Topic: Up Like Trump - page 39. (Read 572883 times)

yes if the 19 agencies are all basing their conclusions upon an old report that shows nothing of substance then yes they are wrong.  And since you do not cite any specifics then I can only conclude that this is the report that you are mentioning..

It is an obvious attempt to demilitarize the sitting president which is a treasonous act.  So they do it in these backhanded ways.    And these forums are the incubator to see what the public will and will not accept.  Thanks for playing!

A fan! I'm flattered, and I'd blush, but I'm too fucking dark.

I made allusion to multiple sources..Which, of the many, has no credibility? I didn't think anyone here would be 'intellectually resistant' enough to doubt official reports from multiple government agencies, on the same topic, which have all reached the same conclusion. And not pussy ass agencies like the EPA, I'm talking letter agencies that can make you dissappear.

  So you are telling me the multiple reports by multiple agencies have no credibility, and are all based off of old evidence before the election? And if the aim is to see if they interfered in the election, would all the actions in question not have occurred before the election? So, they could, you know, influence it?

See, I don't believe in that deep state shit, at least as y'all do. Hell yes there are agencies that exist to supress public interest, secrecy is required for certain agencies to be able to do their jobs. They are no saints, however. But the idea of some monolithic shadow government controlled by intelligence agencies is some paranoid bullshit. That being the case, every branch of government would have its own version of 'the deep state' instead of just the enforcement arm. The 'deep state' is the military industry complex, it exists to make money and protect the state, in that order. They don't want to turn you gay with flouride, or whatever tin foil poppycock is being sold as news on Breitbart and InfoWars.  

And the hilarious thing is, why would the 'deep state' have an issue with Trump? His policies would lead to the civil unrest that Hillary, Obama and Soros want. Can't move to  a police state if everyone is happy, you need strife to make the policy changes necessary. Kinda like the shitshow 45 has brought to bear.

I used to be into conspiracy theories more than you, I promise you. Then, I woke up.

Wake up.

Edit: Had a few fingers of an AMAZING bourbon, came up with 'Obama, Hillary, Soros and the Jews will form Voltron and take over the planet, ushering in a reign of terror'.

The visual of Big O and H Dog forming the head (I don't know what the fuck Soros looks like, from conservative descriptions, he should.look like Emperor Palpatine, I think) is fucking hilarious to me at the moment.

The entire middle East is Muslim. If you don't count Israel. I think that every year Christians will be less until will not do. This objectively. Unless of course Christians will not create its autonomy, but then they suffer the fate of Israel.

I waited to see how this member reacted.. and now I have my answer.  

Greenbitz, the cia report you cite has no credibility.. have you read it?  Did you know it was a repackaged report from several years ago when there was no election taking place?

It was redone with little change to serve a fake news purpose.  So yes our own intelligence agency is making and selling fake news and you bought it.

They can produce such fake news since the smith-bundt act was blocked when the NDAA was reauthorized in concert with executive orders domestically..

..obviously the deep state is pushing the US into a war and Trumps supporters do not want to go


We have some very smart people reading here so please consider posting primary and secondary sources only for review if you wish to be taken seriously.

    Calling names and using social pressure tricks will only make you seem like a deep state shill.  And BTW the term "deep state" is not a term of endearment... never has been... thanks for playing!

Dude, wake the fuck up, man.

I cited Wikipedia, that was clearly stated.

And man, this shit isn't alleged, this is an intelligence report produced by your country. You can not accept the shit, but that does not make it go away. You are free to take the word of an enemy of the state over all intelligence agencies in your country, it speaks to your intellectual stubbornness. I'm not making this shit up. These are the unfortunate facts, I don't want to deal with this shit as much as you.

Remove your fingers from your ears, Spendulus.

Is the entire Intelligence community Democratic?/

Problem is, you are not citing anything but the content of an alleged report. You are not citing the report. I'm not even sure it matters if you were.

Everyone's aware that the Demos have obsessively harped on the "Russian angle."

Everyone will agree that the Wikileaks releases, showing the true nature of Hillary and her criminal associates, influenced the election.

But nobody has to agree that the material was given to Wikileaks by the Russians. There does not seem to be evidence for that. You seem to think "someone said it says so in a CIA report" is evidence. It isn't.

I personally find Julian Assauge's story about where the material came from more believable.

Christians have been living in the middle east even before prophet Mohammed began spreading Islam. Syria was like 30% Christian a century ago. Now this percentage has gone below 10%. Lebanon was 70% Christian in 1930. Now it has been decreased to 30%.

I feel as though the sectarian violence has always been a feature of the region; this occurs whenever there are multiple religions /ehtnic groups (for all practical purposes) cohabitating closely. What is new, is the level of violence that can be achieved with modern technologies, and the level of media dissemination each attack can achieve given the state of communications today.  This always happens, essentially. It's just escalating, like everything else does over time.

Also, the radicalization efforts would be localized, social media makes the threat of remote radicalization much more severe.

Nothing good will. I do not understand how for so many centuries, the Christian community could live in Syria. Or the early Muslims were more peaceful? In any case, it will be hard to live because peace in the middle East will not be a very long time.

I have an opinion - could be wrong - but my opinion is that the attempts at demonization of Trump are going to fail.

It's worth remembering Trump isn't really even a Republican.

Interestingly, were the tables reversed, there would be no need to mount a giant campaign to demonize Hillary.

She already was a demon.

"Pope & el chapo united to stop Trump."   wtf?

Made up, posted by sock puppet on internet.


Yawn.

The mass hypnosis has lost its grip. Republicans+democrats+pope+el chapo+soros, all united to stop TRUMP...

What a beautiful sight...... Or if they will let him win. At all.

The rebels are mostly hardline Islamist factions. Previously, they have even committed genocide against fellow Muslim minorities such as Alawites, Ismailis and Kurds. You can imagine what will happen to the Christians if these people come to power.

I knew I would have to try to analyze how 'real' Trump was if he got in.  One thing I resolved to try to keep an eye on was whether the ridiculous psy-ops continued.  Especially the ones where the 'families of the victims' immediately going into the news cycle talking about how they love and forgive the person who supposedly just shot their family member or whatever.

It seemed that there was a hiatus of such psy-ops for several months after Trump, but now they seem to be back with a vengeance.  Here's a reasonably well put together study of the phenomenon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2VnVqlLzPI

Some people are clinging to the hope that Trump is playing a deep game and will eventually burst through to save us.  I don't rule it out as a possibility, and if so, feigning a sell-out posture would be the way to do it, but now believe that it is a very long-shot indeed.  Even if this is true, Trump and his real hidden operatives would hold we who speak out (rather than suck up to him as he gives every appearance of selling out) in high regard.

This is the most official thing I could find, but do know this is a popular opinion amoung the non Trump camp. We see the fact that this investigation has kept going on for so long despite Comey being decidedly partisan (read Hillary email disclosure). If there was nothing, we wouldn't be hearing about it still.

This is a statement from
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/215-press-releases-2016/1423-joint-dhs-odni-election-security-statement

I don't know how.you feel about Wikipedia. In this case they are citing Senate testimony, here is the link to the article..it is seemingly non partisan, but maybe I am not the best judge. See for yourself.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections

Let me.cite a bit for the sake of ease:

December 2016 CIA report
On December 9, the CIA told U.S. legislators the U.S. Intelligence Community had concluded, in a consensus view, that Russia conducted operations to assist Donald Trump in winning the presidency, stating that "individuals with connections to the Russian government", previously known to the intelligence community, had given WikiLeaks hacked emails from the DNC and John Podesta.[61] The agencies further stated that Russia had hacked the RNC as well, but did not leak information obtained from there.[62] These assessments were based on evidence obtained before the election.[63] According to an unnamed official, the intelligence community did not believe that Moscow’s efforts altered the outcome of the election.

Now before you comment on the fact they concluded there was no effect, understand that this is dated, and the investigation was reopened and is still.in progress. Which is.what I mean about it being interesting this is still going on. This apparently warranted a second look.

Next cite:
During a House Intelligence Committee hearing in early December, the CIA said it was certain of Russia's intent to help Trump, but the FBI said "it’s not clear that they have a specific goal or mix of related goals".[75] On December 16, 2016, CIA Director John O. Brennan sent a message to his staff saying he had spoken with FBI Director James Comey and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and that all agreed with the CIA's conclusion that Russia interfered in the presidential election with the motive of supporting Donald Trump's candidacy.[76]

January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment
On January 6, 2017, after briefing the president, the president-elect, and members of the Senate and House, U.S. intelligence agencies released a de-classified version[83] of the report on Russian activities. The report asserted that Russia had carried out a massive cyber operation ordered by Russian President Putin with the goal to sabotage the 2016 U.S. elections. The agencies concluded that Putin and the Russian government tried to help Trump win the election by discrediting Hillary Clinton and portraying her negatively relative to Trump, and that Russia had conducted a multipronged cyber campaign consisting of hacking and the extensive use of social media and trolls, as well as open propaganda on Russian-controlled news platforms.[84] A large part of the report was dedicated to criticizing Russian TV channel RT America, which it described as a "messaging tool" for the Kremlin.[85]

There is alot more of this. You don't have to take it from Wikipedia if you don't want to, I understand the mistrust of that particular source, but these are jumping off points.for independent research (the best kind). I'm not trying to lie.to you guys, or deceive. Being sincere, it truly looks fishy to me. With that being said, I don't believe in a nefarious 'deep state'. I do believe it exist, and if it does, it is most likely conservative (military types tend toward conservatism, can we agree?) But it serves the country, not a party. It literally exist at the behest of the country. Please believe.I understand they do some amazingly fucked up shit, in the name of security. But this is directed outward, not one of the myriad plots to.militarize society (different conversation).

^^^ good suggestions.  Only correction I would make is the 2 party system is basically the same party and the primary systems keeps any third party from ever ending the scam.

Also I would add that the larger human based vote fraud came from county board of election workers who are placed long in advance and were busted running ballots through the machines 12x for hillary and 0x for trump.  This was found during the recount and was the last info that came out before a judge cancelled the entire statewide recount..

interesting side note in the above mentioned instance the county clerk was available to immediately comment as to why his workers needed to run the ballots upto 12x in the case for Hillary and 0x for Trump because he claims the machines are old.  Also interesting to note that this same clerk was asked regularly if his machines were old and for years has never made 1 complaint,... and yet within minutes of the "human error" fraud being busted he for the first time ever states the machines are old and that his workers must have forgot to zero out the tally after they were done rescanning the hillary ballots 12x and the Trump ballot 0x..  LOL

Estonia already has blockchain voting.

Dubai wants everything government on their blockchain by 2020.

Blockchain Rules.

I don't even think the solution is that complicated.  In fact it is super easy:

 - Severe penalties for cheaters and actual enforcement.

 - Triplicate paper forms with random tamper-proof identifiers.

 - At least two adversarial counting groups (usually dems, repubs.)

 - Counts must match.  If not, the orig held by the voter can be called to see who the cheater is.

The real problem at this point are the computer based tabulations.  It was these databases which were the target for the hackers, or more simply, the cheaters.  It is understood at this point that the mainstream media can put out results make of whole cloth and nobody will question it.  If they do do a re-count the cheaters will be protected (e.g., 2016 Detroit) since actually prosecuting people would threaten the perception of America as a democracy in the minds of the sheep and thus create a 'threat to national security.'