Politics Preferred Trump Endgame re: Russia, nukes, ...?

You set the bar low on that one.

I happen to actually like Bill Clinton (his wife is a wicked witch, though). He committed crimes and remained in office.

Next!

 

This poll was cherry picked by other posters a few days ago.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_aug11

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 45% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) disapprove.

A week ago, only 39% approved of the job Trump is doing.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-08-10/why-some-u-s-ex-spies-don-t-buy-the-russia-story

Why Some U.S. Ex-Spies Don't Buy the Russia Story
Evidence that undermines the "election hack" narrative should get more attention.

VIPS instead surmises that, after WikiLeaks' Julian Assange announced on June 12, 2016 his intention to publish Hillary Clinton-related emails, the DNC rushed to fabricate evidence that it had been hacked by Russia to defuse any potential WikiLeaks disclosures. To this end, the theory goes, the DNC used the Guccifer 2.0 online persona to release mostly harmless DNC data. Guccifer 2.0 was later loosely linked to Russia because of Russian metadata in his files and his use of a Russia-based virtual private network.

The VIPS theory relies on forensic findings by independent researchers who go by the pseudonyms "Forensicator" and "Adam Carter." The former found that 1,976 MB of Guccifer's files were copied from a DNC server on July 5 in just 87 seconds, implying a transfer rate of 22.6 megabytes per second -- or, converted to a measure most people use, about 180 megabits per second, a speed not commonly available from U.S. internet providers. Downloading such files this quickly over the internet, especially over a VPN (most hackers would use one), would have been all but impossible because the network infrastructure through which the traffic would have to pass would further slow the traffic. However, as Forensicator has pointed out, the files could have been copied to a thumb drive -- something only an insider could have done -- at about that speed.

Adam Carter, the pseudonym for the other analyst, showed that the content of the Guccifer files was at some point cut and pasted into Microsoft Word templates that used the Russian language. Carter laid out all the available evidence and his answers to numerous critics in a long post earlier this month.

VIPS includes former National Security Agency staffers with considerable technical expertise, such as William Binney, the agency's former technical director for world geopolitical and military analysis, and Edward Loomis Jr., former technical director for the office of signals processing, as well as other ex-intelligence officers with impressive credentials. That doesn't, of course, mean the group is right when it finds the expert analysis by Forensicator and Carter persuasive. Another former intelligence professional who has examined it, Scott Ritter, has pointed out that these findings don't necessarily refutes that Guccifer's material constitute the spoils of a hack.

...

And yet these aren't good reasons to avoid the discussion of what actually happened at the DNC last year, especially since no intelligence agency actually examined the Democrats' servers and CrowdStrike, the firm whose conclusions informed much of the intelligence community's assessment, had obvious conflicts of interest -- from being paid by the DNC to co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch's affiliation with the Atlantic Council, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank that has generally viewed Russia as a hostile power.

One hopes that the numerous investigations into Trump-Russia are based on hard evidence, not easy assumptions. But since these investigations are not transparent at this point, the only way to make sure their attention is still focused on the technical aspects of the suspected Russian hacks and leaks is to present the available evidence, along with any arguments undermining it, to the public.

 

The truth is coming out. The Nation is a far left source.

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

A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack
Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system.

• 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.

 

And now I'm going to post 3 graphs showing it was Obama who hacked the DNC.

Seriously Denny, BFW trying to create a discussion. Why shit on it?

 

It is the endgame. On topic.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v...rump_deep_state_government_kill_this_guy.html

Former Mueller Deputy on Trump: Deep State, "Government Is Going To Kill This Guy"


CNN counterterrorism analyst Phil Mudd, who worked for the CIA and the FBI when Robert Mueller was the director, on Thursday told host Jake Tapper that "the government is going to kill" President Donald Trump "because he doesn't support them."

"Let me give you one bottom line as a former government official," Mudd began. "The government is going to kill this guy."

"[Trump] defends Vladimir Putin, their State Department, and CIA officers are coming home. And at Langley and in Foggy Bottom (State Dept headquarters), CIA and State they're saying, this is how you defend us? We saw the same thing in his transgender comments. What is the military saying to him on transgender? Show us the policy. You know what that means inside government, ain't going to happen. What did the Department of Justice say on Paul Manafort? You can say what you want, a judge told us we cause to search his home early in the morning because we don't trust the guy who was your campaign manager," he said.

"The government is going to kill this guy because he doesn't support them," Mudd declared.

Jake Tapper attempted to clear up Mudd's comments, "obviously, when you're talking about killing you're using that as a metaphor."

"What I'm saying is government -- people talk about the deep state -- when you disrespect government officials who've done 30 years, they're going to say, 'Really? You send Vladimir Putin sends U.S. officers home and you support him before us?" Mudd replied.

 

I'll take the word of the counter terrorism expert over yours.

 

None of those people are elected. Their job is to enact the president's agenda. Period.