This is the location for conversations that don't fall anywhere else on FlameFans. Whether its politics, culture, the latest techno stuff or just the best places to travel on the web ... this is your forum.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

By paradox
Registration Days Posts
#639859
That's what Ari was saying. Press is amongst least trusted institutions. This implies broad spectrum. They are so bad that even some of their own don't trust them. But the minority of the population that actually trust the mainstream are indeed Dems, in general. His specific point is that the Durham situation is a living example, right before our eyes. Most of press is establishment.
User avatar
By TH Spangler
Registration Days Posts
#639862
thepostman wrote: February 16th, 2022, 4:36 pm You must really live in some kind of bubble if you think Dems in real life trust the press...
Sadly most of the democrats I know fully realize the msm is a lie. And they love them for it. :lol:
By paradox
Registration Days Posts
#639865
Nice try.

You actually have to pay for that content....and sub header seems to indicate the opposite of what you claim.
By paradox
Registration Days Posts
#639869
Not surprised you're going with that. NYT & WP shared a Pulitzer Prize for their Trump-Russian connection reporting. It may or may not interest you that NYT also won a Pulitzer in the 1930s for lying about the forced famine and liquidation of millions of Russian peasants. Walter Duranty. Look it up.
By stokesjokes
Registration Days Posts
#639872
I don’t understand your point here. You lamented that the mainstream media wasn’t covering the Durham stuff, I provided you with an example of them covering it months ago. I’m not endorsing the NYT, but they are MSM and they covered it, it should be open and shut at that.
By paradox
Registration Days Posts
#639873
No one's lamenting anything btw. We're simply saying that they're not reliable. And that's why they're not trusted.

As far as the other point....Durham is saying Clinton campaign had access to internet information coming from White House and Trump Tower. If that's in your story, it's fuzzy at best.

This is REAL news fellas. The press and Dem politicians were obsessed with false Trump-Russian conspiracies for 4 years....spinned them into news....and even impeached the guy. But now with this......crickets. So, there ya go.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#639876
The bottom line on what we know so far from Durham
1- Trump was ridiculed for saying he was being spied on in Trump Tower. That turns out to be true. The legality of it is up for debate but the fact remains he was being spied on
2- Sussman knew the whole Russia connection, especially Alfa Bank was non existent. Yet he ran with it and others did as well. Thus setting off a chain of events that broadsided America for several years
3 - Sussman initially went to the CIA with this information and into the welcoming arms of everyone’s favorite Communist, John Brennan. Not the FBI who has initial jurisdiction over these things.

The spin has begun about DNS servers. The legality etc. But these 3 facts remain
By stokesjokes
Registration Days Posts
#639877
1. “Spied on” is real squishy here. This is available, non-encrypted data, you could get it for my computer if you were so inclined.

2. The Alfa Bank connection is an indisputable fact as far as the DNS data is concerned. You can’t see any of the information being passed, but the GT researchers found evidence of unusual volumes of traffic between Trump’s servers and Alfa Bank’s servers. Now, this doesn’t necessarily mean anything shady was going on since you can’t see the info being passed, but the connection is stone-cold fact.

3. If you see evidence of what these researchers thought might be Russian cyber-attacks, where are you supposed to take it? The Campbell County Sheriff? Also, he brought it to the CIA and FBI


Also, @paradox, you do know that neither of Trump’s impeachments had to do with Russia, right?
User avatar
By TH Spangler
Registration Days Posts
#639881
Purple Haize wrote: February 16th, 2022, 11:46 pm The bottom line on what we know so far from Durham
1- Trump was ridiculed for saying he was being spied on in Trump Tower. That turns out to be true. The legality of it is up for debate but the fact remains he was being spied on
2- Sussman knew the whole Russia connection, especially Alfa Bank was non existent. Yet he ran with it and others did as well. Thus setting off a chain of events that broadsided America for several years
3 - Sussman initially went to the CIA with this information and into the welcoming arms of everyone’s favorite Communist, John Brennan. Not the FBI who has initial jurisdiction over these things.

The spin has begun about DNS servers. The legality etc. But these 3 facts remain
Solid guy, John Ratcliffe, says more to come. Time will tell.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#639882
stokesjokes wrote: February 17th, 2022, 12:18 am 1. “Spied on” is real squishy here. This is available, non-encrypted data, you could get it for my computer if you were so inclined.

2. The Alfa Bank connection is an indisputable fact as far as the DNS data is concerned. You can’t see any of the information being passed, but the GT researchers found evidence of unusual volumes of traffic between Trump’s servers and Alfa Bank’s servers. Now, this doesn’t necessarily mean anything shady was going on since you can’t see the info being passed, but the connection is stone-cold fact.

3. If you see evidence of what these researchers thought might be Russian cyber-attacks, where are you supposed to take it? The Campbell County Sheriff? Also, he brought it to the CIA and FBI


Also, @paradox, you do know that neither of Trump’s impeachments had to do with Russia, right?
1- not squishy. If I am watching you from my car all day and you are not aware of it, that’s spying. The contortions to say this wasn’t spying have been interesting to watch.
2- Alpha Bank was known to be a non starter by Sussman et al. They ran with it anyways and put our Country into untold chaos
3- the FBI. You take that information to the FBI. Sussman and people in his position know tat. But he took it to the CIA first. Why? Because Brennan was sympathetic. It did eventually end up at the FBI because the CIA was only willing to go so far in violating its charter.
By stokesjokes
Registration Days Posts
#639887
1. If you are a presidential nominee, you should be assuming all information that isn’t legally private is fair game. Calling it spying implies wrongdoing. People with legitimate access to the data analyzed the data, that’s not spying.

2. You can’t just repeat “they knew it was nothing” without any justification, especially in the case of the indisputable facts of the DNS traffic. What you’re doing is mixing up the timeline. The FBI investigated the data that was brought to them by Sussman, said we know the computer servers talked, about 2,700 times, but we can’t know if it was financial dealings or just an innocuous explanation like spam emails. They couldn’t have done their investigation until after Sussman brought the data to them because time is linear.

3. I can’t find any source to back up your claim that the FBI has primary jurisdiction here, so please tell me where that’s coming from. At any rate, he met with the FBI in 2016 and the CIA in 2017, although these meetings involved different sets of data. Finally, there weren’t any charges brought related to the CIA meeting anyway. Of note, Durham is fanning all these flames about the CIA meeting after the statute of limitations towards anything related to the meeting has passed and without bringing any charges. That can’t be anything but deliberate. He’s playing a political game here where he doesn’t actually have to prove his accusations.
User avatar
By thepostman
Registration Days Posts
#639888
Probably This ???

The federal government hasn't done a great job keeping up with how and who should be involved in investigating cyber crimes and so I find it hard to believe myself, stokes or PH really have a great grasp on who really has jurisdiction. No offense to you guys.

With that said, this is far from the open and shut case some on here would like to think. The only reason people are running with it is because of the hatred the right has for Hillary. The same goes for how people easily ran with the Russia stuff, they hated Trump so it must be true. You can talk yourselves into a pretzel to try to make it seem like an open and shut case, but it isn't. At least not yet with the info available to the public.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#639889
1- no you are the one muddying up what Spying means. You are literally saying Yes they were spying but it really wasn’t spying because it wasn’t illegal. And even if it was illegal it wasn’t wrong because everyone does it so it’s fine. They had the DNS data sure. But they were using it in a manner not authorized or approved of. It has all the hallmarks of spying because it IS spying.
2 Nope my timeline is solid. It’s in other Court filings and testimony. And is what makes this whole thing a Big Deal. The data was manipulated to make something appear true that wasn’t. Take a gander at what took place in the Brennan meetings
3- It’s simple. It’s in the charter of each Agency. The CIA cannot operate on US soil unless it’s an extreme circumstance. That includes surveillance etc. While the Average Citizen does not know this entirely Sussman et al certainly do and it certainly doesn’t warrant a sit down with the CIA head to game plan.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#639890
@thepostman that kinda makes my point. The FBI is part of DOJ. The CIA is not. The CIA cannot run surveillance or operate in the US that’s the FBI’s playground.
User avatar
By thepostman
Registration Days Posts
#639891
That is mostly true, but has changed a lot since 9/11 and the patriot act the CIA has morphed a lot since then and overreaches all the time, sometimes legally sometimes not so much. But yes the FBI, along with other agencies, typically cover this kind of thing. It is way too convoluted though. But that is a whole other discussion.

Like I was with the Russia investigation, I am in a wait and see mode. No need to jump to judgment because the Clintons and the Trumps of the world are pretty good at covering their butts.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#639893
@thepostman the irony here is that Trump was wrong when he said it was Obama spying on him Which is why I don’t buy the take “oh it’s just that everyone hates HRC” The fact is it’s a big deal for 2 reasons
1- Trump was ridiculed for saying Trump Tower was being spied on Just about everyone thought it was crazy talk and all parties denied it. Turns out he was right and now no one on the other side can bring themselves to admit it
2- these filings prove RussiaGate was a fraud, they knew it and went with it anyways

Legal. Illegal doesn’t really matter since no one is going to jail.
Chippy liked this
User avatar
By thepostman
Registration Days Posts
#639894
You don't have to buy it but it is why it is being jumped on. She isn't well liked, Obama was. Sometimes we make things more complicated than they have to be.

But yeah. Nobody is going to jail. So it all just theater at this point.
By paradox
Registration Days Posts
#639895
My guess is that people will be going to jail, once the GOP takes the House & Senate. Not gonna be HRC or any big name like that. Just fall guys. Hillary is irrelevant. Kamala comes after Joe, whenever that is. They're not gonna divide themselves by going back to Hillary. She's got skills though, Joe and Kamala don't.

This is more about broad malfeasance and deep corruption within the Dem party, IMO.
By stokesjokes
Registration Days Posts
#639898
Purple Haize wrote: February 17th, 2022, 10:37 am 1- no you are the one muddying up what Spying means. You are literally saying Yes they were spying but it really wasn’t spying because it wasn’t illegal. And even if it was illegal it wasn’t wrong because everyone does it so it’s fine. They had the DNS data sure. But they were using it in a manner not authorized or approved of. It has all the hallmarks of spying because it IS spying.
2 Nope my timeline is solid. It’s in other Court filings and testimony. And is what makes this whole thing a Big Deal. The data was manipulated to make something appear true that wasn’t. Take a gander at what took place in the Brennan meetings
3- It’s simple. It’s in the charter of each Agency. The CIA cannot operate on US soil unless it’s an extreme circumstance. That includes surveillance etc. While the Average Citizen does not know this entirely Sussman et al certainly do and it certainly doesn’t warrant a sit down with the CIA head to game plan.
1. I'm not at all saying they were spying. I'm specifically saying they weren't spying. And I'm specifically saying that all we actually know about the information gathering here is legal and above board. I think you have to assume a lot to get to spying here. What we know: a tech company had a government contract to access and collect this information. Researchers were tasked to analyze the data for suspicious patterns. They saw what they thought were suspicious patterns. The used their lawyer to submit this info to the FBI. That lawyer also worked for the Clinton campaign. The lawyer later met with the CIA regarding this and other new information regarding Russian cell phone use. Anything beyond this is pure conjecture at this point.

2. I've read the filing. Durham's accusation is "well, I don't think the data was as suspicious as they thought." To move from that to they knew there was nothing and were purposely moving forward with a fake story is quite a leap that is, again, pure conjecture.

3. If you think there is a chance that Russian espionage is taking place, the CIA makes perfect sense. I don't get how this suggests impropriety at all.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#639899
I literally explained why this was spying. You are making the leap to me saying it was illegal. I’ve said the jury is still out on that. But it was spying. Maybe this will help

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spy

It’s not just this filing that shows RussiaGate was a hoax. This just continues to affirm it.
Again, maybe to you it makes sense. But for someone at that level it clearly goes to the FBI. But they did not. Why?
By stokesjokes
Registration Days Posts
#639909
Yes, and I’ve explained why I disagree. Shentel has my DNS data, are they spying on me?

And I’m glad you’re confident that someone on Sussman’s level would know to go to the FBI. Of course it stands to reason that someone on Sussman’s level might know better than you do what he’s dealing with. It doesn’t seem nearly as clear-cut as you’re trying to make it.
  • 1
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
Dondi Costin - LU President

HEB is alright, but honestly Trader Joe's is my […]

LaTech

Looks like we'll have to win with pitching cause t[…]

JMU for 6 games

The fact of the matter is, JMU and Liberty could n[…]

NCAA Realignment Megathread

Honestly, the ACC should've taken Wazzu and Oregon[…]