TrumpPutingate III: the beginning of the end

#9,676
#9,676
TennTom said:
I find it comical that you now have so much faith in the intelligence agencies to properly investigate that those on your side have been bashing for the last year. Good stuff.
Click to expand...

Its also comical that you don't have much faith in the ABCs to properly investigate this when you have been depending on them for other stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,677
#9,677
TennTom said:
Yeah, I bet the RNC wouldn't have any compromising info on their server. :eyeroll:


Look, they chose to let firms they trust to do the work and that they maintain control over the investigation. There's nothing unusual about that.
Click to expand...

bahahahahahahahahahahahaha


Its okay your honor, we investigated ourselves and found ourselves not guilty. not only are we not guilty but we know who really did it. trust us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,678
#9,678
The strangest thing to me is this, the FBI relied on a contractor (CrowdStrike) retained by the DNC’s lawyers , good ole Perkins Coie (also Clinton and Obama lawyers).

Here, the Clinton campaign and the DNC retained the law firm of Perkins Coie; in turn, one of its partners, Marc E. Elias, retained Fusion GPS. We don’t know how much Fusion GPS was paid, but the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid $9.1 million to Perkins Coie during the 2016 campaign (i.e., between mid-2015 and late 2016).

A friend draws my attention to an intriguing coincidence.

In its capacity as attorney for the DNC, Perkins Coie – through another of its partners, Michael Sussman – is also the law firm that retained CrowdStrike, the cyber security outfit, upon learning in April 2016 that the DNC’s servers had been hacked.

Interesting: Despite the patent importance of the physical server system to the FBI and Intelligence-Community investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election, the Bureau never examined the DNC servers. Evidently, the DNC declined to cooperate to that degree, and the Obama Justice Department decided not to issue a subpoena to demand that the servers be turned over (just like the Obama Justice Department decided not to issue subpoenas to demand the surrender of critical physical evidence in the Clinton e-mails investigation).

Scandals Collide Dossier DNC Server Perkins Coie | National Review
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,679
#9,679
TennTom said:
Yeah, I bet the RNC wouldn't have any compromising info on their server. :eyeroll:

Look, they chose to let firms they trust to do the work and that they maintain control over the investigation. There's nothing unusual about that.
Click to expand...

They being the DNC of course. They also didn't want three federal government looking at it even after they requested to.

I'll give you another analogy. This it's like your house getting broken into and turning away the cops when they show up at your doorstep.

"Nope, got a private investigator looking into it. Just accept whatever they find out."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,680
#9,680
LouderVol said:
bahahahahahahahahahahahaha


Its okay your honor, we investigated ourselves and found ourselves not guilty. not only are we not guilty but we know who really did it. trust us.
Click to expand...
How would they be found not guilty when they weren't being investigated criminally? You need some coffee or something to clear your head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,685
#9,685
TennTom said:
I'm not the one pushing conspiracy theories here. That would be you and your shadows.
Click to expand...

I'm not pushing a conspiracy theory either. I just asked a simple question.

Why did the DNC not allow any federal agencies to look at the evidence themselves?

Your answer of "because they contracted it out" doesn't hold weight here. The federal government would have come in and done for free what the DNC contracted out. And, again, wouldn't you want the federal level agencies to see FOR THEMSELVES the evidence of the crime that was committed?

You can't (won't) answer those questions because you know there really, really isn't a good answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,686
#9,686
Grand Vol said:
I'm not pushing a conspiracy theory either. I just asked a simple question.

Why did the DNC not allow any federal agencies to look at the evidence themselves?

Your answer of "because they contracted it out" doesn't hold weight here. The federal government would have come in and done for free what the DNC contracted out. And, again, wouldn't you want the federal level agencies to see FOR THEMSELVES the evidence of the crime that was committed?

You can't (won't) answer those questions because you know there really, really isn't a good answer.
Click to expand...
Do you really think the RNC would want government intelligence investigators nosing around in their servers? Or any Fortune 500 company? The answer is no. Just stop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,688
#9,688
TennTom said:
Do you really think the RNC would want government intelligence investigators nosing around in their servers? Or any Fortune 500 company? The answer is no. Just stop.
Click to expand...

would you be fine with the RNC turning away the feds?

I am betting now is the time you choose not to be partisan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,689
#9,689
TennTom said:
Do you really think the RNC would want government intelligence investigators nosing around in their servers? Or any Fortune 500 company? The answer is no. Just stop.
Click to expand...

If the RNC believed they had been hacked by a foreign intelligence service, or any Fortune 500 company for that matter, yes, I'd safely assume they'd want just about everyone looking at it they could. Because the more evidence they have and more backing they have makes for a far better case.

Unless they were hiding something of course...

You say "just stop" because you just don't have a good answer. Quite pathetic really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,690
#9,690
LouderVol said:
would you be fine with the RNC turning away the feds?

I am betting now is the time you choose not to be partisan.
Click to expand...

I'd bet he's about to give the good old excuse of "I can't be reasonable with you idiots" or something along those lines.

Won't answer questions without looking like a mouthbreathing idiot, but will claim we are stupid instead.
 
#9,694
#9,694
Grand Vol said:
I'd bet he's about to give the good old excuse of "I can't be reasonable with you idiots" or something along those lines.

Won't answer questions without looking like a mouthbreathing idiot, but will claim we are stupid instead.
Click to expand...
LOL, nice. Maybe I was wrong about you.
 
#9,695
#9,695
Grand Vol said:
So, why won't you answer the question?

Why did the DNC not allow the federal government investigating agencies access to those servers? They requested it, but were turned down.

Two simple questions.
Click to expand...

Because CrowdStrike (Google affiliated company) isn't biased at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,697
#9,697
TennTom said:
You aren't making any sense. Good luck with those neural misfires.
Click to expand...

how can Russia/hackers be found guilty if the feds aren't allowed to do their investigation?

if its as bad as everyone has acted why aren't they wanting it investigated?
 
#9,698
#9,698
ajvol01 said:
Since you're in the know, why did Eric Schmidt resign?
Click to expand...
He's 62 and has more money than he and his kid and grandkids will ever spend? He's focusing on Alphabet and philanthropy is what they're saying.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top