing in the emails that suggest anything in the first place. Even if there was it would be a good it's time we and Russia become alliances, they know what's right.

Except the fact that it was a Russian Lawyer, representing the Russian government, trying to give information on Hillary Clinton. Russia isn't an ally to ANYONE. Wait, I didn't read the first reply to someone else.

YOU FUCKING THINK THAT EVOLUTION IS FALSE? I though Sweden was an educated fucking country, you are proving them wrong. You also think creationism is a good place to start? Jesus fucking christ wow. I haven't seen someone so ignorant since Cherise claimed that Infowars was 90% truth. But you just took the fucking cake.

[NYC17]

Do point out where the timeline of events was different in any way that what I outlined.

The timeline? Who gives a shit about the accuracy of the timeline when you're assuming and "probably" asserting things and actions that may or may not have happened?

Haha, you are seriously misinformed on how coherent thoughts, ideas, and arguments actually work.

[Felya]

Nothing, because nothing will be proven. How did this all start anyways?

It started because the DNC didn't have proper security and John Podesta's password was literally "p@ssword" and got """""hacked"""" by someone who probably wasn't even Russian but used a Russian IP address (which anyone can do) so that when the DNC paid another company (not the FBI) to look at their servers they saw the fingerprints of a Russian IP address (again, which any dumbass could do) and told the FBI that, which somehow means "all 17" intelligence agencies (which turned out to be a Fake News story by the NYT and was actually 4 agencies) agreed was Putin's doing and all of that is somehow evidence that Russia interfered in our election and therefore Trump is Hitler.

If you actually believe that, you probably have the IQ of an inbred Potato (:

You just compared US intelligence tracking IPs, to something anyone can do. Then... called someone else an idiot... WTF? On what planet is your assertion of FBI being thwarted by spoofing an IP that anyone can use beyond reproach?

Edit: Quoted the wrong person.

[Travis B]

They should be only teaching mathematics. Everything else what they teach they think is right is indeed a joke. Evolution nor climate are real. They need to research better in what it is the mysteries earth and the history if it aswell as the universe. The creationist research is a good start on finding that out.

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[Lionhearte0]

The timeline? Who gives a shit about the accuracy of the timeline when you're assuming and "probably" asserting things and actions that may or may not have happened?

Haha, you are seriously misinformed on how coherent thoughts, ideas, and arguments actually work.

So provide information proving what I stated was not factual. If you were paying attention during the election and not just regurgitating what Fox or CNN is spewing, you would know what I said is, in fact, accurate.

You just compared US intelligence tracking IPs, to something anyone can do. Then... called someone else an idiot... WTF? On what planet is your assertion of FBI being thwarted by spoofing an IP that anyone can use beyond reproach?

Edit: Quoted the wrong person.

The FBI didn't review the DNC servers. So how would they know to begin with?

Translation: "I trust a serial liar and grandstanding narcissist more than the US government"

Translation: "I trust the media even though they lied and sold us Bush's lie about WMDs in Iraq." (:

[Enthusiastic Steward]

The ultimate outcome will hinge on the 2018 mid-terms, is my guess.

[NYC17]

So provide information proving what I stated was not factual. If you were paying attention during the election and not just regurgitating what Fox or CNN is spewing, you would know what I said is, in fact, accurate.



The FBI didn't review the DNC servers. So how would they know to begin with?



Translation: "I trust the media even though they lied and sold us Bush's lie about WMDs in Iraq." (:

You provided it yourself with your "probably" qualification. "Probably" is not factual. Tighten up.

End of lesson.

[want my Slimjim]

You actually posted that the Civil War was about taxation. Like that thought exists between your ears and beyond your eyes. And then you typed it.

. . .

/slap

I'm sorry but no. Just. No.

And so you don't forget.

/slap.

*points*

No.

Yeah no. That's what It really was about. You can believe what big brother tells you, noone here is fooled.

[Lionhearte0]

You provided it yourself with your "probably" qualification. "Probably" is not factual. Tighten up.

End of lesson.

This entire Russiagate story is filled with "probablys", so by your own argument the whole thing is Fake News.

For anyone else reading the exchange between NYC17 and myself, what they are doing is called deflection. A fallacy one resorts to when they don't have an argument.

[NYC17]

This entire Russiagate story is filled with "probablys", so by your own argument the whole thing is Fake News.

For anyone else reading the exchange between NYC17 and myself, what they are doing is called deflection. A fallacy one resorts to when they don't have an argument.

Once again, you are incorrect.

Don't appeal to the masses to try and bolster your rather pathetic argument. You tried to refute the "probably", which you claim to be all Russiagate is, by beginning your counter with a "probably". See, the problem isn't that the facts are in dispute, it's that you just have no idea what you're talking about or what argument you're trying to make. The hilariousness of that is equaled only by your obliviousness of having done it.

Tighten up.

[Lionhearte0]

Once again, you are incorrect.

Don't appeal to the masses to try and bolster your rather pathetic argument. You tried to refute the "probably", which you claim to be all Russiagate is, by beginning your counter with a "probably". See, the problem isn't that the facts are in dispute, it's that you just have no idea what you're talking about or what argument you're trying to make. The hilariousness of that is equaled only by your obliviousness of having done it.

Tighten up.

You're about 5 posts in and still haven't refuted my point that an IP address isn't a geographical indicator of the hacker's origins. Are you new to the internet? I don't mean that in an insulting manner, but generally speaking older / inexperienced users often don't realize how a simple IP switch works, or even means.

[NYC17]

You're about 5 posts in and still haven't refuted my point that an IP address isn't a geographical indicator of the hacker's origins. Are you new to the internet? I don't mean that in an insulting manner, but generally speaking older / inexperienced users often don't realize how a simple IP switch works, or even means.

This has already been debated to death. Guess what? There are entire companies who have devoted resources to tracking the source. You know who they know more about this than? [/I][/B] Lionhearte0 of mmo-champ fame. Saying something could have happened because it's technically possible, does not counter anything to any meaningful degree. It's simply not a valid argument. There's no substance to it, and as such your nonsense is dismissed.

You're more than welcome to do a rather simple Google search, or even search my posts as I have repeated posted their information. You are presenting something new. It's the same old shit, yet you demand to be taken more seriously because you made a claim based off ignorance and stupidity.

That's not how this works.

[Lionhearte0]

This has already been debated to death. Guess what? There are entire companies who have devoted resources to tracking the source. You know who they know more about this than? [/I][/B] Lionhearte0 of mmo-champ fame. Saying something could have happened because it's technically possible, does not counter anything to any meaningful degree. It's simply not a valid argument. There's no substance to it, and as such your nonsense is dismissed.

You're more than welcome to do a rather simple Google search, or even search my posts as I have repeated posted their information. You are presenting something new. It's the same old shit, yet you demand to be taken more seriously because you made a claim based off ignorance and stupidity.

That's not how this works.

"Go through 9,000 of my posts to find the link."

Is that how you think this works? No, the burden of proof lies with you, since you're making a claim.

But don't worry, I'll do the work for you.

Here's one article addressing the source of the DNC hack - from our friends at the Book of Bezos.

Relevant part:

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.

This is the blanket statement which validity is being called into question. The same dying, legacy media that sold us the lies of WMDs being in Iraq are now saying Russia hacked the election. Okay, where's the proof?

The answer seems to lie with three companies: Crowdstrike, Mandiant, and ThreatConnect - three Information/Network Security companies who, as James Comey testified under oath, were the ones responsible for reviewing the hack (whether that means the server or the emails that were leaked are not quite clear).

Later in July and after the convention, the first stolen emails detrimental to Hillary Clinton appear on WikiLeaks. A hacker who goes by the moniker, Guccifer 2.0, claims responsibility for hacking the DNC and giving the documents to WikiLeaks. A leading private cyber security firms including Crowdstrike, Mandiant and ThreatConnect review the evidence of the hack and conclude with high certainty that it was the work of APT 28 and APT 29 who are known to be Russian intelligence services.

APT28 is well known, although APT29, known also as CozyBear, does not have definitive proof with ties to Russia, as Crowdstrike claims themselves, although that's neither here nor there in itself.

On the surface, this seems like definite proof and that Trump is LITERALLY Hitler.

But hold on. What did my initial statement say? Probably? The word you got so worked up about?

Well, the CEO of CrowdStrike himself is claiming that they may not know absolutely if Russia was involved.

“We talk about having high confidence, but there’s no absolute in cybersecurity,” CrowdStrike Chief Executive George Kurtz said in an interview Monday on Bloomberg TV. Kurtz said his firm’s report speaks for itself, “and people can read into that whatever they like.”

Here's the video of the CEO, George Kurtz, stating so on Bloomberg TV.

But as he stated, people can read into that whatever they like. What does that mean? People can just presume that it's Russia and not question it further? Ridiculous.

Also, I would like to point out from the earlier WashingtonPost article, that it is slightly outdated/wrong. As seen here:

The CIA presentation to senators about Russia’s intentions fell short of a formal U.S. assessment produced by all 17 intelligence agencies. A senior U.S. official said there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.

Factually incorrect, as stated by Politifact:

Four out of the 17 were involved in the January assessment about Russia: CIA, FBI, NSA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which is an umbrella agency that oversees all 17 organizations.

And no, an argument about the ODNI representing all 17 would imply that they did the work for them, which would mean the 17 Intelligence Agencies are largely ineffective and in need of disbanding. Each works separately but are moderated, or rather, reviewed, by the ODNI. Though this fact is neither here nor there, we do find that this already shows misleading reporting by certain individuals, one that has constantly been parroted by spokesmen and certain officials.

The only reason I pointed this all out was because of misleading clickbait titles and people, much like yourself, who refuse to even do an ounce of thinking for themselves and start demanding heavier proof. These individuals are literally eating the same garbage that the Media continuously spewed over the past several decades, and you're not going to question it? Why, because your tie is blue?

That all said, your argument, whatever it once was, is gone. Your argument from authority "Companies know more than you" is gone - as the CEO of CrowdStrike admitted they may not know for sure. Your fallacies are nothing more than that, just deflection and distraction.