Maybe you could - we'll never know unless you try, will we? What's your evidence that the Russian government was mainly interested in clicks rather than political influence? That's like saying "people shoot guns all the time, so obviously Stephen Paddock isn't a murderer" That isn't correct unless you are talking about everyone who used social media. The Russkies focused on pro-Trump, anti-Clinton. There are always sore losers, but the indictments suggest that there's more to it than just whining. Mueller isn't a Hillary Clinton sycophant. barfo
I dont have any because there isnt any, just like there is no evidence the russian government was involved with ANY of these claims. Just abunch of memes and intelligence agencies claiming they have evidence but refusing to disclose it. I wouldn't put it past them, but why can't we just see the proof? And lets just go ahead and say The Russian government was responsible for ALL the memes and Facebook posts....who gives a shit. It didnt steal the election for anyone. There we're a million times more negative memes and facebook posts at the hands of american citizens. Hillary Clinton is a dirtbag and lost the election regardless of memes. You guys are trying to suggest there were enough americans swayed by Russian influence to make Hillary lose an election she would have otherwise won. Not true. Complete nonsense. Shitty excuse.
You do understand that their is a huge investigation actually going on right now with Russia and our administration don't you? Why would any investigator/prosecutor disclose the evidence while an investigation is going on. The pertinent people know.
Because he hates Trump and Hillary obviously is colluding with him to tarnish Trumps good name (and Putins too!)
The indictments were handed down to russian hackers involved in the DNC hack. Wikileaks published that info, which disclosed DNC favoring of Clinton. All this info was true and led to the stepping down of the DNC chair. People deserved to know the DNC cheated other candidates, I'm all for leaks that expose corruption. None of this means The Russian government won the election for Donald Trump. There isnt even proof these hackers we're affiliated with the Kremlin. You guys are mad because Hillary and the DNC got exposed as crooks and you dont think it's fair. Boo hoo. Wikileaks has never been politically motivated, they publish info that exposes corruption at all levels, from any administration.
Too much money in the hands of the unscrupulous who fund unscrupulous politicians is another subject.
There's solid proof as has been told by even Republican committee members with access to classified information on the subject. Even the major foreign intelligence agencies concur. It's pretty much just our very stable and genius President along with his most ardent followers who disbelieve our best intelligence. I've heard they've got audio of Russians high five-ing each other following the election. There is so much intelligence that Mueller has used it to indict several Russians. Meanwhile, Mueller has indicted and convicted other Americans besides just indicting some Russian professional hackers.
Whether they actually changed the result of the election is unknowable and thus pretty much irrelevant. It is still a crime, though, even if it was completely unsuccessful. At least some of the people he indicted are GRU officers. Hard to argue the GRU has no connection to the Kremlin. I think you aren't paying much attention to the evidence, which has led you several times in this thread to make statements that are incorrect. I also think that Wikileaks is not as pure-at-heart as you'd have us believe. barfo
Our intelligence is specializes in lying, cheating, murdering, overthrowing small governments and installing puppet dictators. I'd trust the likes of a greasy used car salesman before the scum of the earth CIA. Everything they say or do is to advance an agenda you and I are not beneficiaries of.
Our intelligence specializes in lying, cheating, murdering, overthrowing small governments and installing puppet dictators you say? Sounds like you've been listening to Trump. Where else do you get this breaking news?
That's not being fair, that's being silly and partisan within a party. Bernie had every right to run as a democrat.
Millions of mail-in voters in California were sent primary ballots without Bernie's name on them. The officials in California passed a last minute rule stating voters had to make a certain specification ahead of time to vote for an independent-turned Democrat. They made sure to put it in the fine print of course, so millions of voters would pass over it, and get mail-in ballots devoid of a certain senator from Vermont's name on them.
Why? It's nothing personal but he isn't a democrat. I would have the same opinion if he ran as a republican.
Millions? The election had 5 mil total so how could "millions" be missing? Just curious if you ever have any links to support your many assertions?
