Quote:
|
1. Trolled on Facebook
2. Bought divisive ads on Facebook 3. Published fake news on RT, often forwarded on Facebook 4. Cyber-stole and published Hillary Clinton/John Podesta/DNC emails 4a. Cyber-stole Republican emails but didn't publish them 5. Cyber-stole information about registered voters UT note: this is information you can legally buy, or even get for free. In 1996 I asked for, and received, my county's voter database just by telling them that I was an officer of a political party in the county. (I was, but I didn't have to prove it.) 6. Funneled money into pro-Trump PACs IIRC NY Times story showed they had an interest in hacking into voting machines in all 50 states; story found that the state they were most likely to be able to affect was Illinois, but did not have any evidence that they actually did affect anything. (And Hillary won Illinois, and was always going to, so why bother?) The conspiracy theory is in the unproven bits. The top unproven bit is collusion, but people even go on to say Russia is managing Trump's press statements, or Russia might cut off American electricity during a cold snap in the winter, or Russia has a tape of Trump getting peed on which is why he's under their control. People take the puzzling evidence they have and build a narrative around it. But it's true: Russia interfered in the 2016 election. It is well-proven. |
Quote:
|
Meanwhile, another day has passed and there is still no evidence given of Tulsi Gabbard being a Russian asset.
|
Quote:
The goals they took steps to accomplish were achieved, and we are now living in that world. And it continues. When their bots support a candidate (maybe?), someone will say, "Russian Asset!" and they've succeeding in making us argue about it. |
thanks UT
1. Trolled on Facebook
So: how many in-forum got took? # 2. Bought divisive ads on Facebook So: how many in-forum got took? # 3. Published fake news on RT, often forwarded on Facebook What's RT? And: how many in-forum got took? # 4. Cyber-stole and published Hillary Clinton/John Podesta/DNC emails Unlike all the FB stuff (I don't do FB) I read a bunch of the DNC stuff on wikileaks. Not sure how accurate info counts as interference, but: okay. So: how many in-forum got took? # 4a. Cyber-stole Republican emails but didn't publish them How do we know they had Repub stuff? And: mebbe the Repub stuff had nuthin' incriminatin' in them? # 5. Cyber-stole information about registered voters And used it how? # 6. Funneled money into pro-Trump PACs We know this how? # "The conspiracy theory is in the unproven bits." As always. # "The top unproven bit is collusion," Not only unproven but disproven, or are we to doubt Mueller? # "But it's true: Russia interfered in the 2016 election. It is well-proven." Seems to me: what's proven is the Ruskies tried to interfere, not that they were successful. |
"It's worth noting-- Russia successfully interfered in the 2016 election."
No, it isn't a given cuz they mebbe got what they wanted that they were successful.
Again: how many in-forum got took? I'm bettin' not a one. So: what makes you folks immune to monkeyshine? I'm thinkin' most folks, most of the time, are no more gullible than any of you. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
More importantly, Russia was one operation trying to influence the election - amongst *hundreds* of operations. The Wikipedia article says they got $30M to the NRA to run pro-Trump messaging. But that's just $30 Million out of $1.4 Billion spent by PACs to try to influence the election. As such, victory alone is not proof of anything. The DNC are more effective influencers (and they arguably kept Gabbard out of the previous debate) |
Quote:
By not doing that, Hillary is elevating the seeds of division and chaos. Why does their primary target of 2016 play right into their hands? |
I think Tushi Gabbard has a nice asset which more than only the Russians can appreciate.
Probably something just got lost in translation ... имеет хороший актив - has a nice asset ...........хороший актив - is a nice asset |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Hillary is apparently a Russian asset.
|
Quote:
I'd lay any amount of money on Lindsey Graham being compromised, for example. Dude was railing against Trump in some of the strongest terms out there, both before AND after he was elected. Then he takes a one-on-one golf game alone with Trump, and since then he's been licking the guy's balls 24/7. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:09 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.