CIA and FBI: Russia Interfered in US Election

[HamBone]

Seriously...the Democrats need to prove President Trump and the Russians "hacked" the election or STFU.

President Trump needs to prove that President Obama "wiretapped" him...or he needs to STFU.

I swear, it's like I'm playin' cards with my brother's kids or somethin'. You nerve-wrackin' sons-a-bitches.

[Corsair]

Lets have an independent investigation, otherwise this isn't going away.

I'll be interested to hear what Comey says in the public hearing on Monday. Feinstein looked stunned behind the microphone yesterday after her confidential briefing.

[DreadNaught]

Seriously...the Democrats need to prove President Trump and the Russians "hacked" the election or STFU.

President Trump needs to prove that President Obama "wiretapped" him...or he needs to STFU.

I swear, it's like I'm playin' cards with my brother's kids or somethin'. You nerve-wrackin' sons-a-bitches.

(Fat) Billy Bob Thorton in Tombstone!! Johnny Tyler, what are you doing with that Shotgun?

[HamBone]

Lets have an independent investigation, otherwise this isn't going away.

I'll be interested to hear what Comey says in the public hearing on Monday. Feinstein looked stunned behind the microphone yesterday after her confidential briefing.

Even if there is one and the President was cleared...it isn't going to go away. That's not how this works...that's not how any of this works.

[Corsair]

That's not an excuse to not do an investigation.

[HamBone]

That's not an excuse to not do an investigation.

You're right...but, IMHO, the stuff the Democrats have been putting forward isn't a reason to have one. I'm sure you disagree though.

[DreadNaught]

That's not an excuse to not do an investigation.

Democrats just want an investigation for the headlines it will create.

As I've stated many times you don't get to launch an independent investigation without some precedence of actual EVIDENCE. If the IC and journalists are not able to find ANY evidence of collusion than what is the precedence here?

You had 2.5 months while Obama was still POTUS to find something, anything that would justify an independent investigation. Now you're claiming the FBI and others in IC are not trustworthy enough to investigate the matter on there own without assigning a special independent investigation.

You just want to continue the smear campaign b/c you know if there was real collusion between Trump and Russia something would've been uncovered by now.

[Corsair]

Lets just say I disagree with your assessment, DN.

I don't see it as a smear campaign, I see it as a legitimate issue... and Burr and Nunes have already shown explicitly that they are not impartial and Sessions has already recused himself.

I'm continually surprised by republicans who don't want to find out how to prevent future interference of our elections simply to protect "their guy". Let's not forget that it isn't disputed (even by the so-called president) that Russia had a multi-faceted operation to influence our elections. Don't we want to know to what extent they were successful and how we can prevent it in the future?

BTW, investigations like this don't take 50 days. There is no time limit for information gathering. There is no "it would have come out by now" and your assumption of that is childish.

[DreadNaught]

Lets just say I disagree with your assessment, DN.

I don't see it as a smear campaign, I see it as a legitimate issue... and Burr and Nunes have already shown explicitly that they are not impartial and Sessions has already recused himself.

I'm continually surprised by republicans who don't want to find out how to prevent future interference of our elections simply to protect "their guy". Let's not forget that it isn't disputed (even by the so-called president) that Russia had a multi-faceted operation to influence our elections. Don't we want to know to what extent they were successful and how we can prevent it in the future?

BTW, investigations like this don't take 50 days. There is no time limit for information gathering. There is no "it would have come out by now" and your assumption of that is childish.

I'm sure your interest in an independent investigation is not based on partisanship at all and you just after truth and justice. How noble of you.

[Corsair]

Lets just say I disagree with your assessment, DN.

I don't see it as a smear campaign, I see it as a legitimate issue... and Burr and Nunes have already shown explicitly that they are not impartial and Sessions has already recused himself.

I'm continually surprised by republicans who don't want to find out how to prevent future interference of our elections simply to protect "their guy". Let's not forget that it isn't disputed (even by the so-called president) that Russia had a multi-faceted operation to influence our elections. Don't we want to know to what extent they were successful and how we can prevent it in the future?

BTW, investigations like this don't take 50 days. There is no time limit for information gathering. There is no "it would have come out by now" and your assumption of that is childish.

I'm sure your interest in an independent investigation is not based on partisanship at all and you just after truth and justice. How noble of you.

Do you have a reason to believe that an independent investigation would slant more towards partisanship or less towards partisanship?

[DreadNaught]

I'm sure your interest in an independent investigation is not based on partisanship at all and you just after truth and justice. How noble of you.

Do you have a reason to believe that an independent investigation would slant more towards partisanship or less towards partisanship?

Not what I said, I stated partisan Democrats want to continue to smear Trump and an independent investigation would be a tool to do so, which is why they are pressing for it.

In the event you get your wish and there is such an investigation I'm sure it would an honorable person heading it. But that wouldn't stop the Dems and MSM from politicizing it for there own gain.

You don't get to launch an independent investigation against the POTUS because your parties candidate didn't win. Find a reason/basis (like EVIDENCE) to use as precedent to request such an investigation. Right now there is none.

[bucfanclw]

You don't get to launch an independent investigation against the POTUS because your parties candidate didn't win.

I love the fact that you still actually believe that nonsense.

[Corsair]

Do you have a reason to believe that an independent investigation would slant more towards partisanship or less towards partisanship?

Not what I said, I stated partisan Democrats want to continue to smear Trump and an independent investigation would be a tool to do so, which is why they are pressing for it.

In the event you get your wish and there is such an investigation I'm sure it would an honorable person heading it. But that wouldn't stop the Dems and MSM from politicizing it for there own gain.

You don't get to launch an independent investigation against the POTUS because your parties candidate didn't win. Find a reason/basis (like EVIDENCE) to use as precedent to request such an investigation. Right now there is none.

Again, we disagree.

[DreadNaught]

You don't get to launch an independent investigation against the POTUS because your parties candidate didn't win.

I love the fact that you still actually believe that nonsense.

You want an investigation launched based on NO evidence of collusion despite the FBI, CIA, countless journos and god knows who else looking for ANY inkling of evidence. NOTHING has been found, or as former CIA Director and Clinton ally stated yesterday "not even a spark". Then you come here under the guise of legitimacy pretending you are looking out for something other than the interests of your own political ideology.

Just be honest with yourselves. If the situation was reversed would you be banging the table for an independent investigation into Hillary? Of course not... And her camp HAS WAYYY more connections to Russia than Trump or his 'associates do. So spare us w/ your BS...

[DreadNaught]

Not what I said, I stated partisan Democrats want to continue to smear Trump and an independent investigation would be a tool to do so, which is why they are pressing for it.

In the event you get your wish and there is such an investigation I'm sure it would an honorable person heading it. But that wouldn't stop the Dems and MSM from politicizing it for there own gain.

You don't get to launch an independent investigation against the POTUS because your parties candidate didn't win. Find a reason/basis (like EVIDENCE) to use as precedent to request such an investigation. Right now there is none.

Again, we disagree.

I fear it won't be the last time.

[bucfanclw]

I love the fact that you still actually believe that nonsense.

You want an investigation launched based on NO evidence of collusion despite the FBI, CIA, countless journos and god knows who else looking for ANY inkling of evidence. NOTHING has been found, or as former CIA Director and Clinton ally stated yesterday "not even a spark". Then you come here under the guise of legitimacy pretending you are looking out for something other than the interests of your own political ideology.

Just be honest with yourselves. If the situation was reversed would you be banging the table for an independent investigation into Hillary? Of course not... And her camp HAS WAYYY more connections to Russia than Trump or his 'associates do. So spare us w/ your BS...

Aww... do you need a tissue? I think you need a tissue. It much suck being the victim so often.

[DreadNaught]

You want an investigation launched based on NO evidence of collusion despite the FBI, CIA, countless journos and god knows who else looking for ANY inkling of evidence. NOTHING has been found, or as former CIA Director and Clinton ally stated yesterday "not even a spark". Then you come here under the guise of legitimacy pretending you are looking out for something other than the interests of your own political ideology.

Just be honest with yourselves. If the situation was reversed would you be banging the table for an independent investigation into Hillary? Of course not... And her camp HAS WAYYY more connections to Russia than Trump or his 'associates do. So spare us w/ your BS...

Aww... do you need a tissue? I think you need a tissue. It much suck being the victim so often.

[deltbucs]

Just be honest with yourselves. If the situation was reversed would you be banging the table for an independent investigation into Hillary? Of course not... And her camp HAS WAYYY more connections to Russia than Trump or his 'associates do. So spare us w/ your BS...

You can point at the other team all you want, but that doesn't take away the fact that Trump straight up appointed Exxon Mobil's CEO to ****ing Secretary of State!...all so they could get this massive oil deal done with Russia. You know why Obama put the sanctions in place, right? Putin invades Crimea and takes control of a **** ton of oil (mainly from an area of Black Sea). The US (and most of the modernized world) sanctions them and won't buy the oil...since they just straight up invaded and stole the land/oil. Now Trump appoints Exxon Moil's CEO so we can lift the sanctions and reward Putin for invading another country and stealing their resources by buying them from Putin.

I mean, what the ****ing ****, dude? How can you be okay with your boy doing this?

[Rocker]

I agree with your point Delt. However, I'm more upset with selling American uranium to Russia than I am with America buying Russian oil.

[deltbucs]

I agree with your point Delt. However, I'm more upset with selling American uranium to Russia than I am with America buying Russian oil.

I honestly don't know what I'm more upset about. Either one is infuriating. But to say "America buying Russian oil" is oversimplifying at best. "America buying oil Ukrainian/Crimean oil from Russia after Putin invaded them to take possession of the oil", is more accurate. If it were just America buying Russian oil, then yeah, I'd be much more upset about selling American uranium to Russia than buying the oil.

[Rocker]

I agree with your point Delt. However, I'm more upset with selling American uranium to Russia than I am with America buying Russian oil.

I honestly don't know what I'm more upset about. Either one is infuriating. But to say "America buying Russian oil" is oversimplifying at best. "America buying oil Ukrainian/Crimean oil from Russia after Putin invaded them to take possession of the oil", is more accurate. If it were just America buying Russian oil, then yeah, I'd be much more upset about selling American uranium to Russia than buying the oil.

I simplified my post. From a human rights standpoint; I'm ****ing furious about how the US responded to that chain of events. Politically, it's hardly worth arguing; as imho Obama's foreign policy stance was terribad on so many occasions.

Have you ever listened to John Bachelor?

[deltbucs]

I honestly don't know what I'm more upset about. Either one is infuriating. But to say "America buying Russian oil" is oversimplifying at best. "America buying oil Ukrainian/Crimean oil from Russia after Putin invaded them to take possession of the oil", is more accurate. If it were just America buying Russian oil, then yeah, I'd be much more upset about selling American uranium to Russia than buying the oil.

I simplified my post. From a human rights standpoint; I'm ****ing furious about how the US responded to that chain of events. Politically, it's hardly worth arguing; as imho Obama's foreign policy stance was terribad on so many occasions.

Have you ever listened to John Bachelor?

I have not. The only political talk radio that I listen to is the POTUS channel on Sirius/XM. It's not bad for unbiased or equally bias talk when it comes to shows like Steele & Ungar...which I like.

[Rocker]

I simplified my post. From a human rights standpoint; I'm ****ing furious about how the US responded to that chain of events. Politically, it's hardly worth arguing; as imho Obama's foreign policy stance was terribad on so many occasions.

Have you ever listened to John Bachelor?

I have not. The only political talk radio that I listen to is the POTUS channel on Sirius/XM. It's not bad for unbiased or equally bias talk when it comes to shows like Steele & Ungar...which I like.

He's a late night guy; came on 9PM-1AM when I lived in DC. Thing I enjoyed about his show was that he acted more as a moderator for the experts he'd bring on. Spent a lot of time focusing on stories out of Russia and China. Really enjoyed the segments on Ukraine when Crimea was going down. I think he re-airs his shows in podcast form.

[Corsair]

Comey's hits:

There is no evidence to support that Obama had Trump's wiretaps, those claims were made up.

There is an ongoing investigation into Trump ties with Russians agents, and it has passed the high standard to initiate a counterintelligence investigation. In fact, this investigation has been ongoing since July.

[Corsair]

Listening to the GOP questions in this hearing vs Dem questions is further proof that we need a special prosecutor, independent council, etc.

[Babeinbucland]

Seriously...the Democrats need to prove President Trump and the Russians "hacked" the election or STFU..

Looks like they decided to go with proving trump and the Russsians hacked the election

[Corsair]

Reuters is now reporting that TIllerson is skipping a NATO meeting he was scheduled to go to next month (his first NATO meeting) and instead plans to go to Russia to speak to Putin.

This is sending a horrible message to our allies. This is going bad very quickly.

[HamBone]

Seriously...the Democrats need to prove President Trump and the Russians "hacked" the election or STFU..

Looks like they decided to go with proving trump and the Russsians hacked the election

Hacked the election? Admiral Rogers stated there was no evidence that a single vote was changed...didn't he?

[Mountaineer Buc]

Looks like they decided to go with proving trump and the Russsians hacked the election

Hacked the election? Admiral Rogers stated there was no evidence that a single vote was changed...didn't he?

That's the part of this that pisses me off. The Russians could have hacked all sorts of stuff, put out all kinds of fake news, done it all while coordinating with the Trump campaign on the daily and STILL couldn't have possibly altered a single vote.

Clinging onto this Russia thing let's corporate Democrats sit there and ignore the fact that a very large portion of the population does not like them and will not vote for them.

It hands total control of government to the Republicans and is sheer madness.

[HamBone]

Hacked the election? Admiral Rogers stated there was no evidence that a single vote was changed...didn't he?

That's the part of this that pisses me off. The Russians could have hacked all sorts of stuff, put out all kinds of fake news, done it all while coordinating with the Trump campaign on the daily and STILL couldn't have possibly altered a single vote.

Clinging onto this Russia thing let's corporate Democrats sit there and ignore the fact that a very large portion of the population does not like them and will not vote for them.

It hands total control of government to the Republicans and is sheer madness.

I prefer one party have the White House and another party control the Congress...that way neither side can push their agenda through.