• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Official Russian Election Interference Thread

Truth means nothing to me. All that matters is that we won and you lost! LOOOOOSERS! (sticks out tongue) I'm proud to be a Trumpette! GO TEAM AWESOME! #MAGA Whatever the fuck that means! We trumped that bitch! LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! HiLIARy probably has blood coming out of her you-know-what!

FIFY
 
Trump defenders: If this was the complete opposite situation, Hillary won and the CIA was saying that Russia interfered to her benefit, would you guys be anti-CIA right now?
 
Trump defenders: If this was the complete opposite situation, Hillary won and the CIA was saying that Russia interfered to her benefit, would you guys be anti-CIA right now?

I would continue to calmly and soberly weigh the evidence for both sides of the issue, something I have not seen from the histrionic Hillshills.
 
I would continue to calmly and soberly weigh the evidence for both sides of the issue, something I have not seen from the histrionic Hillshills.

So say the media is reporting what it is right now, but for Hillary. Would you really be trying to poke holes in the reporting like you are now? From your past conduct, I would have guessed you'd be posting all the Breitbart articles trumpeting the Russian interference. But maybe I'm wrong
 
Trump defenders: If this was the complete opposite situation, Hillary won and the CIA was saying that Russia interfered to her benefit, would you guys be anti-CIA right now?

:willynilly:
 
Nice try Comrade. This story is not about Hillary. This is a story about Trump actively trying to cover up Russia's involvement in trying to sway the election in his favor. And then rewarding those who helped them do it.

As a former high up in government once said, "the 1980's are calling and they want their foreign policy back"...
 
So say the media is reporting what it is right now, but for Hillary. Would you really be trying to poke holes in the reporting like you are now? From your past conduct, I would have guessed you'd be posting all the Breitbart articles trumpeting the Russian interference. But maybe I'm wrong

Maybe you're right, but I'd have plenty of real stuff to go after Hillary on. I'm not even saying the Russians aren't behind this, but the evidence is just not convincing enough at this point. Too many conflicting narratives. There's probably gonna be far bigger reasons to bash Trump in the coming years.
 
BSF was influenced by leaked emails provided by the Russians
BSF is not convinced that Russians tried to influence the election
 
BSF was influenced by leaked emails provided by the Russians
BSF is not convinced that Russians tried to influence the election

You don't know who provided the emails to Wikileaks and neither do I. There is disagreement on who is behind it and many people are saying the evidence is not conclusive.
 
BSF4L, which of the following statements can you agree with:

1. Russia-backed hackers are the prime suspect, and most likely perpetrator, of the DNC email hack.

2. Wikileaks' source was almost certainly whoever perpetrated the DNC hack

3. Russia has attempted to meddle in foreign political races before and clearly preferred Trump in this election.

4. Trump has people in his cabinet and inner circle with significant past or present ties to Russia.
 
BSF4L, which of the following statements can you agree with:

1. Russia-backed hackers are the prime suspect, and most likely perpetrator, of the DNC email hack.

2. Wikileaks' source was almost certainly whoever perpetrated the DNC hack

3. Russia has attempted to meddle in foreign political races before and clearly preferred Trump in this election.

4. Trump has people in his cabinet and inner circle with significant past or present ties to Russia.


Peter King was just on Morning Joe, and basically confirmed this. He also said that it was unclear if Russia was trying to help Trump or just create turmoil in general.
 
Trump defenders: If this was the complete opposite situation, Hillary won and the CIA was saying that Russia interfered to her benefit, would you guys be anti-CIA right now?
It can't be the complete opposite situation because the CIA has become politicized under Obama.

Bolton thinks it could be a false flag and his rationale is very compelling. You basically have the same situation with the current revelations about DNC/RNC servers and Hillary's servers. One was deemed not direct Russian involvement, just hackers with possible Russian connections. The intel people said a direct attack by the government would not be detectable. Here you have a hacker with Russian connections..and lots of finger prints....and now it's 180° the other way??? One or the other, and either scenario would have cratered Hillary.

But if the Russians are trying to destabilize the west, what would they now do? Push the idea they were hacking to get Trump elected.
 
Last edited:
You don't know who provided the emails to Wikileaks and neither do I. There is disagreement on who is behind it and many people are saying the evidence is not conclusive.

tl;dr version is either BSF got duped by the Russians and can't handle the truth or he's actually more Anti-American than we all thought
 
So, Obama mocked Romney and now it doesn't matter if they influence our politics? Good deal.
 
It seems this whole thing could be validated if they would release some form of proof that the RNC servers were hacked. The claim is that Russia hacked both parties and deliberately chose to only use the info gleaned from Dem sources to affect the election. Pubs are saying their servers were never hacked, thus the claim that Russia had all the info to selectively choose from is bunk.

Seems the only fact that hasnt been verified yet is the GOP servers being hacked. Whomever is the point for this for the IC should focus on clearly laying out that case for us.
 
It can't be the complete opposite situation because the CIA has become politicized under Obama.

Bolton thinks it could be a false flag and his rationale is very compelling. You basically have the same situation with the current revelations about DNC/RNC servers and Hillary's servers. One was deemed not direct Russian involvement, just hackers with possible Russian connections. The intel people said a direct attack by the government would not be detectable. Here you have a hacker with Russian connections..and lots of finger prints....and now it's 180° the other way??? One or the other, and either scenario would have cratered Hillary.

But if the Russians are trying to destabilize the west, what would they now do? Push the idea they were hacking to get Trump elected.

Oh dear lord. Welcome to the tinfoil hat administration.

Any time you're saying the words "false flag" and "very compelling" in the same sentence, it's time to reevaluate your world view
 
Back
Top