"The Ukrainian Job" - or - Russian Propaganda About 2016 Election Interference, Now Being Used By Trump Defenders
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
If you have a problem with the author of the article who attributed something to Giuliani, take it up with that person.
Don't write your letter the way you respond online here, though. You don't want it to end up in the "crank" pile.
There are two reasons for the phony Ukraine hacking story: (a) to distract attention from what Giuliani is really investigating -- Ukraine collusion with Hillary in 2016 and (b) to confuse people about the official investigation of the Russia investigation by ridiculing it as something absurd. Both reasons part of media/intelligence community attempt to discredit and undermine an investigation that it fears will further expose its complicity with a three-year hoax.
That's exactly what I'm talking about. You got it!
Now write that letter to the author of that article about Giuliani, and set them straight. Just avoid all that clownish stuff.
Trump is still ranting like a PaulSurovell about needing that server.
Trump again pushes debunked Crowdstrike conspiracy: “I still ask the FBI, ‘Where is the server?’ How come the FBI never got the server from the DNC? Where is the server? I want to see the server. Let’s see what’s on the server." pic.twitter.com/xSTKNRegmW— JM Rieger (@RiegerReport) October 16, 2019
nohero said:
Trump is still ranting like a PaulSurovell about needing that server.
Not sure where you got the idea that I've been ranting about the server. Have you been dreaming about me?
paulsurovell said:
Not sure where you got the idea that I've been ranting about the server. Have you been dreaming about me?
There's nobody else who is so insistent on citing "VIPS" and claiming that the findings of Russian hacking are false.
“Did he also mention to me in passing the corruption related to the D.N.C. server? Absolutely. No question about that,” he said. “But that’s it, and that’s why we held up the money.”
Mr. Mulvaney was referring to Mr. Trump’s discredited idea that a server with Hillary Clinton’s missing emails was being held by a company based in Ukraine.
paulsurovell said:
I'll break it down for you this evening. It's there and it's not hard to find.
I've been out of this thread for almost a week and a half. Did I miss the breakdown?
ml1 said:
paulsurovell said:
I'll break it down for you this evening. It's there and it's not hard to find.
I've been out of this thread for almost a week and a half. Did I miss the breakdown?
Check your notes. You pre-empted the breakdown with your "conclusion".
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
Not sure where you got the idea that I've been ranting about the server. Have you been dreaming about me?
There's nobody else who is so insistent on citing "VIPS" and claiming that the findings of Russian hacking are false.
That's what you meant by "ranting about the server?"
But yes, I find credible the VIPS position that the absence of evidence of Russian hacking of the DNC is a compelling argument that the Russian government did not hack the DNC, since the NSA would possess such evidence if it existed, and disclosure would not jeopardize sources and methods.
paulsurovell said:
Check your notes. You pre-empted the breakdown with your "conclusion".
I guess I must have been right then.
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
Not sure where you got the idea that I've been ranting about the server. Have you been dreaming about me?
There's nobody else who is so insistent on citing "VIPS" and claiming that the findings of Russian hacking are false.
That's what you meant by "ranting about the server?"
But yes, I find credible the VIPS position that the absence of evidence of Russian hacking of the DNC is a compelling argument that the Russian government did not hack the DNC, since the NSA would possess such evidence if it existed, and disclosure would not jeopardize sources and methods.
And the "V.I.P.S." argument is that the server wasn't examined properly, and information was withheld.
And that's what Trump was also ranting about.
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
Not sure where you got the idea that I've been ranting about the server. Have you been dreaming about me?
There's nobody else who is so insistent on citing "VIPS" and claiming that the findings of Russian hacking are false.
That's what you meant by "ranting about the server?"
But yes, I find credible the VIPS position that the absence of evidence of Russian hacking of the DNC is a compelling argument that the Russian government did not hack the DNC, since the NSA would possess such evidence if it existed, and disclosure would not jeopardize sources and methods.
And the "V.I.P.S." argument is that the server wasn't examined properly, and information was withheld.
And that's what Trump was also ranting about.
VIPS never said anything about the server being in Ukraine, but VIPS member Ray McGovern did point out that CrowdStrike never produced an unredacted or final forensic report for the FBI on the allegation of Russian hacking of the DNC https://consortiumnews.com/2019/06/17/fbi-never-saw-crowdstrike-unredacted-or-final-report-on-alleged-russian-hacking-because-none-was-produced/
nohero said:
This storyline needs its own category, away from the investigation of Trump's actions here-and-now.
Mr. Trump and his allies have been fixated on Ukraine since the 2016 American election, convinced that the country holds the key to unlock what they view as a conspiracy to undermine Mr. Trump. Mr. Giuliani in particular has viewed Ukraine as a potentially rich source of information beneficial to Mr. Trump and harmful to his opponents, including Mr. Biden.
But a detailed look at Mr. Lutsenko’s record shows how Mr. Trump and his allies embraced and relied on a Ukrainian prosecutor with no formal legal training and a long history of wielding the law as a weapon in his personal political battles, disregarding the concerns of senior diplomats who said he wasn’t credible.This Lutsenko guy got involved with Rudy, and then -
After his meetings with Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Lutsenko provided grist for a series of articles in The Hill, a Washington news portal. His remarks were pitch-perfect in their appeal to Mr. Trump and his supporters.
Mr. Trump tweeted the headline of one of the articles: “As Russia Collusion Fades, Ukrainian Plot to Help Clinton Emerges.”
Devin Nunes put the John Solomon lies into the record, in this morning's hearing.
What a lying piece of you-know-what.
[Edited to add] During questioning by Democratic counsel, Col. Vindman says there is no evidence for the "Ukraine interfered" lie.
Let's see if Nunes goes toe-to-toe with Vindman on this.
nohero said:
Devin Nunes put the John Solomon lies into the record, in this morning's hearing.
What a lying piece of you-know-what.
[Edited to add] During questioning by Democratic counsel, Col. Vindman says there is no evidence for the "Ukraine interfered" lie.
Let's see if Nunes goes toe-to-toe with Vindman on this.
Vindman is lying.
nohero said:
Dr. Fiona Hill dispatches the "Ukraine Meddled" fable for good.
What was her rebuttal of
https://www.ft.com/content/c98078d0-6ae7-11e6-a0b1-d87a9fea034f
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-court-ruling-election-interference/29652728.html
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
Dr. Fiona Hill dispatches the "Ukraine Meddled" fable for good.
What was her rebuttal of
https://www.ft.com/content/c98078d0-6ae7-11e6-a0b1-d87a9fea034f
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-court-ruling-election-interference/29652728.html
It was as described in the picture. Among other things, she made the GOP's counsel look stupid as she dissected the claims about what the articles mean.
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
Devin Nunes put the John Solomon lies into the record, in this morning's hearing.
What a lying piece of you-know-what.
[Edited to add] During questioning by Democratic counsel, Col. Vindman says there is no evidence for the "Ukraine interfered" lie.
Let's see if Nunes goes toe-to-toe with Vindman on this.
Vindman is lying.
John Solomon tells the truth.
Trump tells the truth.
Col. Vindman is lying.
"Q.E.D." for Paul, maybe, along with the committed Trumpists.
WATCH: Dr. Fiona Hill rebukes Republicans for repeating Russian propaganda, saying that Russia's goal is to "destroy the faith of the American people in our democracy."
Watch more: https://t.co/2YjkLVyraf pic.twitter.com/Ui61kSsi55
— MSNBC (@MSNBC) November 22, 2019 nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
Dr. Fiona Hill dispatches the "Ukraine Meddled" fable for good.
What was her rebuttal of
https://www.ft.com/content/c98078d0-6ae7-11e6-a0b1-d87a9fea034f
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-court-ruling-election-interference/29652728.html
It was as described in the picture. Among other things, she made the GOP's counsel look stupid as she dissected the claims about what the articles mean.
Can you cite at least one rebuttal by Hill?
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
Devin Nunes put the John Solomon lies into the record, in this morning's hearing.
What a lying piece of you-know-what.
[Edited to add] During questioning by Democratic counsel, Col. Vindman says there is no evidence for the "Ukraine interfered" lie.
Let's see if Nunes goes toe-to-toe with Vindman on this.
Vindman is lying.
John Solomon tells the truth.
Trump tells the truth.
Col. Vindman is lying.
"Q.E.D." for Paul, maybe, along with the committed Trumpists.
i gave you three articles citing evidence of Ukrainian interference. Has Vindman attempted to rebut any of this evidence? Or is the totality of his position "there is no evidence?"
nohero said:
[ MSNBC Tweet of Fiona Hill testimony ]
Hill is lying. The Republicans are not saying "Ukraine -- not Russia -- attacked us in 2016."
Hill knows that what the Republicans are saying is that both Russia and the Ukraine "attacked us in 2016".
ridski said:
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/02/senate-panel-ukraine-election-interference-074796
You're not supposed to read any Politico articles about this if they came out after January, 2017, as Paul makes clear:
What I believe about Ukraine's interference in the 2016 election is largely based on the Politico article previously cited and the Financial Times article, which is shorter and can be reproduced in full. I think Leshchenko was telling the truth when he was quoted in this article and that he started to lie after Trump won the election and he wanted to cover his efforts to help Hillary. It's obvious.
Cite: Post in the impeachment thread, where Paul keeps throwing "Ukraine did it" nonsense.
Meanwhile, back to that fun-filled family game, "Where's Rudy?"
Here are @AndriyUkraineTe and @RudyGiuliani here in Kyiv, #Ukraine. At midnight, they are in lounge bar of the Premier Palace Hotel, owned by close Putin ally, Russian oligarch Alexander Babakov. Hotel known as den for Kremlin agents & Babakov is alleged Russian intel himself. https://t.co/Ieqff7GjP3
Ted Cruz completely abases himself for Trump.
WATCH: @SenTedCruz says he believes Ukraine meddled in the 2016 election. #MTP #IfItsSunday pic.twitter.com/OPAxpe6T6t
nohero said:
ridski said:
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/02/senate-panel-ukraine-election-interference-074796
You're not supposed to read any Politico articles about this if they came out after January, 2017, as Paul makes clear:
What I believe about Ukraine's interference in the 2016 election is largely based on the Politico article previously cited and the Financial Times article, which is shorter and can be reproduced in full. I think Leshchenko was telling the truth when he was quoted in this article and that he started to lie after Trump won the election and he wanted to cover his efforts to help Hillary. It's obvious.Cite: Post in the impeachment thread, where Paul keeps throwing "Ukraine did it" nonsense.
Actually "Ukraine did it" is a canard and I've never said that and you know it. You are lying. And you know it.
nohero said:
Ted Cruz completely abases himself for Trump.
This is a great exchange, where Cruz exposes Todd as propagandist, accusing the Republicans of saying that Ukraine -- not Russia interfered in the election.. Note how he constantly cuts Cruz off to prevent him from exposing what Todd is doing.
You should make Todd an honorary member of your Facts-Don't-Matter gang.
As noted in another thread, the Republicans allege (as Cruz says here) that Russia interfered in the election and that Ukraine interfered in the election.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/02/us/politics/republican-impeachment-report.html
Democrats have posited a false choice: that influence in the 2016 election is binary—it
could have been conducted by Russia or by Ukraine, but not both. This is nonsense. Under then-
Chairman Devin Nunes, Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee issued a report in
March 2018 detailing Russia’s active measures campaign against the United States.529 But
Russian interference in U.S. elections does not preclude Ukrainian officials from also attempting
to influence the election. As Ambassador Volker testified during his public hearing, it is possible
for more than one country to influence U.S. elections.530
For Sale
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Having your worldview challenged is a challenge of its own. I speak my mind.