Comey, Brennan, and the Hoax

[Caveira]

13 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Why didn’t they look into this during Trump 1?  Pretty sure all charges except treason are now past the statute of limitations.

In other words, there will be no charges.  This is just a distraction from Epstein.

I am more curious about this question.  Trump is doing something about it.  Early Trump or late Trump meh.  He’s doing something. 
 

why did the biden admin do 0?   And now why are Ds so hostile on a topic they didn’t care one bit about during their reign?

[Offthemat]

9 minutes ago, Caveira said:

why did the biden admin do 0?

Biden was the first, outside of Hiliary’s campaign, to claim collusion. 

[1032004]

1 hour ago, Caveira said:

I am more curious about this question.  Trump is doing something about it.  Early Trump or late Trump meh.  He’s doing something. 
 

why did the biden admin do 0?   And now why are Ds so hostile on a topic they didn’t care one bit about during their reign?

Trump isn’t doing anything.  Tulsi is because Trump called her stupid and she wants to get back on his good side and help distract from Epstein.

Biden didn’t do anything since there was likely no crime.  You may recall that a Republican-led Senate committee which included the current Secretary of State, did in fact find that Russia interfered in the 2016 election -  https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/senate-panel-finds-russia-interfered-in-the-2016-us-election

[Offthemat]

3 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Trump isn’t doing anything.

Trump most certainly was involved in declassifying documents and blessing, if not directing, the agencies cooperation in the inquiry.  
 

Nobody has ever said that Russia didn’t attempt to mess with the election.  What the documents show is that Obama rejected the IC assessment that said their objective was not to help any particular candidate for one that claimed they were trying to help Trump. 

[1032004]

7 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Trump most certainly was involved in declassifying documents and blessing, if not directing, the agencies cooperation in the inquiry.  
 

Nobody has ever said that Russia didn’t attempt to mess with the election.  What the documents show is that Obama rejected the IC assessment that said their objective was not to help any particular candidate for one that claimed they were trying to help Trump. 

Where exactly do the documents show that?

[Offthemat]

1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

Where exactly do the documents show that?

https://www.odni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/DIG/DIG-Russia-Hoax-Memo-and-Timeline_revisited.pdf

[Undefeated]

Russia’s always trying to mess things up wherever it can, but I think America should probably be more worried about China and the Zionists than Russia.

That said, America really needs to figure out what to do about Russia, but China’s playing a whole different game - sneaky, everywhere, and way scarier than Russia. You can’t just push China aside like Russia. The only way to beat China is if those self-obsessed American presidents stop with the empty talk and hero poses on camera and actually take them down economically.

And that’s a really tough job

[1032004]

6 hours ago, Offthemat said:

https://www.odni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/DIG/DIG-Russia-Hoax-Memo-and-Timeline_revisited.pdf

The earlier documents were specifically about Russia hacking vote totals.  The later ones were simply about them “influencing the election.”

Sorry, you got duped.

[Offthemat]

4 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Sorry, you got duped.

Sorry, but you’re dupid if you think I’ll fall for your misdirection, the second one you’ve attempted in this thread.  The IA that the IC was tasked with producing by Obama was one which would say their purpose was to help Trump.  There were only handpicked members of four of the eighteen intelligence groups involved, and senior analysts disagreed with the final assessment.  Brennan, Clapper, and Comey directly involving themselves in producing the assessment, insisting on using junk for intelligence, mislabeling what it represented, is going to be their downfall.  
 

If you’d read the reports and releases you could make more informed posts, and maybe argue less about points that were never raised.  

[1032004]

8 hours ago, Offthemat said:

Sorry, but you’re dupid if you think I’ll fall for your misdirection, the second one you’ve attempted in this thread.  The IA that the IC was tasked with producing by Obama was one which would say their purpose was to help Trump.  There were only handpicked members of four of the eighteen intelligence groups involved, and senior analysts disagreed with the final assessment.  Brennan, Clapper, and Comey directly involving themselves in producing the assessment, insisting on using junk for intelligence, mislabeling what it represented, is going to be their downfall.  
 

If you’d read the reports and releases you could make more informed posts, and maybe argue less about points that were never raised.  

Well you cut out the part of my post that addressed the report.  Do you disagree with the statement that “The earlier documents were specifically about Russia hacking vote totals.  The later ones were simply about them “influencing the election”?

[Offthemat]

I agree that the earlier assessments were accurate and approved by all the IC agencies and the last one wasn’t.  The last one was fiction.  The plot was by Obama and Comey, Brennan, and Clapper were the editors.  They couldn’t even get their own senior analysts to sign off on it.  Yet they put it out and even though there was no evidence of Putin’s preference for Trump, they used it to promote the idea that not only was there a preference, but there had been collusion.  And today, after Muler, Durham, the IG, and Tulsi’s releases, there is no doubt about what happened.  The only question is who will be held to account and what that will entail. 

[1032004]

8 hours ago, Offthemat said:

I agree that the earlier assessments were accurate and approved by all the IC agencies and the last one wasn’t.  The last one was fiction.  The plot was by Obama and Comey, Brennan, and Clapper were the editors.  They couldn’t even get their own senior analysts to sign off on it.  Yet they put it out and even though there was no evidence of Putin’s preference for Trump, they used it to promote the idea that not only was there a preference, but there had been collusion.  And today, after Muler, Durham, the IG, and Tulsi’s releases, there is no doubt about what happened.  The only question is who will be held to account and what that will entail. 

Where exactly is there an allegation that Trump colluded with Russia?  I don’t see that in the link you provided.

[scourge165]

On 7/9/2025 at 8:04 AM, 1032004 said:

Looks like the right got their marching orders to distract from the Epstein mess

Also... it wasn't a Hoax. Trump admitted it, his Chief of Staff admitted it. The entire intelligence apparatus said it happened.

Russia interfered. They did it again in 2020 and 2024.

 

Yet...if you were ACTUALLY going to prosecute someone, it's odd that the FBI would be investigating both the Republican Candidate AND the Democratic Candidate the Last week before the election but only publicly announce one of the two investigation which... is not what they do. 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/trump-acknowledges-russia-role-in-us-election-hacking-aide-idUSKBN14S0O9/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Quote

Yes, the Trump administration did acknowledge that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. In January 2017, President-elect Donald Trump's incoming chief of staff, Reince Priebus, stated that Trump accepted the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyberattacks during the election.

The U.S. intelligence community, including the FBI, CIA, and NSA, concluded that Russia conducted a widespread campaign to influence the election in favor of Donald Trump. This assessment was supported by the Mueller report, which found that Russian interference occurred "in sweeping and systematic fashion" and "violated U.S. criminal law"