• 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!

Newly uncovered bombshell: Crowdstrike had no solid evidence Russians hacked the DNC computers

SonOfDaedalus said:
They didn't favor Russians. You favor Russians. You favor authoritarianism and a government the lies to you.

Trump once again repeated the lie that he was Michigan man of the year. Is that true? Do you even recognize the truth anymore?
Click to expand...

I don't believe everything Trump says but I have not found his statements as dishonest, hurtful and evil as I have found statements made by those who have hated him and speak evil of him without just cause.
 
marke said:
What are American simpletons not being told by propaganda such as this?

1. No Russian hackers could possibly have been hacking the DNC beginning in summer 2014 in order to help Trump.

2. If Dutch intelligence had notified US intelligence of the hacking in 2014 then why was the FBI not told?

3. If the FBI knew of the hacking in 2014 then why did the FBI not inform Obama and the DNC?

4. If foreign intelligence warned the FBI that Russians were hacking Hillary's emails then why was Obama not concerned about her illegal private server?

5. If the hackers were supposedly in Russia when the DNC was hacked then why did the evidence show the emails were exfiltrated from somewhere on the East Coast of the US?


And the lack of Fact Checking by the deluded American media continues.
Click to expand...

I agree with many of your counterpoints. I would point out that in counter point #1 a rival to the DNC could've been decided upon by Russia (for whatever reason) and that rival could've been any GOP representative for president in 2016 favored over any DNC representative for president in 2016. It turns out Trump was that GOP rival for president in 2016 VS. Hillary the DNC rival for president in 2016.

Alleged Russian hackers could've been hacking the DNC beginning or before 2014 to hurt the DNC...Not saying that was true. Just saying that thinking is logical.
 
cabse5 said:
The Dutch are allies with the EU...The Dutch remained neutral in WWII. Heck, the Dutch are allies to everyone (and no one).
Click to expand...

A very dear Christian friend of ours was born and raised in Holland. She spent a few years in a Nazi prison camp during WW2. She is one of the finest people I know. I respect good people from all nations and have one son in law and one daughter in law who were born and raised in nations outside the US, one from Europe and one from Asia, neither of whom could speak English until coming to America. I have other relatives who have married into families from even other outside nations. All nations are made of ther same blood by God and are brethren in that regard.
 
cabse5 said:
I agree with many of your counterpoints. I would point out that in counter point #1 a rival to the DNC could've been decided upon by Russia (for whatever reason) and that rival could've been any GOP representative for president in 2016 favored over any DNC representative for president in 2016. It turns out Trump was that GOP rival for president in 2016 VS. Hillary the DNC rival for president in 2016.

Alleged Russian hackers could've been hacking the DNC beginning or before 2014 to hurt the DNC...Not saying that was true. Just saying that thinking is logical.
Click to expand...

We understand that the hackers were supposedly hacking into sensitive government agencies, such as the Defense Department as well, but I have not heard any report that the FBI assigned a motive to those hackings like CrowdStrike attributed to the nebulous "Russians" for whatever supposed or assumed reason they suggested.

I have also heard that Brennan presented evidence which could be used to support his contention the alleged hacking was designed to help Trump but he hid evidence that indicated the alleged hackers were intending to help Hillary.
 
marke said:
Isn't that always the way it goes? The FBI called in CrowdStrike to find out who was hacking the DNC computers, even after testifying they had known about the hacking for more than a year before CrowdStrike was called upon to do their job for them. And now we find out that Dutch intelligence had done in two months what Mueller never could do in 3 years, which was to identify the hackers by name and address and confiscate their computers to give to federal investigators to find out who all was invoved in the illegal activity, including the names of any Americans involved.
Click to expand...

One can't just blindly accept that Netherlands intelligence stumbled upon a Russian intelligence operation against the DNC because motivations for the Dutch to hack Russian intelligence are quite sketchy on or before 2014.

Why did the Netherlands intelligence decide to hack Russian intelligence on or before 2014? Why the extent of that hack on or before 2014? What benefit did the Netherlands receive from a hacking operation of Russian intelligence on or before 2014? Because of the alleged data mined from this hacking, is it possible that Netherlands intelligence knew of the results of its hack of Russian intelligence beforehand?
 
Last edited:
marke said:
We understand that the hackers were supposedly hacking into sensitive government agencies, such as the Defense Department as well, but I have not heard any report that the FBI assigned a motive to those hackings like CrowdStrike attributed to the nebulous "Russians" for whatever supposed or assumed reason they suggested.

I have also heard that Brennan presented evidence which could be used to support his contention the alleged hacking was designed to help Trump but he hid evidence that indicated the alleged hackers were intending to help Hillary.
Click to expand...

Here's my conspiracy theory, for what it's worth, on why Russia was deemed the hacker of DNC emails: To hide the fact that the Ukraine was helping Hillary and the DNC in the presidential campaign.

The Ukraine was a close and mortal enemy of Russia.
By designating Russia as the 'bad guy', the Ukraine is designated as the 'good guy'. Wasn't the gist of the impeachment against Trump that he withheld military funds against the 'good guys', the Ukraine, who was fighting the good fight against Russia?
 
sanman said:
Trump campaign has the right to discuss its policy positions with whomever cares to listen. That's absolutely not against the law. I'll point out that Democrat politicians campaigning for election have also been abroad and talked with others. This is nothing unique to the Trump campaign.

But Deep Staters including at FBI hate the policy positions of the Trump campaign, and want to get rid of Trump & co by any means necessary, whether fair or foul, whether by hook or by crook.

So they eavesdropped on Flynn under false pretexts, and then even when nothing turned up wrong (as confirmed by FBI Jan-4-2017 memo), they still tried to question Flynn as a last-minute gambit to screw him, hoping they could at least get him fired.

Deep State wants its own policy agenda to prevail no matter what, and this was their attempt at a coup d'etat. They felt that if they could nail Flynn, then they could parlay that into an expanding investigation that would allow them to nail President Trump and get rid of him too.

Coup d'etat is a fundamental breach of the constitution, and is treason.

I hope these bastards are charged with treason, even if they face the death penalty.



Anyone who wins an election should be able to put in their preferred foreign policy priorities. Nobody at FBI gets a veto over US elections. If you're at FBI and somebody gets elected who you don't like, then tough luck - you don't get to inflict a coup d'etat - that's treason.
Click to expand...
Discussing secretly with Russia was politically 'against the law', however, because Russia was forever tarnished.
 
cabse5 said:
Discussing secretly with Russia was politically 'against the law', however, because Russia was forever tarnished.
Click to expand...

No, the incoming administration was already elected and under transition of power. They have the right to pave the way for their new policies. Likewise, the outgoing administration is on the way out, and should not be trying to pursue any of their clashing policies in the brief time they have left. Under transition of power, the outgoing administration is supposed to facilitate the arrival of the incoming administration, not thwart of undermine them.

There's no such thing as "forever tarnished" - that's the Left's nutty fabrication. Nixon and his NSA Kissinger made overtures to China, because they felt it would help them contain the larger threat of Moscow - never saw Dems crying foul about that. Now China is the larger threat, and has not just a larger army, but even an economy that's FIFTEEN TIMES LARGER than Russia's - and so certainly a swing back from Nixon's shift can easily be justified.
Democrats who don't care about national security at all (despite loudly screeching "traitor!" whenever it suits their political games) wouldn't notice these crucial fundamental realities.
 
Last edited:
sanman said:
No, the incoming administration was already elected and under transition of power. They have the right to pave the way for their new policies. Likewise, the outgoing administration is on the way out, and should not be trying to purse any of their clashing policies in the brief time they have left. Under transition of power, the outgoing administration is supposed to facilitate the arrival of the incoming administration, not thwart of undermine them.

There's no such thing as "forever tarnished" - that's the Left's nutty fabrication. Nixon and his NSA Kissinger made overtures to China, because they felt it would help them contain the larger threat of Moscow - never saw you libs crying foul about that. Now China is the larger threat, and has not just a larger army, but even an economy that's FIFTEEN TIMES LARGER than Russia's - and so certainly a swing back from Nixon's shift can easily be justified.
Democrats who don't care about national security at all (despite loudly screeching "traitor!" whenever it suits their political games) wouldn't notice these crucial fundamental realities.
Click to expand...

That is my supposition why the incoming Trump administration was reticent about openly discussing open discussions with Russia. It wasn't politically expedient.

EDIT: Another perjury trap, if you will. Ask about Russian secret negotiations when it isn't politically expedient to discuss secret negotiations with Russia.
 
Last edited:
marke said:
A very dear Christian friend of ours was born and raised in Holland. She spent a few years in a Nazi prison camp during WW2. She is one of the finest people I know. I respect good people from all nations and have one son in law and one daughter in law who were born and raised in nations outside the US, one from Europe and one from Asia, neither of whom could speak English until coming to America. I have other relatives who have married into families from even other outside nations. All nations are made of ther same blood by God and are brethren in that regard.
Click to expand...

Even the "****hole" nations?
 
cabse5 said:
One can't just blindly accept that Netherlands intelligence stumbled upon a Russian intelligence operation against the DNC because motivations for the Dutch to hack Russian intelligence are quite sketchy on or before 2014.

Why did the Netherlands intelligence decide to hack Russian intelligence on or before 2014? Why the extent of that hack on or before 2014? What benefit did the Netherlands receive from a hacking operation of Russian intelligence on or before 2014? Because of the alleged data mined from this hacking, is it possible that Netherlands intelligence knew of the results of its hack of Russian intelligence beforehand?
Click to expand...

I can tell you are not a mainstream news reporter. You actually ask questions which deliberately or not tend to turn attention to the democrats' lack of answers.
 
marke said:
I can tell you are not a mainstream news reporter. You actually ask questions which deliberately or not tend to turn attention to the democrats' lack of answers.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to the last statement of my post?
 
cabse5 said:
Here's my conspiracy theory, for what it's worth, on why Russia was deemed the hacker of DNC emails: To hide the fact that the Ukraine was helping Hillary and the DNC in the presidential campaign.

The Ukraine was a close and mortal enemy of Russia.
By designating Russia as the 'bad guy', the Ukraine is designated as the 'good guy'. Wasn't the gist of the impeachment against Trump that he withheld military funds against the 'good guys', the Ukraine, who was fighting the good fight against Russia?
Click to expand...

I think the democrats picked Russia in part because they knew many conservatives do not think Russia is a good country, as judged by its brutal atheistic leader. And also, they knew nobody could ever prove or disprove the Russians were or were not involved. Russia was a perfect scapegoat behind which to hide and cover the serious injustices and immorality that was soon to be revealed by the coming release of secret DNC emails delivered to Wikileaks by a DNC insider.
 
SonOfDaedalus said:
Even the "****hole" nations?
Click to expand...

There are good Christians in every nations, even in nations run by "****hole" atheist communist morons, many of whom are responsible for creating horrible conditions for their unfairly oppressed people.
 
marke said:
I think the democrats picked Russia in part because they knew many conservatives do not think Russia is a good country, as judged by its brutal atheistic leader. And also, they knew nobody could ever prove or disprove the Russians were or were not involved. Russia was a perfect scapegoat behind which to hide and cover the serious injustices and immorality that was soon to be revealed by the coming release of secret DNC emails delivered to Wikileaks by a DNC insider.
Click to expand...

How sure are you that a DNC insider delivered secret DNC emails to Wikileaks?
 
cabse5 said:
How sure are you that a DNC insider delivered secret DNC emails to Wikileaks?
Click to expand...

Pretty sure.
1. Julian Assange hinted it was a DNC insider and affirmed that it had nothing to do with Russians or Trump.
2. Assange publiched the fact that he was open to being interviewd by Mueller but Mueller refused to interview him.
3. Media outlets claimed the FBI had no evidence Seth Rich was involved and did not investigate the Rich Murder, but recently released documents revealed the FBI did have notes on Seth Rich and that the NSA does have evidence of Rich's conversations with Assange in the weeks before his murder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom