billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,643
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 30, 2017 11:54:32 GMT -5
If you've got enough time to share bad satire, how about commenting on the interview with Ms. Farkas? I would love to but I didn't hear it when it was broadcast and I can only find a selective 58 second clip with a part of it. Do you have a link that would allow us to listen to the interview?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 30, 2017 17:39:50 GMT -5
If you've got enough time to share bad satire, how about commenting on the interview with Ms. Farkas? I would love to but I didn't hear it when it was broadcast and I can only find a selective 58 second clip with a part of it. Do you have a link that would allow us to listen to the interview? A full 7-minute version is available a bit further down in the article Paul links to.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,643
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 30, 2017 22:50:20 GMT -5
I would love to but I didn't hear it when it was broadcast and I can only find a selective 58 second clip with a part of it. Do you have a link that would allow us to listen to the interview? A full 7-minute version is available a bit further down in the article Paul links to. Thanks. I will get it watched and will commit.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,808
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 30, 2017 23:19:59 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 25, 2024 1:59:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 23:51:28 GMT -5
You wouldn't happen to have a link to a credible "fact checker" instead... would you?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 31, 2017 10:22:15 GMT -5
Give me a bloody break, Snopes. ibid.: ...but purported key “admissions” made by Farkas during that segment actually described an Obama administration attempt to preserve intelligence about possible Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, not a “spying” effort focused on Donald Trump...
...
Nothing said or repeated by Evelyn Farkas on 2 March 2017 was novel or ostensibly more revealing than the New York Times article published just before her interview, and Farkas described the actions of Washington operatives (not President Obama) to preserve extant intelligence about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election (not to spy on Donald Trump). Duhhh, I wonder if "intelligence about possible Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election" might involve spying on Trump campaign staff. I guess we'll never kn- oh wait... "Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior people who left so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the [stutters] Trump folks — if they found out how we knew what we knew about their [the] Trump staff, dealing with Russians — that they would try to compromise those sources and methods, meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence." That's it, Snopes. You just officially jumped the shark. Congratulations.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 25, 2024 1:59:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 19:50:58 GMT -5
No, Virgil Showlion. That's them being fair and unbiased. Just ask them. They'll tell you. She meant something other than what she said. She meant "The sky is yellow at sunset."
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 2, 2017 22:44:25 GMT -5
I presume you didn't read my latest post, nor did any of you watch Hannity tonight? You're saying Evelyn Farkas is your source? Don't get me wrong; her comments seem pretty damning. I can't think of any way to construe them that looks positive for the Obama administration. But they don't prove wiretapping. They're merely evidence that Pres. Obama was in a race against time to hoard intel on Pres. Trump before Obama left office. Yeah- there's no spinning her way out of this. As soon as the SHTF, she should have shut up and lawyered up.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 2, 2017 22:45:35 GMT -5
Give me a bloody break, Snopes. ibid.: ...but purported key “admissions” made by Farkas during that segment actually described an Obama administration attempt to preserve intelligence about possible Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, not a “spying” effort focused on Donald Trump...
...
Nothing said or repeated by Evelyn Farkas on 2 March 2017 was novel or ostensibly more revealing than the New York Times article published just before her interview, and Farkas described the actions of Washington operatives (not President Obama) to preserve extant intelligence about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election (not to spy on Donald Trump). Duhhh, I wonder if "intelligence about possible Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election" might involve spying on Trump campaign staff. I guess we'll never kn- oh wait... "Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior people who left so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the [stutters] Trump folks — if they found out how we knew what we knew about their [the] Trump staff, dealing with Russians — that they would try to compromise those sources and methods, meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence." That's it, Snopes. You just officially jumped the shark. Congratulations.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,965
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Apr 3, 2017 4:12:59 GMT -5
I still see no vindication. Intelligence was gathered on Russia. In the course of doing so, some intelligence was gathered on Trump staffers speaking to Russia. Because of the latter, there was worry in the intelligence community that intelligence obtained when Russians spoke to Trump staffers might be disappeared if Trump were elected because it put Trump staffers in a bad light.
Seems like a legit fear. Does not change reality that in getting intelligence on Russia, Trump staffers were involved only because they were talking to Russians under investigation. Trump and some of his supporters are milking that victim mentality they purport to hate ... when its not about them.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,965
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Apr 3, 2017 4:24:52 GMT -5
And apparently Trump has been successful in turning the dialogue away from why were Trump staffers talking to Russians under investigation in the first place. Did they do things that weren't fully legal? Was Trump or his staff conspiring with Russia simply to win an election? Or was it worse than that?
What is Trump trying to hide by putting out his "I was a victim of Obama spying on me' when reality was Trump staffers got into the net because they were regularly talking to Russians being spied on by the intelligence community? It amazes me what can be sold to some folks because of the conservative mindset to worry about outside forces. Some folks are really buying the poor Trump fairytale instead of being concerned that one of the super powers who does not have our best interests at heart, may have colluded with staffers of the elected President to win an election. That should be the news. Not Trump pretending it was about him.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 25, 2024 1:59:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2017 5:58:56 GMT -5
And apparently Trump has been successful in turning the dialogue away from why were Trump staffers talking to Russians under investigation in the first place. Did they do things that weren't fully legal? Was Trump or his staff conspiring with Russia simply to win an election? Or was it worse than that?
What is Trump trying to hide by putting out his "I was a victim of Obama spying on me' when reality was Trump staffers got into the net because they were regularly talking to Russians being spied on by the intelligence community? It amazes me what can be sold to some folks because of the conservative mindset to worry about outside forces. Some folks are really buying the poor Trump fairytale instead of being concerned that one of the super powers who does not have our best interests at heart, may have colluded with staffers of the elected President to win an election. That should be the news. Not Trump pretending it was about him. Or maybe it was something that was none of our business... like could he have been making arrangements for Trump Winter Resort - Siberia... or Trump Tower - Moscow... or some other purely business nature contacts? My point is... until we know what the conversations that were recorded were actually about, we just know a few "so-and-so spoke with person-of-interest" conversations happened... That's it. Period. To be honest though, I'd be willing to be real money that the Russians colluded with BOTH candidates (we know that numerous foreign powers were at work supporting Hillary... why couldn't the Russians be involved too?)... so they would have some pull no matter WHO won.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,965
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Apr 3, 2017 7:15:25 GMT -5
And apparently Trump has been successful in turning the dialogue away from why were Trump staffers talking to Russians under investigation in the first place. Did they do things that weren't fully legal? Was Trump or his staff conspiring with Russia simply to win an election? Or was it worse than that?
What is Trump trying to hide by putting out his "I was a victim of Obama spying on me' when reality was Trump staffers got into the net because they were regularly talking to Russians being spied on by the intelligence community? It amazes me what can be sold to some folks because of the conservative mindset to worry about outside forces. Some folks are really buying the poor Trump fairytale instead of being concerned that one of the super powers who does not have our best interests at heart, may have colluded with staffers of the elected President to win an election. That should be the news. Not Trump pretending it was about him. Or maybe it was something that was none of our business... like could he have been making arrangements for Trump Winter Resort - Siberia... or Trump Tower - Moscow... or some other purely business nature contacts? My point is... until we know what the conversations that were recorded were actually about, we just know a few "so-and-so spoke with person-of-interest" conversations happened... That's it. Period. To be honest though, I'd be willing to be real money that the Russians colluded with BOTH candidates (we know that numerous foreign powers were at work supporting Hillary... why couldn't the Russians be involved too?)... so they would have some pull no matter WHO won. If Trump staffers were talking to Russians about Trump business interests in Russia and things were legit, why doesn't Trump release those conversations? Yes it could be about business, but since nothing is being released we simply do not know. And like Hillary's emails, its interesting that since its Trump some folks are assuming its nothing to worry about instead of going 'OMG Trump staff colluded with Russians to win the election!'
I'd be willing to bet real money if I had some to bet, that Russians most definitely did not collude with Hillary. Russia in general was very against the idea of a HRC Presidency. Much like some Americans, only for different reasons. If you are going to the trouble to interfere with a country's election, it makes no sense to support two candidates from opposing sides. You go in there because you want one and/or really do not want the other.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2017 7:42:49 GMT -5
It's getting worse every day for the radical alt-left DNC media, the Democrats, establishment Republicans, and the Deep State they're all defending... Oh, look- Susan "YouTube video" Rice requested the unmasking of incoming Trump Administration Officials. medium.com/@cernovich/susan-rice-requested-unmasking-of-incoming-trump-administration-officials-30085b5cff16Here is an IRON-CLAD prediction you can take to the bank (DO NOT DOUBT ME): The "Russian Conspiracy" sham investigations will be dropped like a hot rock within 30 days, and the focus will shift to distracting from the investigations into Obama regime abuse of power to use the intelligence apparatus of government to spy on their political opponents (the worst crime ever committed in our history). I won't say whether the real criminals will ever be brought to justice- experience tells us they won't be. But they will drop this Russia nonsense- and soon. Few months tops. Check in 6/3...
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,965
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Apr 3, 2017 7:46:47 GMT -5
OK, doubt level 5 enabled.
ETA- Isn't it enlightening to see the difference between the hunt to uncover all the Hillary emails, spare no one, and the protections desired for Trump officials who may or may not have been doing something illegal? 2017 - the year the double standard was codified as a core way of being and seeing the world for some conservative folks. And some with undetermined leanings ... say Trump and some of his staff.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2017 8:16:59 GMT -5
It is only prudent for a foreign power to be friendly toward both presidential candidates prior to a US election. At the same time it is plain to see why the Russians would NOT prefer a HRC presidency. Her track record as SoS was quite clear. She was not "soft" on Russia, and was in fact a supporter of crippling financial sanctions, even after her term ended. It is also only prudent for US presidential candidates to be careful and open about any communications with foreign powers, especially those which could be considered adversaries. Really, this is basic stuff. Why didn't Trump know this? Pretty lame for the ultimate deal maker.... She made sure that the Russian government controlled entity was able to buy 20% of the world's uranium production through a public offering on the Canadian exchange after Bill was paid $500,000 to give a speech in Russia. Yeah, she was super tough.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2017 8:19:20 GMT -5
OK, doubt level 5 enabled.
ETA- Isn't it enlightening to see the difference between the hunt to uncover all the Hillary emails, spare no one, and the protections desired for Trump officials who may or may not have been doing something illegal? 2017 - the year the double standard was codified as a core way of being and seeing the world for some conservative folks. And some with undetermined leanings ... say Trump and some of his staff. Hillary's emails WERE illegal. Their existence on a private server, the only practical purpose of which was to evade federal laws requiring the retention of all of her official communication in order to shield her systematic public corruption from discovery- were illegal.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Apr 3, 2017 8:19:42 GMT -5
Didn't Podesta have pizza with Russian children? No, but his brother did when he accepted the check from them
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2017 8:21:02 GMT -5
Mark my words- they're going to ditch this investigation. It's already blowing back on them.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Apr 3, 2017 8:22:08 GMT -5
You're saying Evelyn Farkas is your source? Don't get me wrong; her comments seem pretty damning. I can't think of any way to construe them that looks positive for the Obama administration. But they don't prove wiretapping. They're merely evidence that Pres. Obama was in a race against time to hoard intel on Pres. Trump before Obama left office. Yeah- there's no spinning her way out of this. As soon as the SHTF, she should have shut up and lawyered up. Please do not confuse the posters here that the Obama Administration is still a Virgin regarding political paybacks after eight years in office. They will not even believe it when the woman admits and brags about it to another liberal hack on live cable news.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2017 8:28:47 GMT -5
Yeah- there's no spinning her way out of this. As soon as the SHTF, she should have shut up and lawyered up. Please do not confuse the posters here that the Obama Administration is still a Virgin regarding political paybacks after eight years in office. They will not even believe it when the woman admits and brags about it to another liberal hack on live cable news. You can't blame her for assuming no one would be watching...
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,965
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Apr 3, 2017 9:02:53 GMT -5
She made sure that the Russian government controlled entity was able to buy 20% of the world's uranium production through a public offering on the Canadian exchange after Bill was paid $500,000 to give a speech in Russia. Yeah, she was super tough. Actually that is demonstrably false. As one of nine members of CFIUS the SoS has a vote in whether or not the board recommends a transaction to the President. She is but one vote, and the board does not even have veto power. In fact, she may not have even participated in a limited manner on the CFIUS recommendation, as she did not sit on the committee to represent the state department, a deputy did, and she did not intervene in committee matters. Your allegation above was another of Donald Trumps's "alternative facts" while on the campaign trail. Fake history in an alternative universe. Wish it wasn't so common.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2017 9:03:42 GMT -5
She made sure that the Russian government controlled entity was able to buy 20% of the world's uranium production through a public offering on the Canadian exchange after Bill was paid $500,000 to give a speech in Russia. Yeah, she was super tough. Actually that is demonstrably false. As one of nine members of CFIUS the SoS has a vote in whether or not the board recommends a transaction to the President. She is but one vote, and the board does not even have veto power. In fact, she may not have even participated in a limited manner on the CFIUS recommendation, as she did not sit on the committee to represent the state department, a deputy did, and she did not intervene in committee matters. Your allegation above was another of Donald Trumps's "alternative facts" while on the campaign trail. Not according to the alt-right New York Times... www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,965
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Apr 3, 2017 9:05:51 GMT -5
Yeah- there's no spinning her way out of this. As soon as the SHTF, she should have shut up and lawyered up. Please do not confuse the posters here that the Obama Administration is still a Virgin regarding political paybacks after eight years in office. They will not even believe it when the woman admits and brags about it to another liberal hack on live cable news. Political paybacks for what pray tell? Is there some paranoia star configuration in place today? Two of you are seeing issues where I see nothing. Nothing at all worth spinning gossamer fairytales over.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2017 9:12:25 GMT -5
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,643
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 3, 2017 9:27:57 GMT -5
... Here is an IRON-CLAD prediction you can take to the bank (DO NOT DOUBT ME): ... dropped like a hot rock within 30 days, ... drop this Russia nonsense- and soon. Few months tops. Check in 6/3... Hopefully it will get resolved at some point in time, whether it be the next 24 hours, within 30 days, or a few months.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,808
|
Post by Tennesseer on Apr 3, 2017 9:30:54 GMT -5
Strap in. We'll see how reliable my source in DC is- wiretapping story is supposedly coming to a head within 24 hours. Not in a way Trump opponents hoped it would, either... It has been 110 plus hours since your timeline prediction. What's up with that?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2017 10:00:28 GMT -5
It may not be your fault that you are not informed. I have grace and understanding for the ignorance displayed here:
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 3, 2017 10:03:14 GMT -5
... Here is an IRON-CLAD prediction you can take to the bank (DO NOT DOUBT ME): ... dropped like a hot rock within 30 days, ... drop this Russia nonsense- and soon. Few months tops. Check in 6/3... Hopefully it will get resolved at some point in time, whether it be the next 24 hours, within 30 days, or a few months. An eight month long investigation- according to sworn testimony by James Comey and others- which has revealed no evidence of any Russian hacking, nor any collusion between Russian agents and Trump campaign operatives is called "resolution". It's resolved. When will it be dropped? My guess is sooner than later.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,808
|
Post by Tennesseer on Apr 3, 2017 10:41:23 GMT -5
|
|