Jump to content

Bill O'Reilly, Meet Stevie Johnson!


Domdab99

Recommended Posts

here you go

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=evidence+the+russians+interfered+in+US+election&oq=evidence+the+russians+interfered+in+US+election&aqs=chrome..69i57.9488j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

Google is easy.

 

But I'm sure you're going to come back and say "smoking gun." Never mind that over TEN of our intelligence agencies have agreed that it happened.

 

The “three or four” agencies referred to by Mr. Trump are the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the F.B.I. and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, all of which determined that Russia interfered in the election. Their work was compiled into a report, and a declassified version was released on Jan. 6 by the director of national intelligence. It said that all four agencies had “high confidence” that Russian spies had tried to interfere in the election on the orders of President Vladimir V. Putin.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/06/us/politics/trump-russia-intelligence-agencies-cia-fbi-nsa.html


This is like people saying Climate Change isn't real because only 98 out 100 Climate scientists say it's real.


And i'm done with this. Anything else you're going to want answered will have to come from someone else.

Edited by Domdab99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

here you go

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=evidence+the+russians+interfered+in+US+election&oq=evidence+the+russians+interfered+in+US+election&aqs=chrome..69i57.9488j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

Google is easy.

 

But I'm sure you're going to come back and say "smoking gun." Never mind that over TEN of our intelligence agencies have agreed that it happened.

 

The “three or four” agencies referred to by Mr. Trump are the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the F.B.I. and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, all of which determined that Russia interfered in the election. Their work was compiled into a report, and a declassified version was released on Jan. 6 by the director of national intelligence. It said that all four agencies had “high confidence” that Russian spies had tried to interfere in the election on the orders of President Vladimir V. Putin.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/06/us/politics/trump-russia-intelligence-agencies-cia-fbi-nsa.html

This is like people saying Climate Change isn't real because only 98 out 100 Climate scientists say it's real.

And i'm done with this. Anything else you're going to want answered will have to come from someone else.

 

I asked for evidence... and you give me a google link without a hint of irony and then a bunch of reports on the DNI ICA. The ICA is evidence, just not evidence for what you're claiming. It's evidence that Directors Clapper and Brennan committed felonies in the preparation of this document in order to undermine an incoming administration's ability to wage its own foreign policy. That's the real conversation we should be having about this document... but if you want to hold it up as proof that the Russians interfered with our elections you should at least understand what the document actually says:

 

What you provided is the DNI ICA (actually, a second hand report of the ICA) which has been proven to have been compiled in direct violation of USIC protocols and relied primarily upon what's now been forensically proven falsified evidence. The ICA itself actually doesn't even say what you think it does, or what the NYT says it does. It in fact does not confirm the Russians meddled, they speculate it's possible. The NSA is so confident in the ICA's assessment they currently have less than 50% confidence in its central findings. This is the NSA, the one agency of the three who compiled the report who would have evidence of hacking and collusion, and they're less confident in the ICA's findings than they had about WMD in Iraq.

 

It's times like this when it helps to read the source material for yourself before allowing yourself to be spun wildly into a frenzy by a propaganda machine that brought us 17 years of endless war and the most massive surveillance state the world has ever known.

 

You're being had.

Edited by Deranged Rhino
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You like a person that basically propagandizes against the left. It's not disagreement, it's just bull sh it he was pushing. Most left leaning people just spot that bull straight away, just saying. You did say we needed the tax cuts because of the hidden unemployment rate, and you don't know anymore than I do that the GOP will pass anything at all on healthcare, and almost nothing can be worse than that turd ball bill "mean" they passed before. What do you lean left on?

I don't see the same propaganda tricks with O'Reilly that Hannity and Limbaugh employ (everything wrong in government is the fault of the left and the Rino's). You can disagree with me and that's fine. I never said I supported federal income tax cuts because that means they'll likely reduce funding for social entitlement programs a lot of less fortunate people rely on. I hope you're right and the GOP doesn't successfully repeal the ACA, but I think they eventually will. If they don't, some major changes are needed to fix the ACA and reaching across the aisle to some of the more moderate Republicans input is a good idea.

Edited by Doc Brown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you lean left about? Seriously, you like O'Reilly, wanted the Trump unhealth care bill, have argued for the GOP tax cut plan, what the heck makes you a lefty?

He has flatulence.

that's like a more intellectual version of me. you !@#$.

 

fine i'm going to be Levi.

You have to spend your apprenticeship in Alaska first.

No. If you can't find it on your own, anything I post won't sway you.

 

You have made up your mind already.

your name is apt.

In other words, if you (DR) can't find something to support your premise then you won't discuss this anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has flatulence.

 

You have to spend your apprenticeship in Alaska first.

 

In other words, if you (DR) can't find something to support your premise then you won't discuss this anymore.

have you met that !@#$? He snap chats me anything 69 he can
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...