The new, and apparently seminal report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on putative Russian meddling in the 2016 US presidential election has finally been released, providing a 25-page glimpse into the thinking that underpins an allegation which remains the sum total of US electoral politics in recent months.
This appears to be the report that the Obama Administration was heavily pressured to proffer by Congressional Democrats as a way to end public skepticism of the allegations, and attempts to do so, as officials have been for weeks, by declaring Russian intervention, hacking, and what have you as an absolute confirmed fact.
But like the previous reports, evidence to substantiate the claims is wholly lacking. The big difference in the new report is an acknowledgement that they aren’t providing any evidence of what they are alleging, complete with a disclaimer at the top of every page that as a declassified report it “does not include the full supporting information” that some secret other report might.
The evidence-free version was still sufficient to get ample media coverage once again echoing the claims unquestioned, declaring that Putin was driven by “hatred” and warned to “denigrate Secretary Clinton.” The report’s claims largely amount to a collection of the myriad allegations in an easy-to-follow form, but break no new ground.
Once again, the report claims the DNC hacker Guccifer 2.0 was actually the Russian military, providing no evidence for this, and claims DCLeaks.com was the military as well. They claimed the military directly gave WikiLeaks the documents because Putin thought WikiLeaks’ history of accuracy was valuable. No evidence for any of this, but the report did at the very least note that all the WikiLeaks documents appear to have been authentic.
Beyond a very brief rehash of the narrative, and a claim that Putin was bent on destroying the Western liberal order simply to spite Hillary Clinton, the report then gets into by far the deepest section, alleging state-funding media outlet RT America “disparaged” Clinton and wanted Trump to win.
Interestingly in that it’s the part with the most meat, this “propaganda” section is also the part with the most glaring contradiction, arguing on the one hand that Putin was just anti-Clinton and warmed to Trump relatively late in the campaign while at the same time arguing that Russia had hired a bunch of “social media trolls” and that they were all pro-Trump from before the primaries began.
The report also faults RT for covering the Clinton email leaks so extensively, presenting that as proof of their “consistently negative” attitude toward the candidate. US media outlets, of course, largely focused on Clinton’s allegations of Russian plots above the actual email releases.
As has often been the case in previous reports, this one begins with its conclusion and then figures out ways in which the facts could conceivably fit that conclusion. For example, the report notes that Putin did not publicly praise Trump ahead of the election, and then concludes this was a savvy move on the part of the Kremlin because they thought it would “backfire” and hurt Trump’s election chances.
With no existing publicly available evidence for the allegations, and no new evidence emerging from today’s report, it’s not clear that anyone new will be convinced, and President-elect Donald Trump appears to have the same doubts he always did. Ultimately, the only ones likely to be happy with the report are those who were already sold on the allegations before.
Moreally of the same bull-$hit from the most morally corrupt regime on this planet… Seymore Hirsch says that children were screwed in the ass and raped in front of their MOTHERS by personaEl at U.S. administered detention facilities in Iraq. Thesee acts were
used to pressure the mothers and the children to tell the interrogators where their men were..
Support the troops!
We have discussed that mistake before and we didn’t get anywhere when I said that you don’t support troops who are acting like criminals. Now, too late you get bent because some kids were done by the troops.
Would they have enjoyed it or would they have closed their eyes, spread the kids’ legs, and thought of old glory?
regardless, support the troops!
you don’t support troops who are acting like criminals…’
Don, well said. I found that when a person, or entire groups
of humanity are demonized in the racist corporate media, it’s easy for a gullible USG public to turn a blind eye to atrocities.
I remember an encounter with an individual who probably
couldn’t piss and chew gum at the same time, who wanted to berate me for supporting Code Pink. It didn’t matter to him
that Bush lied the USG into a bogus war that slaughtered one
million humans and destroyed Iraq.
He told me, ‘We liberated (them) people!’
That ‘hero’ who shot-up the airport yesterday was probably convinced that he was in Iraq to ‘help’. That ‘service’ made him sick enough to come back home and lay his ‘experience’ on the mall trotters.
Thank you EME. Outside of the US we know the score. As I suggested above, they will support their troops no matter what they do to the people in foreign lands as long as they can pretend it’s in the name of old glory. Sick
This is antiwar.com and this is the place to tell it!
luv from Canada.
Don, I don’t see this situation getting any better in the future.
Apparently, stooges in the USG Congress waited until December 23, 2016 to introduce drivel they called the: ‘Countering Foreign Propaganda & Disinformation Act’, which Obama signed into law.
This ‘Act’ is suppose to protect (us) citizens living in the USG from foreign and domestic ‘propaganda’. It appears if someone has an opinion’ contrary to the bullshit we get from the establishment, they might be open to scrutiny from the dreaded ‘Thought Police’.
This is just another attempt to keep the masses uninformed, while going after alternative media outlets such as: Counterpunch, and Antiwar.com.
It wasn’the the troops stupid. It was the U.S. policy and done by contractors… Yes. Support the troops, because they are victims of these illegal policies too. But not when THEY commit war crimes…
Most of the raped were boys by men… Is that your preference….????????
Trump is adamant that the Russians didn’t influence the election.
Check!
Trump declines to say whether or not he accepts the intelligence briefing.
Check!
He’s just about there, as predicted, and he will become a jelly fish soon. Anybody have enough confidence in Trump to argue that?
luv from Canada.
Baloney.
It’s the truth Hetero, right straight from the mouths of Americans. So is that the extent of your argument?
Is not, is not, is not. My ears are plugged, I can’t hear you, nyah, nyah.
HURRR
Don your conclusions are as reliable as the average US Intel Brief 🙂
The problem with the briefing is that it’s not made of stuff that is deniable or falsifiable. One could only point to the underlying ideology and beliefs which are needed to make sense of it. Any “fact” in the secret briefing would still need a rather complex context of interpretation to make sure.
This is difficult and leaves one only the question it and, possibly, clean up the organization afterwards. It’s not a real “debate” as such. It all starts with belief or trust in the underlying structure.
Then again, politics is a game. If Trump can gain anything by accepting this report, he’d surely do the jelly fish thing. But there’s little on offer here. Constant opposition has brought Trump his popular support. Why cave in now? Keeping everyone on edge: it’s one of the arts of his deal making. Not showing the cards, making it impossible to predict the next move. You’ll see more of that.
He’s admitted the Russians hacked. All he’s holding to now is an attempt to save his vanity by having it known that the hacking didn’t influence the election in his favour. Who fu–ing cares about his vanity?
luv from Canada.
Lovely Don, you should perhaps try to read with more patient and attention. Trump did *not* accept the conclusions of the intelligence report. If he did I’d like to see it in writing. But he did acknowledge the world + dog (eg China and others too) were engaged in hacking (incl DNC) and does not seem to doubt Russian hackers were part of that crowd. But he still is questioning the scope and exclusivity of the Russian role and the links to the Kremlin. He’s implying political cherry picking.
And from what I’ve seen of the reporting, the connections are indeed quite vague. According to e.g. Assange and other independent top security experts, it seems very likely that many different parties had access to the same sources over time, considering the faulty security.
More likely is that Russians with various intelligence ties got to the information but others did so too. The news of Clintons irresponsible handling of material would have drawn them like flies by now.
Trump now ends up walking the fine line between dismissing and accepting the various conclusions of the report. He accepts Russians infiltrated at some point but dismisses the significance and attempt to tie it solely to the Kremlin. And indeed the global hacking Wild West is just too complex for such simple attribution. And not only Trump claims that: many credible analysts are saying this based on the so far publicly known parts of the story.
That’s pretty surreal Jan!
But it’s o.k. to spin it any way you like as far as I’m concerned. I’m just going to maintain that the spooks gave Trump the vanity lift he needed and in return Trump gave them the admission of Russian hacking.
If you’ve intended to say anything that differs from that then please make it clear. It really does sound to me like there’s nothing left to debate anymore. As if it really made any difference anyway. It was only a Dem plot all along. There’s just no way any US president would have any intentions of cooperating with the Russians/Putin. Even if Trump wanted to, he would be stopped from doing so and causing damage to his country’s agenda.
Here’s another one for you to interpret if you like:
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/intelligence-officials-brief-skeptical-trump-russian-hacking-n703971
Not that much left to disagree, it’s now all about degrees and semantics. As for the NBC article you link to, it just substantiates what I was telling you: even if Russian hackers collected emails and sold them or leaked them, Trump appears still openly convinced they were not the only one. Not sure what or who is surreal here though!
Take care, JanD
Thanks Jan! It’s going to take a long time for Trump supporters to come to terms with this betrayal because this was about all that was left. Bearing in mind that probably 9/10’s of the lowlife scum who voted for Trump could care less about improved foreign policy. They’re likely the worst hawks of the lot.
And otherwise, it’s not important because all that is important is that Trump kept his promise o friendly relations with Russia. There’s little doubt now that he has no intention of doing that. And in fact as I said you now have a president who is infinitely more dangerous than Hillary would have been. That is due to his choices, starting with mad dog Maddis.
Yo, Mr. Moderator. Didn’t you boot this “Trump is a sociopath” clown some time back? Here he is, back again with his no content content. Please boot him again.
Sure jeff, you bozo Trump apologist who can’t stand opinions that differ from your ignorance. Try to have them all silenced.
Even though now we know jeff, that I was right all along about Trump caving to the spooks. Get out more kid because you aren’t going to hear any of the regulars admitting the truth around here for a while. See my post at top for the Trump quote. Then eat some crow before you go on your banning campaign again.
luv from Canada.
Jeff,
When and if he violates the guidelines, I will. Being in the manic phase of some kind of schizophrenic episode is not a violation of the guidelines.
If I was sure on what the rules are that I’m not to violate then I would steer clear of doing that. If my schizo harping on Trump caving is within the rules then that’s all I’m interested in right now. And of course we can take it as a given that Raimondo was wrong to ‘build on’ Trump’s chances even though he was sort of for what’s it, Johnson or the doctor?
The damage he’s done is now pretty evident because Trump can sit back with his vanity safe and be the figurehead. The damage of course is in his selection of Maddis and the others. At least Hillary was predictable and wouldn’t have allowed such dangerous hawks to gain power. And then too, the racist factor that played so heavily against Obama wouldn’t have continued to be a factor.
p.s. if the word ‘racist’ is against the rules then let me know and I’ll censor it out for you.
I hope we’re coming a little closer to an understanding. You know how I’ll be making my contributions now and they won’t be conflicting with your agenda. And in fact, I don’t even really know your agenda anyway because you act more like a moderator with not a lot of opinions. Also, if you can regard my comments as schizo and convince others of that then where’s the problem?
luv from Canada.
I have plenty of opinions — but those opinions have nothing to do with my actions as moderator. I’m a janitor in the debate room. Mopping the floors is my job. Debating is my hobby. So, back to debate:
My recollection is that you spent all last year taunting the sTrumpets and telling them to get used to the idea of Clinton winning as she was certain to do.
Now you’re back with a whole bunch of other predictions and opinions and apparently have either forgotten, or hope others have forgotten, that you spent the entire last year being pretty much completely wrong about pretty much everything. So I guess my question is: Why should anyone think that your new collection of predictions and opinions is likely to be any more sound than the last one?
First off, what makes Trump Canada’s business?
That aside, he’s doing exactly what he said he would do. He accepted the outcome of the election, as he said he would , because he won. Right now he’s busy,- ‘draining the swamp’ in a grand , old American style – every Democratic appointee as ambassador is being recalled. Including one who has only finished redecorating his new ambassadorial residence in Ottawa. and barely finished presenting his bona fides to ‘the Kid’ Hopefully he got to take in a pseudo-football game.
Trump ‘s treating Democratic party appointees like Obama treated Russians (and should have treated Republicans).
Oops, that wasn’t a good comparison , was it?
Trump’s phony claim of friendly relations with Russia is the world’s business. That’s what makes it Canada’s business and my business.
Trump’s now caved and admitted that the Russians did hack. Now the rest becomes nothing but more US bullshit of both parties trying to spin it as a win.
The Dem spin is saying that Trump admitted the hacking because it’s true.
Trump’s spin and the patsies who support him, will spiin it in saying that he ‘will’ push for better relations with Russia.
The truth is, there will not be any better relations with Russia and the situation will become even more dangerous.
You knew that didn’t you?
“As has often been the case in previous reports, this one begins with its conclusion and then figures out ways in which the facts could conceivably fit that conclusion.”
That’s conspiracy theory 101. These assholes should do their next book report on Big-Foot. Only they’ll probably find more evidence on that one.
We know comrade, we know. You’re acting like you’re just finding out now that you’re going to be screwed up the a-s by your country again.
Brace yourself comrade, because this is going to be like none other as far as pain you’re about to feel in the ol backdoor, so to speak. This time it’s your hero Trump who you had at least some confidence in for saving the farm.
luv from Canada.
This is cheap McCarthyite ass hattery.
Grow some dignity, Princess.
Today Trump caved and admitted the Russian hacked. Eat your crow now a–hole.
His words are quoted in my post at the top of the page.
luv from Canada.
Sure he did, Donny. Sure he did.
Only Bangladesh and darkest Africa don’the have hackers… All modern states have oppositions and opportunists.
You and john wells sure aren’t very bright on that ‘comrade’ thing are you. Dohhhhhh!
How in the hell would you know Don, being from a foreign country?
Why are you using a US military term like “comrade”; yes the Russkis use that term probably more than the American military, but the term has become more in vogue by our American military over the past 20 years or so.
John and john, I’m not using any term you idiots. I’m using comrade hermit’s name. Dohhhhhh! Now why not stop being pro-war cheerleaders and learn to appreciate my efforts at condemning US warmongering throughout the world.
luv from Canada.
Do you actually read any of comrade’s comments? Trump is hardly his hero.
Like Your any betta off up there. You had that lying POS Bush buttocks buddie Neoconservative skumbag torturing child soldier 16 yr old kid Omar Kadir…… Canada ONCE was a place where things were relatively honest and governance was conducted to benefit Canadians.. It’s distant past now as your new masters ran things st the behest of the Queen and her Neocon fancy boys… Off in faroff Afghanistan securing that Caspean carbon energy for the NWO Cabal and the deep state manupilators
I have never defended my country or government when it has done evil or wrong. And yes, most of what you say about Canada is either true or becoming true.
But you need to know that you come off like a petulant child defending your own country by making the comparison. You don’t want to make it sound that way. Restructure your comments so they will be criticism of Canada where criticism is due. I have lots of time to hear it and will even comment on it positively if you when you bring up worthwhile points. Yes, you are right about Harper, Canada’s own war criminal.
Otherwise, Canada is largely following the US lead, not leading. And Canada’s government has shown only minimal resistance to US war efforts. Trudeau tried in the beginning with bring home our 6 bombers which were a token political contribution at best. But he was immediately embarrassed and cowed into replacing them with troops as a symbolic gesture of support. That was disappointing.
luv from Canada.
Hard to believe that somebody professorial, in any US ‘School of International Relations’ would slip somebody a 4.0 GPA for this kind of ‘inductive reasoning’ – depending, of course, on the size of her tits.
The report also indicates “high confidence” (FBI, CIA) versus “moderate confidence” (NSA). “Confidence” ordinarily is not a word qualified by adjectives–either you have it or you don’t. Then consider the FBI’s version is entirely based on the research of crowdstrike, which is employed by the DNC. Further, the report continually favors Hillary Clinton with no attention whatever to what the leaks revealed.
Now on the “healthy skepticism versus disparagement” by Clapper he needs to clarify to all the nodding heads. “Disparagement” means what he and the others are doing to Russia. “Healthy skepticism” is what Jason and those like him are doing. To “disparage” the intell agencies would mean running them down as incompetent hacks, but Trump is not doing this–he’s questioning the specific case here. In fact, today in response to the intell briefing he praised these agencies, while promising to improve them as a top priority. All this demonize Russia language is wrapped in the flag and calling on the deep reservoirs of those Americans still conditioned to hate the Soviet Union, such as John McCain.
—–
“Confidence” ordinarily is not a word qualified by adjectives–either you have it or you don’t.
—–
In US military and intelligence parlance, it is always scalar qualified by adjectives. The higher the confidence, the more trustworthy the sources or effectual the methods used to reach the conclusion.
That is, if one not very well connected source with a spotty record of reliability says X, the report on X will express low confidence.
On the other hand, if a very well connected source with a long-time record of complete reliability says X, and if there are communications intercepts or whatever to corroborate that source, the report on X will express high confidence.
Correct.
Unfortunately this only works if said agency is actually doing its job, as opposed to writing its reports around preconceived conclusions.
“There is High Confidence that Saddam is in bed with Les Qaeda” etc.
Thanks, Thomas. What would “high” mean in terms of the FBI crediting crowdstrike, hired by the DNC? (see link and comments in the link) As I understand it, the FBI did no investigation itself, which might account for how slow it was in buying this story. So this “high” from the FBI here indicates crowdstrike is reliable, given possible prejudice in terms of who hired it? This seems a plausibility issue.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/01/new-intelligence-report-adds-no-evidence-of-russian-hacking.html#more
Well, I was only commenting on the scalar nature of “confidence” as the term is used in military/intel communications, not the quality of any given assessment.
What we’re talking about here is not really military or intelligence communications, it is POLITICAL communication. I have to assume that the “confidence” level will be set based on what the people publishing that communication want us to believe, and that what they have good reason to believe is true is of secondary importance at best.
That’s not to say that there couldn’t have been any Russian state-sponsored hacking. Sure, there could have been. But so far those claiming so have been either unwilling or unable to prove their claim in public.
But the point is that whatever “confidence” level they claim, it can still be crap. The WMD in Iraq was loudly proclaimed to be of the highest confidence.
Oops. We bad…
Not really. The entire miliatry brass at least down to the level of Major or equivalent would have been smart enough to know that it was all a scam. A lot of American civiiarns would have known too even thought they can’t admit it because it’s too painful for them to accept the half million civilian deaths that will send them all to hell. (as if it exists)
The majority of Canadians I talked with knew fully well the WMD’s didn’t exist. That’s more like the truth.
This game the US and Trump are playing is no different. Trump campaigned on false pretenses and now he’s backtracked. Only his vanity is at stake now.
luv from Canada.
How does the confidence degree of the report published without some (significant?) detail, compare to Assange’s 1000 percent confidence that his sources weren’t Russian, or associated with Russians?
The answer is that US intelligence has a high level of confidence in Assange’s reports. If not 100% then very close to that. But they express a very low degree of confidence in his reports. The US also has a high degree of confidence that Assange is receiving information from the Russians.
We can rise above the bullshit Mikronos, even though most Americans can’t. None of this had anything to do with the Russians hacking. They’ll hack whatever they are able to hack and the US will do the same, only more often and more thoroughly.
luv from Canada.
the latest: Actually Trump continues to say that hacding didn’t influence the election results.
But he’s declinig to say whether or not the Russians hacked the elections. He does say that Russia didn’t hack the ballot boxes and he’ll stay firm on that. In any case, that charge was never serious.
But on whether the Russians hacked the emails, Trump has definitely CAVED. Sadly, it’s over folks. This leaves us with the plain fact that the evidence now shows that Trump has renegged on literally everything of any consequence. Shame, shame, on those who supported him. And even those who pretended they weren’t supporting Trump but really were.
the end!
And luv from Canada.
It’s the Art of the Deal and they made him one.
> But on whether the Russians hacked the emails
That has been debunked some time ago, go grab another talking point, liberal friend.
Trump admitted the Russians hacked today. Crow for dinner for you too, you schmuck! You actually thought a phony psychopathic American pres would actually promote peaceful relations with Russia? Hahahahaha! Not in our lifetimes schmuck. Americans don’t do that because the huge majorithy still think Russia is the commie satan. You should get out more.
luv from Canada.
“clarified on CBC” – good one! The Canadian branch of the Clinton Broadcasting Corporation.
So Don’s logic here is that because Trump “declined to say” something, therefore it must be true. So if Don declines to say whether or not aliens exist in outer space, therefore it must be so.
The possibility that Trump doesn’t know who did what is ignored, even though that has been his consistent position.
The unnamed government “sources” who “decline to say” what their actual verifiable evidence is on alleged Russian hacking must be then admitting that they have no such information. Such is Don’s logic. Oddly, from that lack of evidence Don has concluded that somehow Trump is “wrong” and has “reneged on literally everything of any consequence. Shame, shame!”
In DonWorld, not believing wild accusations absent verifiable proof is somehow proving oneself a serial liar and charlatan. If Don here lives with a Significant Other, they must qualify for sainthood. “So you don’t deny that you failed to respond to my text. That proves your are unfaithful!”
It was clear to me yesterday but it if wasn’t clear to you then today’s comments by Trump sealed it. Read my latest post above on what he said. Now eat some crow a–hole.
luv from Canada.
Beginning to look a lot like Colon Powell’s slam dunk evidence at the UN Feb2003 when he delivered irrefutable proof that Saddam was hiding WMDs and worked with Al Qaida. Remember those biological labs he showed the world on those flip charts? Everything sooooo convincing but absolutely BS. Now, Jan2016 we are to believe this perjurer intel chief who lied under oath twice to Congress that the NSA isn’t collecting/hacking information from the American people? Sorry, never will I believe this clown and please stop with the cr*p of our intel agents work so hard blah blah blah and now are becoming demoralized by Trump’s questioning. No one is denigrating the agents; it is the corrupt leaders of the agents who interpret their intel who we denigrate.
CIA Director George Tenet made the “slam dunk” statement; Donald Rumsfeld said they were a little north, a little east, a little south, and a little west of Baghdad.
That carbuncle took much longer to come to a head. This one was leaking pus in September.
I took a quick browse through it. A lot of “we assess” but no evidence. Kind of comes down to just take their word for it.
Pretty scary seeing the US itself become the target of a “color revolution” info campaign. “Up close and personal”… it’s just that Samantha Power cannot complain at the UN and demand observation of the democratic process by “third parties”.
Cookies in the street soon!
America’s going to become a victim of its stock market again. That may cause a ‘color revolution’ – because the poor blacks, along with the poor whites will be hit first. And the poor whites will be paid and armed to defend what’s left for the ‘real Americans’..
As an outside observer, it astounds me that no mention is made of the only country in the world that has greatly benefited by the Trump victory. The state of Israel and Netanyahoo in particular have meddled and interfered in American politics over the past four years of the Obama administration more than any other country. They were the benefactors, they have the capability to disable the nuclear reactor (for power) program in Iran so are expert when it comes to interfering in the business of other countries and for some reason have the ears of all the US Congress. When the dust settles, my bet on Israel being the hackers will pay me handsomely.
Okay, fine. Try this little “conspiracy theory” out and see how closely it fits whatever “facts” you might think you have:
The CIA “knew” that Hillary was going to win — didn’t we all think it was in the bag for Hillary, particularly after the bump she got following the Access Hollywood tape? So they decided to seize the opportunity to enhance the intelligence community’s influence and funding in the upcoming Clinton presidency by concocting a Putin “Manchurian Candidate plot” to help Trump. They, the CIA — along with Russia, China, Israel, and various 14-year-old nerd boy hackers — already had all of HRC’s private and State Dept emails, as well as those of the DNC and the Clinton campaign. Got them from their buddies at the NSA thanks to GWB’s post-911 efforts to enhance intel sharing between the different intelligence community agencies. So they put together this “false flag” Russian “act of war plot to subvert the sanctity of the American electoral process”.
Then, when Hillary had ascended to the Presidency, the CIA could go to her, show her how Putin/Hitler had tried to rob her yet again of the brass ring — another evil ***man*** who had beaten or humiliated her, like Obama or her philandering husband — it would be a bright, shining, abundantly-funded springtime for the entire Intelligence Community.
Of course, then reality intervened, and the unthinkable happened. At which point — the very survival of the CIA et al at stake — doubling down on the phony “Russian Plot” and making Trump a party to it, became plan B.
In this clip: https://www.rt.com/shows/news-with-ed-schultz/372785-news-with-ed-jan05/
Ed Schultz interviews cyber security expert John McAfee who explains why “the Russian hack” is bogus. But the same features he cites as evidence of “bogosity” could also be interpreted as the inserted tradecraft “evidence” intended to implicate Russia as the source,… implicate that is, to the unsophisticated.
I leave it to you to decide what is reality. One thing I hold certain: bureaucracies pursue their own self-interest, and in this case cui bono points directly at the CIA et al. In fairness, cui bono also points at Putin — it was clearly in Russia’s interest to have a President Trump and not a President Hillary — but the “sloppiness” pointed out by McAfee, would have been crucial — a feature not a bug — in order to have the “evidence” necessary to implicate the Russians. At the same time that “sloppiness” would have been well below — revealingly below — Russian cyber-tradecraft standards. In a pre-internet age, it might very well have escaped notice,… but not today.
What then is real? President Trump is real,.. in 13 days.
As if Putin couldn’t deal with Hilary. Compared to the ‘great mind’ that was Obama she’s a mental midget.
Putin made Obama look, and act like, Uncle Ben. That’s some ‘heavy duty’ ‘hacking’ for you. He’d have curled Hillary’s striped stockings and made her go hide under the house.
When I was glum about Trump’s impending defeat and HRC’s victory, I took solace in the hopeful expectation that Putin would humiliate her worse than Obama and Bubba combined, and do so in full view of the entire world. Sweet, sweet dreams! Then fate took a hand, and a wondrous thing happened: the Trumpinator and his merry band of Pussy-Grabbing Deplorables dispatched the anti-Christ-with-a-Vagina with a heart-stopping surprise ending that would have done Hollywood proud. Only, it was real life. Holy cow, what a spectacle!
Is it possible!!?? Do I dare to hope?… can The Donald deliver? Four years of politics with, I mean, like, ***real*** entertainment value? Breaking Bad Does DC. Perp walk the CIA torture team to the Hague? Have Dick Cheney dance at the Super Bowl half-time show (at the end of a rope)? Make GWB the lifetime librarian at Leavenworth, and monetize it with a strap-on 24/7 Bush-cam? Tell Congress, “You’re fired!” and put ’em all in orange jumpsuits and on trial, on tv — war crimes — before Judge Judy? Hold a golf tournament at Doral between him and his buddy Vlad, with Obama and the Shrub serving as caddies on work-release?
Please, if there is a God, answer my prayers, show me a sign.
I’m not the god but I can give you a sign:
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/intelligence-officials-brief-skeptical-trump-russian-hacking-n703971
How’s that do it for you jeffy?
luv from Canada.
Here’s a more likely scenario. Putin pretended he was interested in better relations with Russia and that force Hillary to take the opposite side. And the more Trump blew it up, the more extreme Hillary got on being against Russia. It’s what happens in politics and it was most ly created by the election campaign.
luv from Canada.
“didn’t we all think it was in the bag for Hillary”
Nope.
Most people who hate somebody want to get as far away from as they possibly can. Mind you, American haters seem to be different. They like to get up close to feel the hate, until they ‘pop’ and unload on the problem. Or to get close enough to cause that hated one some problems that will eventually get them caught and ‘reverse-hated’.
Like Putin hating Hilary so much he gave her a ‘case’ for not being elected. and winds-up being hated, himself, more than ever. Yeah that makes sense – to the kind of Americans who still wear coonskin caps and think Peter Pan dwelt in Boston.
And today Trump said that Russia’s interference changed nothing.. As predicted, Trump caved but wants to save his vanity by staying withe the claim that Russia didn’t help him win.
Who cares how he won, he’s bent to the wishes of the spooks and conceded that Russia did hack.
Totally useles for any antiwar cause and likely worse than Clinton considering his spewing his bullshit against China. What a bunch of patsies those who supported him have turned out to be!
luv from Canada.
Let’s hope Trump isn’t as bad as Steven Harper…
Stephen Harper was as evil as they get but he was powerless to do real damage to the world because of his country’s stature. He was nothing but a puppet who willingly consented to having his strings pulled.
Trump is much more dangerous because of the evil bastards with whch he’s surrounding himself.
So in fact it’s not Trump we have to worry about. He’ll sit as a figurehead while the US and people like Maddis represent the wishes of the US.
You see, this is the reason why Raimondo was so wrong. He got all wrapped up in Hillary hate when in fact it was pretty well predictable that she wouldn’t be any worse than Obama. And fwiw, probably better because the racist hate for Obama wouldn’t be a factor any longer.
Trump has folded his hand and has doublecrossed his supporters again. That is, if in fact any of his lowlife supporters even cared about improved foreign relations with Russia.
http://gulfnews.com/news/americas/usa/trump-admits-possibility-of-russian-hacking-1.1958034
And exactly as I predicted, the spooks would soften the blow for Trump by allowing him to save face by not maintaining that the hacking influenced the election in Trump’s favour. Of course that’s all Trump ever really wanted.
So how about all the patsies that believed in Trump now go and eat your crow?
There will be no improved relations with Putin/Russia and it’s going to be hard to find any of Trump’s promises that still stand and he hasn’t renegged upon.
luv from Canada.
The Country was so revived up to goto war with Iraq I don’t even know why they started with all the propaganda about WMD, nobody cared, 80% wanted war and more war at the time.