Jump to content


Null



Hidden Over 2 Years: Dem Cyber-Firm's Sworn Testimony It Had No Proof of Russian Hack of DNC


Recommended Posts

 

Quote

 

Hidden Over 2 Years: Dem Cyber-Firm's Sworn Testimony It Had No Proof of Russian Hack of DNC

CrowdStrike President Shawn Henry's admission under oath,  in a recently declassified December 2017 interview before the House Intelligence Committee, raises new questions about whether Special Counsel Robert Mueller, intelligence officials and Democrats misled the public. The allegation that Russia stole Democratic Party emails from Hillary Clinton, John Podesta and others and then passed them to WikiLeaks helped trigger the FBI's probe into now debunked claims of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia to steal the 2016 election. The CrowdStrike admissions were released just two months after the Justice Department retreated from its its other central claim that Russia meddled in the 2016 election when it dropped charges against Russian troll farms it said had been trying to get Trump elected.

Henry personally led the remediation and forensics analysis of the DNC server after being warned of a breach in late April 2016; his work was paid for by the DNC, which refused to turn over its server to the FBI. Asked for the date when alleged Russian hackers stole data from the DNC server, Henry testified that CrowdStrike did not in fact know if such a theft occurred at all: "We did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated [moved electronically] from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated," Henry said.

Henry reiterated his claim on multiple occasions: 

  • "There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."
  • "There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated."
  • "There is circumstantial evidence that that data was exfiltrated off the network. … We didn't have a sensor in place that saw data leave. We said that the data left based on the circumstantial evidence. That was the conclusion that we made."
  • "Sir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didn't see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw."
  • Asked directly if he could "unequivocally say" whether "it was or was not exfiltrated out of DNC," Henry told the committee: "I can't say based on that." 
509875_5_.jpg
Rep. Adam Schiff: Offered Crowdstrike what appeared to be a face-saving follow-up.
(Senate Television via AP)
 

In a later exchange with Republican Rep. Chris Stewart of Utah, Henry offered an explanation of how Russian agents could have obtained the emails without any digital trace of them leaving the server. The CrowdStrike president speculated that Russian agents might have taken "screenshots" in real time. "[If] somebody was monitoring an email server, they could read all the email," Henry said. "And there might not be evidence of it being exfiltrated, but they would have knowledge of what was in the email. … There would be ways to copy it. You could take screenshots." 

Henry’s 2017 testimony that there was no “concrete evidence” that the emails were stolen electronically suggests that Mueller was at best misleading in his 2019 final report, in which he stated that Russian intelligence “appears to have compressed and exfiltrated over 70 gigabytes of data from the file server.” It is unlikely that Mueller had another source to make his more confident claim about Russian hacking. 

MUCH MUCH MORE...

 

The FBI was supplied with (apparently edited) digital copies of the HDD, maybe as many as 10 copies.
They also received partial copies of logs from the server.
On not one of them did they find any evidence of exfiltration, digital copying and movement, of files.
CrowdStrike then offered that they could have been seen in real time and screen-shotted. 
Problem, what was released from wiki-leaks was pure emails, not screen shots. 
(Remember, if you will, that the copied emails were said to have been downloaded to a PC with Russian as the preferred language in Word? This was supposedly all the proof some needed that the RUSSIANS!!!!! were involved. Take my word for it, or google for yourselves. If you use screenshots, what the preferred language of Word wouldnt make a difference.)

***Professionals at the time stated that there was no realistic chance that 10GBs of data was transferred over 5-6K miles of Ethernet in the time that was found for the transfer to have happened. That the most logical conclusion was that the EMAILS were copied to a thumbdrive locally.    

Congress knew this was pretty much BS in Dec of 2017 when the CEO of Crowdstrike testified before congress.
Schiff held up releasing this info until now. 

Just another thing I got right. 

Edited by DKW 86
  • Like 4
  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites




  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thank God Barr is where he is, if the media would have done their jobs when the Russia Gate first happened we wouldn’t have wasted 3 years of this mess.  Are the walls still closing in?

“You’re an easy mark, David” coming from the guy that bought into the whole Trump is a Russian spy BS. Also, all of the “under oath” congressional testimony from Clapper, Brennan, Rice, Power, Mc

The FBI was supplied with (apparently edited) digital copies of the HDD, maybe as many as 10 copies. They also received partial copies of logs from the server. On not one of them did they find any

Posted Images

Thank God Barr is where he is, if the media would have done their jobs when the Russia Gate first happened we wouldn’t have wasted 3 years of this mess.  Are the walls still closing in?

  • Like 5
  • Dislike 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You're an easy mark, David.

They're declassifying this info and are almost certainly going to feed it to you in such a way that these lies by omission will get this exact reaction.

You labor under the impression that the only evidence implicating the GRU is from Crowdstrike? The evidence is far more expansive than that. It came from US Intel, cooperating foreign intelligence, and public analysis of publicly available data, like the bitly accounts and metadata within the dumps itself. Hell, even the Republican led Senate Intelligence Committee unanimously reaffirmed that the GRU had their fingerprints all over it. Hell! Trump's current SOS and his former CIA director confirmed it!  TRUMP HIMSELF HAS CONFIRMED IT. 

I feel bad for Seth Rich's family. Qanon about to be all over them again.

Edited by AUDub
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, AUDub said:

You're an easy mark, David.

They're declassifying this info and are almost certainly going to feed it to you in such a way that these lies by omission will get this exact reaction.

You labor under the impression pretending that the only evidence implicating the GRU is from Crowdstrike? The evidence is far more expansive than that. It came from US Intel, cooperating foreign intelligence, and public analysis of publicly available data, like the bitly accounts and metadata within the dumps itself. Hell, even the Republican led Senate Intelligence Committee unanimously reaffirmed that the GRU had their fingerprints all over it. Hell! Trump's current SOS and his former CIA director confirmed it!

I feel bad for Seth Rich's family. Qanon about to be all over them again.

Are we also forgetting that in 2017, the House was led by the Republican caucus?  Am I to believe that this wouldn't have leaked out if it was beneficial to their cause during that time?

Edited by Brad_ATX
  • Thanks 1
  • Dislike 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's go through this point by point. You need to read the GRU indictment. 

https://t.co/CofJpydBuQ?amp=1

7 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

The FBI was supplied with (apparently edited) digital copies of the HDD, maybe as many as 10 copies.

Proper forensic analysis of a hack is always, ALWAYS, performed via image. Don't ask me, ask @Strychnine, who does if for a living. Image the HDDs, analyze those,  not the actual physical hardware. This is standard practice.

"Edited" is a bull**** Qanon talking point you're just sneaking in there. They were cryptographically signed!

People also assume that when you say "server" you're talking about a box in a closet somewhere, which is completely wrong. In reality, the DNC server is cloud based, residing on an array of about 140 leased AWS servers scattered around the nation.

Quote

They also received partial copies of logs from the server.
On not one of them did they find any evidence of exfiltration, digital copying and movement, of files.
CrowdStrike then offered that they could have been seen in real time and screen-shotted. 
Problem, what was released from wiki-leaks was pure emails, not screen shots. 

(Remember, if you will, that the copied emails were said to have been downloaded to a PC with Russian as the preferred language in Word? This was supposedly all the proof some needed that the RUSSIANS!!!!! were involved. Take my word for it, or google for yourselves. If you use screenshots, what the preferred language of Word wouldnt make a difference.)

That evidence exists. There are literally routing logs showing exfiltration to a leased AWS in Illinois in April 2016.

Routing logs showing connections from the DNC/DCCC servers to GRU leased servers.  Same bitcoin accounts used for VPN leases and the DC Leaks account, tying together the guccifer and DCCC hacks, etc, etc.

Quote

***Professionals at the time stated that there was no realistic chance that 10GBs of data was transferred over 5-6K miles of Ethernet in the time that was found for the transfer to have happened. That the most logical conclusion was that the EMAILS were copied to a thumbdrive locally.    

That's bull****. The line connecting the leased AWS and DNC AWS array isn't run of the mill 10G Ethernet. This would have been a Terabit fiber backbone!

Unless you're assuming a transatlantic transfer over an undersea cable, no. A transfer over a north American fiber backbone is lightning fast, and would match (if not exceed!) the 480 Mbps transfer speed of 2.0 USB.

Quote

Congress knew this was pretty much BS in Dec of 2017 when the CEO of Crowdstrike testified before congress.
Schiff held up releasing this info until now. 

Just another thing I got right. 

This is meant to make Schiff look bad, and you're buying it. He had more corroborating evidence than Crowdstrike, way more. 

Edited by AUDub
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why we cant have nice things...

You are literally seizing on anything now. The FBI saw nothing and did forensics on...NOTHING. They are 100% dependent on Crowdstrike and this is testimony of the CEO, the man that lead the investigation for Crowdstrike, the PAID for people that did the investigation.

The rest is utter bull****.  

Why was the FBI denied access? 
Why in the **** would anyone deny access to Supposedly, The World's Best Investigative and Forensics Agency?


This is from....CrowdStrike.

are you nutz? Are you so blind that you are going to deny what the lead investigator said in testimony before Congress?
This is straight from the guy that lead the damn investigation. Are you saying he doesnt know what he is talking about? Really? BS, BS, BS... 

Quote

 

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/

There has been a long effort to counter the official narrative we now call “Russiagate.” This effort has so far focused on the key events noted above, leaving numerous others still to be addressed. Until recently, researchers undertaking this work faced critical shortcomings, and these are to be explained. But they have achieved significant new momentum in the past several weeks, and what they have done now yields very consequential fruit. Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year. Their work is intricate and continues at a kinetic pace as we speak. But its certain results so far are two, simply stated, and freighted with implications:

  • There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial “hack,” as alleged, that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on WikiLeaks last summer.
  • Forensic investigations of documents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or entity known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a blank template that had Russian as its default language. Guccifer took responsibility on June 15 for an intrusion the DNC reported on June 14 and professed to be a WikiLeaks source—claims essential to the official narrative implicating Russia in what was soon cast as an extensive hacking operation. To put the point simply, forensic science now devastates this narrative.

This article is based on an examination of the documents these forensic experts and intelligence analysts have produced, notably the key papers written over the past several weeks, as well as detailed interviews with many of those conducting investigations and now drawing conclusions from them. Before proceeding into this material, several points bear noting.

One, there are many other allegations implicating Russians in the 2016 political process. The work I will now report upon does not purport to prove or disprove any of them. Who delivered documents to WikiLeaks? Who was responsible for the “phishing” operation penetrating John Podesta’s e-mail in March 2016? We do not know the answers to such questions. It is entirely possible, indeed, that the answers we deserve and must demand could turn out to be multiple: One thing happened in one case, another thing in another. The new work done on the mid-June and July 5 events bears upon all else in only one respect. We are now on notice: Given that we now stand face to face with very considerable cases of duplicity, it is imperative that all official accounts of these many events be subject to rigorously skeptical questioning. Do we even know that John Podesta’s e-mail address was in fact “phished”? What evidence of this has been produced? Such rock-bottom questions as these must now be posed in all other cases.

 

 

If there are routing logs, do they 100% prove that those files were moved on a certain day at a certain time? Then show us us where those file were moved on that day at that time. Link demanded. No, BS, it must 100% undeniably prove that those files were moved to the Crimea over, yes 5-6K miles of Internet on that day at that time.    

Quote

 

Quote

 

https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/newly-released-docs-suggest-crowdstrike-unsure-if-fbi-confirmed-russians

Henry said that based on the evidence his firm reviewed, they believe “70 gigabytes of data” were exfiltrated from the DNC’s network. However, when asked by Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) whether he could “unequivocally say it was or not was exfiltrated out of the DNC, from what you know of?”

Henry responded, “I can’t say based on that,” according to the 80-page transcript

 

 

 

  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, AUDub said:

 

You're an easy mark, David.

 

“You’re an easy mark, David” coming from the guy that bought into the whole Trump is a Russian spy BS.

Also, all of the “under oath” congressional testimony from Clapper, Brennan, Rice, Power, Mcabe and Lynch was declassified and released. Interesting that they said much different things under oath than they did on CNN night after night, day after day for three years.  All of them said they saw no evidence of anyone in the Trump campaign working with any foreign govt, which includes Russia. But on MSNBC they all said things like “what does Putin have on Trump?”

Anyway, thanks for the laugh, and remember @DKW 86 you’re an easy mark!

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
  • Dislike 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, auburn41 said:

“You’re an easy mark, David” coming from the guy that bought into the whole Trump is a Russian spy BS.

Also, all of the “under oath” congressional testimony from Clapper, Brennan, Rice, Power, Mcabe and Lynch was declassified and released. Interesting that they said much different things under oath than they did on CNN night after night, day after day for three years.  All of them said they saw no evidence of anyone in the Trump campaign working with any foreign govt, which includes Russia. But on MSNBC they all said things like “what does Putin have on Trump?”

Anyway, thanks for the laugh, and remember @DKW 86 you’re an easy mark!

I think whats pissing some off here is that for three years I and a bunch more laughed at the crapola. Not all, but the vast majority of the RUSSIANS!!! COLLUSION!!!!!! IMPEACHMENT!!!!! UKRAINE!!!! has pretty much blown over. Slowly, even the few wins are evaporating. 

Now, do not get me wrong, Trump sucks as a President. He has no morals, no integrity, no character, no ethics. He is a buffoon and a clown. But the funny part is watching the TDS Crazies Over-React time and time again. Vote the guy out and move on, unless of course you nominate a geriatric, demented, old perv that has a reputation for his entire career as the human gaffe machine that was on the wrong side of the 10 biggest things that have happened in the last 40 years.  

  • Like 1
  • Dislike 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, auburn41 said:

“You’re an easy mark, David” coming from the guy that bought into the whole Trump is a Russian spy BS.

Also, all of the “under oath” congressional testimony from Clapper, Brennan, Rice, Power, Mcabe and Lynch was declassified and released. Interesting that they said much different things under oath than they did on CNN night after night, day after day for three years.  All of them said they saw no evidence of anyone in the Trump campaign working with any foreign govt, which includes Russia. But on MSNBC they all said things like “what does Putin have on Trump?”

Anyway, thanks for the laugh, and remember @DKW 86 you’re an easy mark!

Several tend to have these type issues......Hillary destroying evidence like having cell phones crushed and computers wiped clean and the DNC refusing to turn over their stuff to the FBI, and Wasserman-Shultz and her friendly IT guys, and this doesn't even count the Chinese spy on Feinstein's staff for years and years.  Nothing to see in any of this I'm sure.  And now we know the cabal including Schiff and Clapper and Brennan and others all lied their collective a$$es off on TV based on all of the released transcripts. We also know they played dirty to trap Flynn. We know they spied illegally on Page. We know they committed fraud on the FISA court.  We know they changed a statement to make it reflect the opposite of what the person said. These are facts that are now proven.  Who knows what we don't know yet.  I have a feeling that many of this gang will suffer the consequences of their actions and I suspect it will be timed to occur prior to the November election, but close enough to it so that folks will remember the truth when they vote. 

  • Like 4
  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

I think whats pissing some off here is that for three years I and a bunch more laughed at the crapola. Not all, but the vast majority of the RUSSIANS!!! COLLUSION!!!!!! IMPEACHMENT!!!!! UKRAINE!!!! has pretty much blown over. Slowly, even the few wins are evaporating. 

Now, do not get me wrong, Trump sucks as a President. He has no morals, no integrity, no character, no ethics. He is a buffoon and a clown. But the funny part is watching the TDS Crazies Over-React time and time again. Vote the guy out and move on, unless of course you nominate a geriatric, demented, old perv that has a reputation for his entire career as the human gaffe machine that was on the wrong side of the 10 biggest things that have happened in the last 40 years.  

I disagree with your characterization of POTUS but the rest of your post is right on the mark. I just happened to read Henry's entire transcript yesterday and it confirms Crowdstrike found no real evidence of Russian hacking. In fact to this day, no govt agency including Brennan's CIA, has ever done a forensic analysis of the DNC server to be able to form a basis for a finding. Yet some accepted this as fact for 3 years. I always asked, "How do you know that is a fact ?" It wasn't. "What law enforcement body ever did an investigative analysis of the server ?" Nobody ever did.

Edited by IronMan70
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Now, do not get me wrong, Trump sucks as a President. He has no morals, no integrity, no character, no ethics. He is a buffoon and a clown.

No need to always qualify your post David. We have understood that Russia collusion is BS. Reasoning behind the BS is the real story. 

Thanks for reminding us of the"geriatric". Most people are forgetting that he is a candidate. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, auburn41 said:

“You’re an easy mark, David” coming from the guy that bought into the whole Trump is a Russian spy BS.

Find documentary evidence of me saying such a thing, if you don't mind. I've said many times I think he is extremely deferential when it comes to Russia, but that stems more from advancing his own interests rather than Vlad's.

41 minutes ago, auburn41 said:

Also, all of the “under oath” congressional testimony from Clapper, Brennan, Rice, Power, Mcabe and Lynch was declassified and released. Interesting that they said much different things under oath than they did on CNN night after night, day after day for three years.  All of them said they saw no evidence of anyone in the Trump campaign working with any foreign govt, which includes Russia. But on MSNBC they all said things like “what does Putin have on Trump?”

There's really no doubt people in Trump's orbit were working as foreign agents. Neither here nor there, as you're just trying to strawman.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

And this is why we cant have nice things...

You are literally seizing on anything now. The FBI saw nothing and did forensics on...NOTHING. They are 100% dependent on Crowdstrike and this is testimony of the CEO, the man that lead the investigation for Crowdstrike, the PAID for people that did the investigation.

The rest is utter bull****.  

Like hell it is. 

I literally linked the indictment for you. Read it. Absorb it. This should all become clear at that point.

Read the Mueller report too. In fact, do a word search for Crowdstrike through the PDF. You'll find two mentions. In the footnotes. 

Crowdstrike is a red herring. 

Quote

Why was the FBI denied access? 


Why in the **** would anyone deny access to Supposedly, The World's Best Investigative and Forensics Agency?
 

This is from....CrowdStrike.

are you nutz? Are you so blind that you are going to deny what the lead investigator said in testimony before Congress?
This is straight from the guy that lead the damn investigation. Are you saying he doesnt know what he is talking about? Really? BS, BS, BS... 

You're speaking out of your depth. You have no idea how IT forensic investigations work, otherwise you'd know why this line of argument is bull****. I've performed forensic investigations on many pieces of networked medical equipment in my capacity as a clinical engineer.

Hell, the FBI contracts a ton of work to entities like Crowdstrike, including, get this, Crowdstrike, with regularity. Investigating a hack isn’t like investigating a murder. The Russians didn’t leave DNA evidence on the server racks and fingerprints on the keyboards. All the evidence of their comings and goings was on the computer hard drives, in memory, and in the ephemeral network transmissions to and from other locations.

The FBI made an unusual request, likely because they wanted access while the Russians were still there. They got their images, all the same data the Crowdstrike had access to, eventually. Their findings, in addition to others with additional evidence, confirmed the fact that the GRU is involved.

For the love of God, read the indictment I linked.

Quote

Read the forward the Nation put on top of that article. VIPS' take is quite controversial (controversial is me being charitable,  as they're flat wrong),  and the Nation even ran it by a cybersecurity expert that said VIPS conclusion was erroneous.

Quote

Hosting and management are two separate things. Even that slate article gets it wrong. The email server is not a single monolithic machine or set of machines in DNC offices. It's spread out among 140 AWS servers connected by a fiber backbone. This is a hard fact.

Quote

If there are routing logs, do they 100% prove that those files were moved on a certain day at a certain time? Then show us us where those file were moved on that day at that time. Link demanded. No, BS, it must 100% undeniably prove that those files were moved to the Crimea over, yes 5-6K miles of Internet on that day at that time.    

For the love of God, read the damned indictment I linked.

https://t.co/CofJpydBuQ?amp=1

Pages 6-13 lay it out easily enough for a layman, and page 11 details the dates and the location of the GRU leased server. 

Quote

5-6K miles of Internet

What the hell do you think the internet is? A series of tubes?

It's hard to argue with you when you don't even have a fundamental understanding of what you're arguing. 

Edited by AUDub
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AUDub said:

Like hell it is. 

I literally linked the indictment for you. Read it. Absorb it. This should all become clear at that point.

Read the Mueller report too. In fact, do a word search for Crowdstrike through the PDF. You'll find two mentions. In the footnotes. 

Crowdstrike is a red herring. 

You're speaking out of your depth. You have no idea how IT forensic investigations work, otherwise you'd know why this line of argument is bull****. I've performed forensic investigations on many pieces of networked medical equipment in my capacity as a clinical engineer.

Hell, the FBI contracts a ton of work to entities like Crowdstrike, including, get this, Crowdstrike, with regularity. Investigating a hack isn’t like investigating a murder. The Russians didn’t leave DNA evidence on the server racks and fingerprints on the keyboards. All the evidence of their comings and goings was on the computer hard drives, in memory, and in the ephemeral network transmissions to and from other locations.

The FBI made an unusual request, likely because they wanted access while the Russians were still there. They got their images, all the same data the Crowdstrike had access to, eventually. Their findings, in addition to others with additional evidence, confirmed the fact that the GRU is involved.

For the love of God, read the indictment I linked.

Read the forward the Nation put on top of that article. VIPS' take is quite controversial (controversial is me being charitable,  as they're flat wrong),  and the Nation even ran it by a cybersecurity expert that said VIPS conclusion was erroneous.

Hosting and management are two separate things. Even that slate article gets it wrong. The email server is not a single monolithic machine or set of machines in DNC offices. It's spread out among 140 AWS servers connected by a fiber backbone. This is a hard fact.

For the love of God, read the damned indictment I linked.

https://t.co/CofJpydBuQ?amp=1

Pages 6-13 lay it out easily enough for a layman, and page 11 details the dates and the location of the GRU leased server. 

What the hell do you think the internet is? A series of tubes?

It's hard to argue with you when you don't even have a fundamental understanding of what you're arguing. 

I don’t guess you understand this but...an indictment just means that “there may be enough here to go look for more.” An indictment doesn’t even guarantee charges. Really, in the world of real men and real facts it really doesn’t mean s***. 

  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

I don’t guess you understand this but...an indictment just means that “there may be enough here to go look for more.” An indictment doesn’t even guarantee charges. Really, in the world of real men and real facts it really doesn’t mean s***. 

It's a "formal accusation of a serious crime," and and extremely compelling one, given that Mueller laid out his case extremely effectively therein. Not that I expected anything less than a handwave from you.

"Just" an indictment. LOL. What utter claptrap 

Edited by AUDub
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Get it through your head, David. These guys are never going to be tried. Russia won't extradite, and these guys would be complete morons to even sniff our borders.

In that sense, the indictment is essentially a factual report of Mueller's findings, and it's excellently spelled out. There's literally a rock solid paper trail described therein  They're basically indicting a bank robber that let himself be caught on camera, told the teller his name and social security number and left his fingerprints all over the crime scene. That you refuse to read and comprehend before you utterly reject it and assume a contrary postion because of your silly (not to mention hilariously inconsistent) ideological proclivities without weighing all the other evidence is your problem.

Your objection is tantamount to suggesting that because a couple of witnesses, in spite of all of that other evidence, couldn't agree whether the getaway vehicle was a blue or green, then the whole case must be bunk. 

Edited by AUDub
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

Adam Schiff spread falsehoods shamelessly about Russia and Donald Trump for three years "

Same could be said about a few folks around here.

i did. hell trump asked russia for help. oh he was just joking yall said. how can you tell with that lying piece of garbage? hell he lies about stuff he has no need to lie about. i am sorry but only a fool would see a guy running for president asking russia for help and at the same time knowing russian agents were around often and not look into it. when will we get to read the complete unredacted mueller report? and now trump is making a mockery of justice and it appears he will get away with it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Tom knows what's up. 

 

Ole Tom can’t be serious.  “If the media chases every one of these as bombshell, they’re going to end up being a functioning arm of the Trump campaign“.  Do you really believe the media (other than FOX) will actually investigate these bombshells in a unbiased manner?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Ole Tom can’t be serious.  “If the media chases every one of these as bombshell, they’re going to end up being a functioning arm of the Trump campaign“.  Do you really believe the media (other than FOX) will actually investigate these bombshells in a unbiased manner?

That's what I thought when I read that. LMAO

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...