• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FBI’s Russian-influence probe includes a look at Breitbart, InfoWars news sites

ReverendHellh0und said:
You would fit in well, given you both believe without evidence. Hence your inability to post any actual evidence. :failpail:
Click to expand...

So the conclusions from 17 different defense and intelligence agencies and the testimony of Comey and Rogers is not evidence in your world?

Amazing!!!!!!
 
Erod said:
There is absolutely no evidence of collusion between Russia and Trump in any way. But there is definitely evidence of DNC collusion against Bernie Sanders.
Click to expand...

Is it really that difficult to believe that they both happened? I worry about the future of Conservative America if it so steadfastly chooses to tie itself to the Trump Titanic.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Is it really that difficult to believe that they both happened? I worry about the future of Conservative America if it so steadfastly chooses to tie itself to the Trump Titanic.
Click to expand...

Did Russia feed Hillary debate questions? Did they set up her server? Did they prevent her from campaigning in the rust belt? Did they force her to stay married to a serial philanderer and possible rapist? Did they suck the charisma out of her bones? Did they force the DNC to collude against Bernie Sanders? Did they scare away any other would-be challengers to Hillary?

Of course not. Governments have been meddling in foreign matters for hundreds of years. This election was no different than any other in that regard.

It's just a way to comfort liberals through their loss. Like ice cream when a boyfriend breaks up.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Based on what evidence?

tick tock.
Click to expand...

Based on the evidence they have seen that you and I have not. Or do you labor under the delusion that you know everything the director of the FBI and other intelligence agencies know?
 
haymarket said:
Based on the evidence they have seen that you and I have not. Or do you labor under the delusion that you know everything the director of the FBI and other intelligence agencies know?
Click to expand...

C'mon. He knows just as much as Trump and co. know...
they all get the "facts" they need from Breitbart.
 
TheGoverness said:
I have my doubts about the extent of Russian influence on this election too, but we'll just have to wait see what the FBI investigation turns up.
Click to expand...

I'm all for waiting for what the FBI turns up. What I oppose is the rampant speculation of what the FBI might find as if they already found it. The latter is what the Democrats in congress are providing and it won't get any better until their supporters demand better from them.
 
Verax said:
FBI-led investigative team examines role of conservative news sites in Russia campaign | McClatchy DC





More evidence of Russian tampering in our elections. It is proven beyond any doubt they assisted Donald Trump every chance they could. The only question that remains, did the Trump administration have any kind of active role in this? I'm very curious if the FBI or CIA have SIGINT with Trump or his associates making any kind of incriminating statements.
Click to expand...

Your quotes use words like exploring, which is present tense, and you say "It is proven beyond any doubt they assisted Donald Trump every chance they could." which is past tense.

How do you from one to the other?

If anything there is no "proven beyond any doubt" in any way here.
 
apdst said:
The FBI is going after the free press? Oh yeah, this is definitely going to blowup in the Liberals's faces.
Click to expand...

I think their point is that nobody should ever write a positive story about Trump because that story could be used to sway an election.

These connect-the-dot conclusions are getting crazier every day.
 
Moot said:
Or...it might expose the corruption of the rightwing media.
Click to expand...

It didn't say the media did anything wrong. It said bots were used to circulate already written positive stories about Trump.

So I guess the answer would be to never write anything positive about Trump, right?
 
Captain America said:
Americans were dumbed down with a LOT of birther type fake news because they WANTED to believe that horse crap. NewsMax. Red State. Brietbart. FOXNews.... the list goes on....

Even after it became debunked, they still believed it. Like my rightwingnut friend in Austin told me, "I'm Texan and I'm American. That means I can believe what I want to believe."

They are stupid because they CHOOSE to be stupid. And now, we got Trump. We get what we deserve.
Click to expand...

Honestly, considering what's passing for "not fake" in Trumpeteer world, Fox cones out very positively.
 
jmotivator said:
I'm all for waiting for what the FBI turns up. What I oppose is the rampant speculation of what the FBI might find as if they already found it. The latter is what the Democrats in congress are providing and it won't get any better until their supporters demand better from them.
Click to expand...

It's being investigated. Nothing will be found if it isn't looked for. You won't accept anything that's actually found anyway.
 
Erod said:
We'll investigate this with absolutely no evidence, but we won't investigate the wiretapping claim despite evidence that the NSA was trailing the Trump family?

Hypocrisy defined.
Click to expand...

Where is that evidence that the NSA was doing this?

So far what I've seen is a tweet., and then explanations from administration folks that, when taken together, say what he really means is they were watching him through the microwave.
 
jmotivator said:
I'm all for waiting for what the FBI turns up. What I oppose is the rampant speculation of what the FBI might find as if they already found it. The latter is what the Democrats in congress are providing and it won't get any better until their supporters demand better from them.
Click to expand...
So does that include the current FBI investigation into possible Trump campaign collusion with the Russians, you know, what you were denying yesterday?
 
haymarket said:
Based on the evidence they have seen that you and I have not. Or do you labor under the delusion that you know everything the director of the FBI and other intelligence agencies know?
Click to expand...


Really, based on what unkown sources have seen that you and I have not is your evidence? /facepalm


Just had to put that in there, your quota is up.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Really, based on what unkown sources have seen that you and I have not is your evidence? /facepalm


Just had to put that in there, your quota is up.
Click to expand...

You put nothing in there other than your own repetitions which have already been exposed.
 
rocket88 said:
It's being investigated. Nothing will be found if it isn't looked for. You won't accept anything that's actually found anyway.
Click to expand...

Sure, and I suppose the FBI should search your home after every crime and suspected crime in your neighborhood. Can't be too careful!
 
Gimmesometruth said:
So does that include the current FBI investigation into possible Trump campaign collusion with the Russians, you know, what you were denying yesterday?
Click to expand...

I'm still denying that they are investigating Trump currently because that isn't what Comey said. You still can't seem to wrap your head around the idea that an FBI investigation into Russia doesn't mean that there is currently investigations into Trump.
 
jmotivator said:
I'm still denying that they are investigating Trump currently because that isn't what Comey said. You still can't seem to wrap your head around the idea that an FBI investigation into Russia doesn't mean that there is currently investigations into Trump.
Click to expand...
i did not say "Trump", I said "the Trump campaign", which may or may not include the Orangeatan himself. But then, this is just another example of your pedantic style.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Really, based on what unkown sources have seen that you and I have not is your evidence? /facepalm

Just had to put that in there, your quota is up.
Click to expand...

If Comey is 'unknown' to you, that's not really anyone's problem but your own. He's a source with a name and a high rank - Director of the FBI. He testified in public just a couple days ago!

Seriously, you can claim if you want that the evidence is not compelling to you, at least not yet, but it's pretty dang absurd to claim the intelligence findings of a couple months ago and direct testimony on the matter by the FBI director before Congress is not even 'evidence.' That's just burying your head in the sand stuff. To believe it you'd have to believe that the intelligence agencies as a group and Comey, specifically, are making up these accusations and there is nothing in the record of an ongoing investigation to support those conclusions, as opposed to speculations.
 
jmotivator said:
I'm still denying that they are investigating Trump currently because that isn't what Comey said. You still can't seem to wrap your head around the idea that an FBI investigation into Russia doesn't mean that there is currently investigations into Trump.
Click to expand...

LOL, right, because an investigation of the Trump campaign, of which Trump is obviously a key figure, would not by necessity include an investigation of Trump. I suppose they have a firewall set up so that they don't look at connections or communications between, say, Trump's campaign manager and his boss.... It takes some doing to split hairs that finely. :roll:
 
Gimmesometruth said:
i did not say "Trump", I said "the Trump campaign", which may or may not include the Orangeatan himself. But then, this is just another example of your pedantic style.
Click to expand...

The same goes for "the Trump campaign".
 
JasperL said:
LOL, right, because an investigation of the Trump campaign, of which Trump is obviously a key figure, would not by necessity include an investigation of Trump. I suppose they have a firewall set up so that they don't look at connections or communications between, say, Trump's campaign manager and his boss.... It takes some doing to split hairs that finely. :roll:
Click to expand...

LOL! He didn't say there was an active investigation of the Trump campaign, either!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom