The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

Reply
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
232
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

232 Views
Message 31 of 55

When mass protests against Russian President Vladimir Putin erupted in Moscow in December 2011, Putin made clear who he thought was really behind them: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

With the protesters accusing Putin of having rigged recent elections, the Russian leader pointed an angry finger at Clinton, who had issued a statement sharply critical of the voting results. “She said they were dishonest and unfair,” Putin fumed in public remarks, saying that Clinton gave “a signal” to demonstrators working “with the support of the U.S. State Department” to undermine his power. “We need to safeguard ourselves from this interference in our internal affairs,” Putin declared.
Story Continued Below

Five years later, Putin may be seeking revenge against Clinton. At least that’s the implication of the view among some cybersecurity experts that Russia was behind the recent hack of the Democratic National Committee’s email server. 

 

So Hillary and the U.S. were "meddling" in Russia's election. What goes around, comes around. 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
232
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
224
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

224 Views
Message 32 of 55

PUTIN HATES HILLARY   so how in the world did anyone come up with the idea that RUSSIA was  HELPING Hillary....    BUT  It's easier to fool people than convince them they have been fooled.   Regardless I couldn't help but respond anyway to shed some truth  to the fiction in this thread.    Apparently, people have not been paying attention to Trump's kids who have met with Russians and Trump at Helsinki and how he practically kissed Putin's rump.  


When mass protests against Russian President Vladimir Putin erupted in Moscow in December 2011, Putin made clear who he thought was really behind them: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

With the protesters accusing Putin of having rigged recent elections, the Russian leader pointed an angry finger at Clinton, who had issued a statement sharply critical of the voting results. “She said they were dishonest and unfair,” Putin fumed in public remarks, saying that Clinton gave “a signal” to demonstrators working “with the support of the U.S. State Department” to undermine his power. “We need to safeguard ourselves from this interference in our internal affairs,” Putin declared.
Story Continued Below

Five years later, Putin may be seeking revenge against Clinton. At least that’s the implication of the view among some cybersecurity experts that Russia was behind the recent hack of the Democratic National Committee’s email server.   www.politico.com/story/2016/07/clinton-putin-226153

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
224
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
223
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

223 Views
Message 33 of 55

@jimc91 wrote:

Here is one factoid from the original article:

 

As it turns out, the DOJ official being lobbied was the spouse of one of that foreign national’s co-workers at the firm that hired the two of them to foment Russian hysteria on behalf of the Clinton campaign. And in a twist almost too absurd for even the most bizarre Franz Kafka novel, that firm was itself working on behalf of a Russian billionaire’s corporation that had been charged by U.S. federal prosecutors with illegally evading U.S. sanctions.

Concocting a Giant Setup

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Here is a simple challenge for the posters that are trying to make this about the source.  

 

What in the above paragraph is inaccurate?  

 

The reporter that wrote this story did the legwork to discover these facts and then wrote about it.  You did not read this on CNN or MSNBC, have you wondered why?  

 

How about because they both supported Hillary in the 2016 election and this story certainly does not support her, so it does not lend itself to their narrative.

 

So exactly where am I wrong or the article wrong?

 

When the left has no real rebuttal they simply attack the source...  And that's a fact!

 

 


What in the above paragraph is inaccurate. you ask?

 

How about THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH!!!

 

Why did CNN and MSNBC not carry the article while THE FEDERALIST did, you ask.

 

Because both CNN and MSNBC are legitimate news sources while THE FEDERALIST was founded by a serial plagiarist, printed that a certain female Supreme Court justice was gay with absolutely no proof, and considers CHILD MOLESTATION as a method of increasing the U.S. population.

 

I love the use of THE FEDERALIST as a source. It makes my day easy.

 

Thanks.

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
223
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
215
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

215 Views
Message 34 of 55

@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@nctarheel wrote:


 

It is the responsibility of the poster to defend their sources and, in this case, it can't be done.

 


Can you or the rest making this about the source post accurate information to disprove the original post? 

 

And to the contrary regarding your's and other posts making this about the source instead of the topic, it is up to those opposed to prove the topic wrong. 

 

 


So your challenge is to "POST ACCURATE INFORMATION" to disprove the post. All that could mean is that you also believe that the source is so contaminated that it is wholly inaccurate.

 

Since when is it up to posters to disprove wholly inaccurate posts from contaminated sources.

 

If that were the case, posters could write anything from any source, regardless of its validity, and everyone else would have to "chase their tail" wasting time challenging obviously erroneous material.

 

So those that use THE FEDERALIST, THE DAILY MAIL, and LIFEZETTE; keep doing so... it makes my life easier.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
215
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
215
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

215 Views
Message 35 of 55

Here is one factoid from the original article:

 

As it turns out, the DOJ official being lobbied was the spouse of one of that foreign national’s co-workers at the firm that hired the two of them to foment Russian hysteria on behalf of the Clinton campaign. And in a twist almost too absurd for even the most bizarre Franz Kafka novel, that firm was itself working on behalf of a Russian billionaire’s corporation that had been charged by U.S. federal prosecutors with illegally evading U.S. sanctions.

Concocting a Giant Setup

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Here is a simple challenge for the posters that are trying to make this about the source.  

 

What in the above paragraph is inaccurate?  

 

The reporter that wrote this story did the legwork to discover these facts and then wrote about it.  You did not read this on CNN or MSNBC, have you wondered why?  

 

How about because they both supported Hillary in the 2016 election and this story certainly does not support her, so it does not lend itself to their narrative.

 

So exactly where am I wrong or the article wrong?

 

When the left has no real rebuttal they simply attack the source...  And that's a fact!

 

 

VIMTSTL
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
215
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
218
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

218 Views
Message 36 of 55

@nctarheel wrote:


 

It is the responsibility of the poster to defend their sources and, in this case, it can't be done.

 


Ok, now you are making this topic about the source.  Can you or the rest making this about the source post accurate information to disprove the original post?  It does appear that attacking the source is an attempt to sidetrack the discussion.

 

And to the contrary regarding your's and other posts making this about the source instead of the topic, it is up to those opposed to prove the topic wrong.  It is apparent that you want to avoid proving the topic erroneous.  Of course, that has been the case anytime a topic sources media you don't agree with.

 

 


“Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself”. . . FDR
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
218
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
229
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

229 Views
Message 37 of 55
Soosie , debating these kind of "stories" serves no useful purpose , unless you enjoy the ridiculous. I guess some people even believe the National Inquirer. @mandm84......................It is hard to determine what you are referring to, but I will take a stab that it is the whackadoodle speculaton. I am learning some new important political words here. It reminds me of being in a line and hearing the guy who in a loud voice give his very studious opinion of the world happenings and then does his he, he, he, he bit. It is when everyone's eyes roll, but he still thinks he is cute.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
229
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
264
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

264 Views
Message 38 of 55

Attention! trump supporters!

Did you think this topic thru?

So, Hillary colludes with russia?

In order to have russia help defeat her

and elect trump? What!!

Hillary was the last person that russia wanted to see elected. 

 

Perhaps your source material was from

Mad Magazine!...What Me Worry!

 

still want to see trump’s tax return

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
264
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
267
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

267 Views
Message 39 of 55

@TxGrandpa2 wrote:


Criticizing the source instead of the content would be like criticizing the poster instead of what they post. 
One poster consistently attacks the source instead of the content.  
I've noted that this poster has never offered a source with an opposing view.

Criticizing the source is NOTHING like criticizing the poster, as you propose.

 

I, in fact, love when sources like THE FEDERALIST are used.

 

To use a source that is well known to have been described as BOGUS, PHONY, MAKE-BELIEVE, DECEITFUL, ERRONEOUS, MISLEADING, UNTRUE, CONCOCTED, and DECEIVING relieves me of the responsibility of finding an opposing view.

 

It is the responsibility of the poster to defend their sources and, in this case, it can't be done.

 

The source is too contaminated.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
267
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
260
Views

Re: The Only 2016 Campaign That Deliberately Colluded With Russians Was Hillary Clinton’s

260 Views
Message 40 of 55

@Soosie wrote:

Sure would be good if posters debated the post rather than always bringing up the fact they don't like the source. 


It is not that I don't like the source.

 

In fact, I love when sources like that are being used.

 

BECAUSE....................................................................

 

Why debate a post that is predicated on a source that is FAKE, BOGUS, PHONY, MAKE-BELIEVE, DECEITFUL, ERRONEOUS, MISLEADING, UNTRUE, CONCOCTED, AND DECEIVING?

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
260
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

AARP Call-in Event: Coronavirus: Maintaining Your Well-Being

Ask experts about the coronavirus, learn how to protect yourself, stay connected and cope with stress and anxiety brought on by the pandemic. Join AARP for a special call-in event April 9, at 1:00 pm (EDT).

You can participate by calling toll-free 1-855-274-9507.

Learn more about the event on our Tele-Town Hall page.

Top Authors