CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

50%↑

15%

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
January 06, 2017 03:21 PM UTC

BREAKING: Official Intelligence Report Says Putin Ordered Interference in U.S. Election

  • 85 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Whoa! As CNN (and everyone else on earth) is now reporting:

The US intelligence community concluded in a declassified report released Friday that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an “influence campaign” aimed at hurting Hillary Clinton and helping Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

The campaign — which consisted of hacking Democratic groups and individuals, including Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, and releasing that information via third-party websites, including WikiLeaks — amounted to what the intelligence report called “a significant escalation” in longtime Russian efforts to undermine “the US-led liberal democratic order.”

The report was the first official, full and public accounting by the US intelligence community of its assessment of Russian cyberhacking activities during the 2016 campaign and the motivations behind that hacking.

“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump,” the report said.

For everyone out there who doesn’t believe that the moon landing was a fake, this is pretty stunning news. The report from the Director of National Intelligence outlines many of the alleged tactics used by Russia to influence the U.S election with the absolute goal of trying to help Donald Trump win the Presidency.

We say again: Whoa!

So, now what? Either our elected officials accuse the Director of National Intelligence of lying, or they take action somehow. This isn’t a conspiracy theory.

There are many different questions here, but it is important to separate two of them: 1) Did Russia actively interfere in the U.S. election process? — and 2) Does this delegitimize Donald Trump as President? The answer to the first question must be considered on its own.

Tweet
Share

Comments

85 thoughts on “BREAKING: Official Intelligence Report Says Putin Ordered Interference in U.S. Election”

  1. I'm so tired of hearing about this. Everybody tries to influence our elections. Nothing leaked was false, was it? Maybe Democrats should be blaming their own crappy IT guys.

    Hillary Clinton lost the election because of NAFTA and her personal record of scandal. Own it.

    1. You're "so tired" of hearing how our democracy has been subverted? You're blaming the victims of espionage for the espionage? And since everybody "tries" to influence our elections, we should just disregard it?

      You're either the most ignorant citizen who has ever lived in any nation or you're a fucking Russkie agent. It's impossible to believe that any educated person could be so totally clueless.

      1. BS

        If the no-no is an "influence campaign" ordered by the Russians, how guilty do you think the US is of ordering "influence campaigns" on other countries?  My sense is we do that repeatedly.

      1. Oh, we can carry the logic much farther – the US has used drone strikes, so it would be fine for Putin to do drone strikes inside the US; the US has toppled heads of countries, so it would be fine for Putin to topple a head of the US, etc. You get the idea.

    3. First, let's be clear, Mr. Trump was legitimately elected President of the United States. Whether Russian espionage affected the ultimate result could be debated for eternity but no one can gauge, including me, what influence the Russians had on the election results.  From my perspective, I think Mr. Trump would have won regardless of the Russian involvement but all of that is beside the point.

      The point is the Russians tried to do it  and by succeeding and turning over the information to Wikileaks they obviously had a purpose. They didn't hack the DNC just for fun.. They had a motive which was to disrupt our election by attempting to make all of us or as many of us as possible, believe our system was fixed or in some way rigged. The Russians were trying to undermine our confidence in our way of life and our way of governing ourselves.

      More importantly, they also want to convince the rest of the world that our system isn't free and honest and therefore offers no hope for the rest of the world. The Russians know we are the hope of the world and regardless of who is president or who wins a particular presidential election, they took dead aim at our American Exceptionalism.

      Those are the reasons everyone, regardless of party preference or political philosophy, should be outraged at what the Russians did. The fact Mr. Trump was one of the candidates for president is irrelevant. 

      1. +100 R36. Well said.

        Voter suppression, as I’ve written numerous times, was in my opinion, the deciding factor in this election. Russian hacking and propaganda was also a factor, enhancing existing distrust of the Democratic candidate for a variety of reasons, some policy-based, some historical, some made up out of pure BS and moonshine.

        But Putin directed his people to undermine our election, and Trump refuses to acknowledge his intelligence expert’s information about this.

        2. Spot on, MJ. It's the last point, that The Screaming Yam refuses to acknowledge the intel on this, that scares the spit out of me. If this is the shape of things to come with him, we are all in deep cow chips.

    5. This was a direct attack on our democracy by a hostile foreign power. Do you Trumpies really think this is about Democrats whining? And yes this would be just as serious if Russia tried to influence our elections to favor Hillary. Our intelligence experts have made clear, that Russia isn't done yet. But Trump says only stupid people and fools don't want closer ties with Russia so I guess that should be the final word right?

      1. Having served as Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton would be madder than a wet cat if they had meddled on her behalf. She (unlike The Screaming Yam) has a firm grasp on foreign policy and diplomacy. He just gave them a wink and a nod to meddle all they like in our governmental affairs.

  2. I think wikileaks, in some sense, performed a public service.

    Our news media was too busy colluding with the Clinton campaign, feeding her debate questions, etc, to report on how corrupt the DNC was in its treatment of Sanders.  To me, that was the real scandal.

    1. Yes, the Director of National Intelligence officially reporting that Russia interfered in our elections…that's not nearly as important as what happened inside the DNC.

    3. The rACist weighs in to defend the rapist America hating commie bastard who endangers the lives of American troops and allies.   What a surprise.   Assange stinks almost as much as rACist does, so no surprise here.   

      1. V

        The last true believer, dog whistle, everybody who disagrees with me is a racist, clown is no longer with us.

        He passed away a couple years ago as I recall.

        I think the vitriol got to him.

        Seems like it is getting to you.

        Enjoy your weekend.

         

         

        1. AC, what happened to the right wing talking point about how Obama wasn't tough enough to stand up to Putin?

          It was everywhere for a while.

          (insert Democratic politician name)_______ just isn't strong enough to stand up to Putin!

          What happened to that talking point?  I mean, Donald Trump sort of stands up to Putin….that is, if backing up and bending over is "standing up to" someone…..

          How about you? You good with Vladimir puppeting our Prezzy?

        2. Actually, people who call African-American men "boy" are by definition rACist.  That ain't no dog whistle, klan klown, that's you showinng your true colors.

    4. How can you possibly say that Russian interference in our elections is commendable? By supporting Russian espionage, you believe its alright for a foreign power to attempt to undermine our country? That's just plain nuts.

  4. Director Clapper laid out the Obama intel report on Russian hacking. Director said it was a multi faceted attack that included, fake news, disinformation, propaganda and computer hacking. What are we to think? "You can save a bunch of money on car insurance by switching to GEICO". Apparently that's what the President was thinking since nation states and independent parties target every computer hooked to the internet. No serious effort exist to punish any type of hacking. Defense does not win in computer competition. Maybe this will result in redesign of hardware, software and connectivity of computer networks. I have no idea what that will look like. The human innovative mind will come up with the solution. No need for John McCain to drum up a shooting war. I'll do my part against Russia, no caviar, or vodka.

  5. So what does this report change?  Absolutely nothing.  Unless there is evidence that the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russian propaganda, the election stands and Trump is going to be the President of the United States as of 20 January with no legal reason to have him removed.

    We can only hope he won't be a total disaster.

     

  6. While I am still under the impression that the content of the leaked e-mails did not provide adequate incriminating evidence to sway an election, for the sake of the conversation I will hypothetically assume it did. Where that information came from seems to be the crucial factor here, while the content is being ignored. 

    The questions that immediately come to mind to me are:
    1) Would the outcome have been the same if the information was release by a 14 year old in their parents basement?

    2)Did the messenger provide any further catalyst other than the message, which based on the report, "did not contain any forgeries"?(pg13)

    3)At what point does the blame turn from the message to the messenger?

    Again I submit that the content was weak at best, and I urge anyone to provide one email out of the tens of thousands that would sway a voter's vote. However, if we are going under the assumption that the content of these emails swayed the election, and the content was factual and true, the source of this content is irrelevant…

     

    1. Evidence of forgery:

       

      “Guccifer” leak of DNC Trump research has a Russian’s fingerprints on it

      We still don't know who he is or whether he works for the Russian government, but one thing is for sure: Guccifer 2.0—the nom de guerre of the person claiming he hacked the Democratic National Committee and published hundreds of pages that appeared to prove it—left behind fingerprints implicating a Russian-speaking person with a nostalgia for the country's lost Soviet era.

       

       

      Exhibit A in the case is this document created and later edited in the ubiquitous Microsoft Word format. Metadata left inside the file shows it was last edited by someone using the computer name "Феликс Эдмундович." That means the computer was configured to use the Russian language and that it was connected to a Russian-language keyboard. More intriguing still, "Феликс Эдмундович" is the colloquial name that translates to Felix Dzerzhinsky, the 20th Century Russian statesman who is best known for founding the Soviet secret police."

       

      http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/06/guccifer-leak-of-dnc-trump-research-has-a-russians-fingerprints-on-it/

      1. So kickshot are you suggesting that the intelligence report which states "disclosures did not contain any evident forgeries" is not true? Are you providing evidence via your link that arstechnica.com has found the documents from the DNC and Podesta to be falsified or fabricated? Are you suggesting that Donna Brazile did not, in her own words, share debate questions prior to the debate?

        If you are implying that the information provided was not true, that would be a different story altogether. I have not seen a single person deny the validity of the content, only the source. If the content is true, my prior statements still stand.

        Q: Where did the "pussy grab" video/audio come from?

        A: Who cares. It's real. 

         

                1. No.

                   

                  Are you willing to ignore the obvious fingerprints of a manipulator?

                   

                  Are you unwilling to accept that there was more than one delivery mechanism?

                   

                  Are you skillful enough with a broad paint brush to presume that anything said about one delivery method applies to ALL delivery methods? 

                    1. Which party? IIRC, Hillary's server and confidential info was secure as per the (D) party line…. 

                      …until it wasn't…

                       

                       

                  2. I completely embrace and admit to the obvious fingerprints of a manipulator. I have no doubt that Putin was out to manipulate the election.

                    I am also willing to accept that there was more than one delivery mechanism.

                    I am not skillful enough to presume anything said about one delivery method applies to ALL delivery methods.

                    Now, tell me, what was delivered? 

                     

            2. So, is this the new Official Distraction technique?

              "It's the message that's important, not the messenger"?  'Cause you've said that several times, in different ways.  

              Whatever it takes to keep the focus off of what's important, I guess.

              1. And I will say it again as to not confuse you further:

                Its the message that's important, not the messenger.

                If the enemy provides you the truth you are vastly better off than a friend lying to you. How do you dispute this? Are you actually suggesting the truth is not important?

                This again assumes that the data provided is accurate and correct, as confirmed to be in the intelligence report. 

                  1. Weird, how all these freedom-loving, gun-toting, fight-for-liberty badasses are complete suckups to the USSR, now, huh?

                    And they used to call Liberals commies.…

                    1. You make it sound like Vlad wrote those emails himself…..

                      …..USSR…. is so…. 90's man….seriously. 

                      You, again, miss the point. The data can come from Vlad, Julian, Gussifer 1.0, 2.0, Billy, Ray, Sally or Geraldo – it just does not matter.

                      What matters is that the data is a true and correct depiction of the actions on the inside of Hillary's party, which, if proven effective, swayed the election away from Hillary. This came at no fault or manipulation of the data by the provider – whoever it may be.

                      So I am not "sucking up" the "USSR" (really?). I am embracing the truth, regardless of how unsavory it may be. You should too it may move your party forward instead of back. You could learn something from this if you were not so determined to pass blame for spilled milk. Now you just come off as a sore loser looking for a participation trophy…

                      Seriously, imagine what you would think if Hillary won and the Republicans were saying what you are saying now. It's pathetic.  

                      I’m going to reply to your post below here as the site will not allow me to post below it. The boot was on my throat in 2013. Where the fuck were you? You submit that I should be the better man than you were when you had the opportunity to open your arms?

                    2. Deny all you want.  You chose your side, and you don't care where the help comes from, or what the motive is behind it.  Trump is beholden to a brutal oligarchy, and that's a-okay with you. 

                      After all, you can be reasonably sure the boot won't be on your throat just yet.

                    3. "The boot was on my throat in 2013. Where the fuck were you? You submit that I should be the better man than you were when you had the opportunity to open your arms?"

                      What in the name of blonde baby Jesus riding a dinosaur are you talking about?  Whose boot? Who was supposed to "open their arms" to you, and why? 

      2. Certainly the "letter from Hillary's doctor" which fueled the rumors that HRC was ill or dying, was blatantly forged. I wrote about this in Kos last August.  We don't know if the story originated from Russian hackers, or from homegrown fakers such as Alex Jones or the Drudge Report.

        Definitely, the Russian "botnets", which are groups of thousands of fake twitter accounts programmed to tweet these stories back and forth at each other, amplified these stories and perpetuated them. As Dave Weigel from the Washington Post noted, the appearance of the stories about HRC's health was a well-coordinated effort.

        The rumors about HRC's supposed failing health reached my students, who are inveterate twitter and instagram users. They knew zilch about policy, nada about Trump's cheating and defrauding people, but they knew that HRC's favorite pizza brand was "Little Seizures". (sorry)

        This was the weirdest of bedmates: white supremacist Trump supporters and Russian KGB agents collaborating together to generate and spread fake news stories. It should scare the crap out of you.

        1. I never saw the "letter from Hillary's doctor", but I did see her collapse on video at the 9/11 memorial. A picture is worth a thousand words. Its difficult to unsee this type of image, and whether it corroborated an untrue story or not, the visual was undeniably reminiscent of such an assertion.  

          We also, as per the dailykos, see that Hillary had hired fake supporters to do the very same thing during the election.

          So whats good for the goose my not be good for the gander. 

           

          1. Troll wars

            Negev wrote:

            We also, as per the dailykos, see that Hillary had hired fake supporters to do the very same thing during the election.

            Karma is such an evil bitch, ain't she?

            Yeah, that happened, at Kos. I experienced it. Whatever I wrote that was pro-Bernie or critical of Hillary was relentlessly trolled. Like most bloggers, I like comments – but after the Hill Trolls went into action, I'd get like 100 negative and abusive comments for pointing out HRC's corporate connection or policy contradiction. People got flagged and banned from Kos for saying, for example, that the DNC had planned a "coronation" of HRC.  FWIW, I don't think Kos handled that well.

            So then these exiled Bernie folks went to Caucus99percent and other sites. I wrote there for a while until the fricking Russian trolls invaded there and started praising Putin, and downplaying the Trump – Putin connections, while continuing to spread fake news about Hillary. At that time, the primary was over, Bernie had asked his supporters to get behind HRC, and most of us did just that.

            I guess the difference I see between Hillary's paid trolls and the Russian ones are: 1) Hillary's at least respected the norms of the Democratic process and institutions. 2) At least, they were American. At bottom, I'm a dyed-in-the-wool patriot. 3) the Russian trolls had ties to really vicious racist sites like DailyStormer.

            These "alt-right" sites were pretty clearly Russian in that the only Communists they hated were "ChiComs", but Russian ones were AOK. Russians were "Aryans", i.e. Caucasians from the Caucusus, so racism played a big role, too. Dailystormer is still downplaying the Russian hacking today. I won’t link to it here, though. It’s pretty disgusting stuff.

            1. I'm with you on this, Mama, completely. I would rather have it come from Americans as well. Russia could have just slipped a pimply faced kid a flash drive in Kansas and this would not even be an issue….

              Karma IS an evil bitch…..

               

              …Good lord I just went to that stormer site you noted above… while I am pro rights… all rights…. that site is a prime candidate for “reasonable restriction” of First Amendment rights. Honestly if hate speech is protected as to allow this site to exist I should be able to own an atom bomb under the 2nd….

                1. Hey, what's a little Sieg Heil, as long as it helps get the guy you want elected?  

                  Trump lovers have got to be doing some epic compartmentalizing right now. Of course, they've had a lot of practice. 

                  1. "Caucasians from the Caucasus……"  Then the joke is on the alt-righties as many of the inhabitants of the Caucasus are Muslim. I know, due to going there multiple times for climbing.

                    1. I was wondering if anyone would catch that. The Daily Stormer celebrates how the Russians discriminate against the Caucusus Muslims.  They manage to incorporate racism into every pro-Putin political position they take.

                      Chechen rebels were mostly Muslims.  Stormer claims that the Ukraine resists Russian rule not because they want to be independent, but because they are Jewish.

                      Put the "caucasians from the caucusus" down to my hankering for a euphonious phrase. Reality, in the form of dark-complected non-Christians inhabiting the Caucusus region in Russia, is not something antisemitic racists are comfortable with.

          1. kickshot: I tried it, and found that prntly site was Australian. Is that significant? At the time I wrote the Kos diary about HRC's health and the concern trolling, Russian hacking wasn't on many people's radar.

            1. Russian trolling snuck up but then accelerated to an overwhelming and endless roar.

              There was no way (probably never will be) to get Trump to STFU.

              How Donald Trump Made Russia's Hacking More Effective

              https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/how-trump-made-russias-hacking-more-effective/511880/

              This is how hacking tilted the election to Trump. Hacking is not just applied to voting and vote tally machines. Societies are hacked. 

              Putin waged a hack on our voting populace and installed the candidate he supported.

              RWNJs declare that Hillary was the only candidate that could lose to Trump.

              Trump was the only candidate that could get a russian dictator to hack the election for him.

              (In deference to PP above … we are all hacked all day and all night by advertising, internet browsing, walking into a dept store, etc, etc. Every minute, every day someone is either trying to inject information favorable to themselves or scrape information favorable to themselves)

              INDIVISIBLE – A PRACTICAL GUIDE for RESISTING THE TRUMP AGENDA
              https://www.indivisibleguide.com

               

              PS. Being an Australian site is significant because it is not on local soil.
              This begs the question as to how they got access to a Dr.’s letter unless they wrote it themselves.

              Not conclusive but bolstered by the preponderance of fake news and fake news sites.

              Running ‘whois’ will, I hope’ be part of FB’s criteria for trying to flag fake news.

    1. Cute picture. Would have been even better had the Russian been grammatically correct. Even better still, if Baldwin would have been dressed up like Il Douchey with the hat on.

  8. I have no doubt at all the Russians tried to influence the US election. Whether it made a real difference can be debated. The major factor in swinging the election; IMHO; was the spineless activity of FBI Director Comey and his unprecedented attempt to influence the election. 

    2. I prefer Bernie's analysis from NPR:

      The Vermont senator, who ran for president on the Democratic ticket and then switched back to Independent after losing the primary to defeated former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, added, “Look, you can’t simply go around to wealthy people’s homes raising money and expect to win elections. You’ve got to go out and mix it up and be with ordinary people.”

       

      1. There is some truth to that. Obama and Bernie both "mixed it up", and were more relatable than HRC. What OFA did was practice what Obama learned in community organizing, which happens to be the same lessons Bernie learned from his community organizing:

        Keep leadership local, start every meeting with a story about "Why I'm here", keep it personal. Obama 2012 still used some of those models, but by then it was more consultant and Washington-driven.

        What your candidate did, though, was LIE to those "ordinary people": tell them he'd bring jobs back to the US, that he loved "the blacks, the gays, the Jews, the _____s", that Mexico would pay for this ginormous ego wall he wants to build. He also validated every selfish, paranoid, conspiracy theory and prejudice people had. He brought out the worst in people.

         Obama and Bernie brought out the best. I didn't work on the HRC campaign; maybe it had a great ground game – I don't know. I was a reluctant convert to being With Her.

        Finally, I get such a kick out of seeing you and Negev concern trolling how HRC and the DNC Did Bernie Wrong – as if you would have been supporting or voting for him in any circumstances. What you're saying about Hillary today, you would have been saying about Bernie then.  Because he's been consistent for 30 years, though, you would have been reduced to actually disagreeing with his policies on the merits. He had many fewer contradictions of "public and private policies" than did HRC.

         

        1. Concern trolling. I had to google that. I love it! It would be noted the DNC did the same thing to Bernie as the RNC did to Trump, and both seemed to present the current government as corrupt. Boy that battle would have been the quintessential Capitalism  vs Socialism battle, right?

          I have far less against Bernie than I do Hillary. He is consistent and sincere. Way more authentic than Trump or Hillary. His position on holding gun companies responsible for the illegal use by an individual differed from Hillary in a reasonable way, and I feel that although he would not get my vote, my empathy for him goes beyond concern trolling.

          Mama it is good to hear you were reluctant to back Hillary. 

           

  9. Mudge and Negev,

    I had to laugh at Negev's "boot on my throat in 2013" comment. Mudge, what he's complaining about is that he wasn't able to buy 30 round magazines in the store anymore, and had to go through a background check if he wanted to buy or sell a gun. Isn't that just like having a boot on one's throat?

    1. I almost forgot curmie, you're a crack shot and will defeat that imaginary tyrannical government with your lever action. You may get a chance to prove that after all…and, uh, I'm not on watch, I'm just makin popcorn….

      1. I did get that marksmanship ribbon in basic training, if that's what you're asking. Of course, the guy next to me on the line could have missed so badly a few times that he hit my target. You never know. 

        I'm not the one who fantasizes about taking up arms against a tyrannical government.  I carried a weapon most every day of my years in the military and law enforcement.  It doesn't thrill me the way it does you.  Of course, I was on duty, rather than dash-waddling around a course with terribly dangerous cardboard cutouts.  I mean, a guy could twist an ankle…

        But what will you do now that you're happy with the tyrannical government (at least for now)?  

        1. 23 to 29 out of 40 targets. That's like C-. Bravo sir.

          I do not fantasize about taking arms against a tyrannical government, I get no thrill, nor do I carry, a firearm on a daily basis. When you restrict my rights, I am offended. You will be too. 

          What will I do? Don't know. But:

          I will chuckle when this site freaks the fuck out about a Muslim registry when they were on board for a gun registry.

          I will empathise when women feel attacked by "modest" efforts to increase the safety of reproductive rights by initiating "reasonable" restrictions on abortion. 

          I will get a kick out of you arguing that transgender men should be allowed to shit in your daughters bathroom because the economic cost from boycott is too great…

          I guess what I'll do with this so called "tyrannical" government is watch it do to you what your government did to me. That whole "first they came for the socialists, and I did nothing" mantra you so ridiculed in the past seems so apropos at this juncture…

          And Curmie, thank you for your service. Really. That C- thing is a low blow and I feel like a dick for saying it to someone that I respect for service to our country. I know you're a tough guy though so I left it in….

           

          1.      Actually, my score was higher. I didn't say Expert Marksman because it seemed silly. It was an easy shoot.   And the fireline is nothing like the real world.  Of course, you wouldn't know that.

                 I could care less what you think or say about me.  Anyone willing to ignore the things you are just because you think you're getting what you want.    

                 You know nothing about the military. You just pretend you do,  You play at it, without the commitment or risk or responsibility.  You're the worst kind of coward. The one who will gladly lick the boots of an authoritarian, as long as their rights are unharmed.  Everyone else can go to hell.

                 I'd accuse you of being the type who would have told the Nazis, "They're in the attic, just don't hurt me!" but I'm finding it hard to believe you'd give anyone refuge if it would be even an inconvenience. to you.   

            You're gonna be a good little brownshirt. You definitely have the mindset.

             

             

             

              1. Oh, right. Because gun regulations were a boot on your throat.

                P.S. “Brown shirt” (like, a shirt that is brown) is an article of clothing. “Brownshirt” (like, well… you) is someone who happily supports an authoritarian regime, hoping they can have power by being a willing lackey.

                  1. Considering your stated beliefs regarding other people's right to their own humanity…I'd say you're already there.

                     I'd congratulate you, but since I'm relatively sure of the eventual outcome (Freedom winning out over tyranny, etc) it might not be the sweet deal you're dreaming of.

  11. Take a look at Annex A in the report. It seems that Putin was trying to get Trump elected in 2012. He must have borrowed the same time machine Obama’s used to plant the false birth certificate and birth announcements in the Honolulu newspapers back in 1961.

    This report adds nothing to what we already supposedly know. All it really does is devote a lot of space to accusing Russia Today, and pretty amateurishly at that, of being the propaganda arm of the Kremlin.

    Additionally, look at these links. One is co-written by a former technical director at the NSA and the other is from the reporter who broke the much of the Iran-Contra stories during the administration of America’s Greatest President Not Named Donald Trump.

    1. That's a fundamental mischaracterization of the report.  You should stop that.

      While I'm no fan of the lack of evidence provided by the report and am unwilling to accept, absent evidence, conclusions made by our intelligence apparatus as fact rather than speculation, you are making a claim that is provably false.

      Annex A is an inclusion of a report drafted in 2012, as noted at the bottom of the page, which speaks to propaganda activities of Russia Today.  That network's bias, and its purpose as a tool of the Russian government is not in doubt.  It says absolutely nothing about Trump or his election.

  12. If a Republican were the lame duck president and a Dem had won the election, the entire country would be on lockdown over this foreign interference stuff. We wouldn't have an official president-elect, since there would have been thousands-strong Brooks Brothers riots, if not armed troops, preventing electors from voting all over the country.

    But hey, that's not how the Dems roll. We sit there getting punched in the junk over and over, silently wondering when the ref is going to call a penalty.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

40 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!