I'm reporting what the various intelligence agencies and investigations have officially confirmed (that Russia hacked the DNC a — Michael

Without any presentation of evidence.

a presumption is a presumption. To call a presumption a false presumption is like calling a question a false question or a doubt a false doubt.

I could have looked him up but I just couldn’t be bothered due to it’s, in my opinion, irrelevancy.

So because he can say whatever he likes he's either lying or mistaken? Or, perhaps, he's knowledgable and telling the truth. — Michael

Time may tell.

Lawrence Noble, served as Deputy General Counsel from 1983 to 1987 and General Counsel from 1987 to 2000. FYI, both appointments under Reagan. — Michael

Ok. So what? As I said, maybe Wapo should seek the opinion of the current occupier of that position.

Do you think I am some loyal republican or something?

Perhaps you have trouble understanding my words, so I'll try to be clearer. You have repeatedly said that you haven't personally seen evidence of collusion between Trump's campaign and the Russian government, and so you don't support the accusation that he did, and yet you accuse the DNC of colluding with Fusion GPS and a Russian lawyer to entrap members of the Trump campaign despite the fact that you haven't personally seen such evidence. You're a hypocrite. — Michael

It is what I am going with. As I have said countless times about this case, we shall just have to wait and see.

You have a narrative and opinion you are going with, without seeing irrefutable evidence, and I have my opinion based on what I have come across.

So, I am no less a hypocrite than you. .

the article that quotes the former chief counsel for the Federal Election Commission saying that there's a legal difference between the Steele Dossier and the Trump Tower meeting is wrong? — Michael

Emphasis should be on “former” chief counsel. This means he has no horse in the race which futher means he can say whatever he likes without threat to a position he no longer holds within which he would be forced to take care with his words.

Presumably he was in that role under Obama.

Maybe Wapo should endeavor get some information from the currently employed chief counsel.

No, it's an admission that there's no public irrefutable proof. And it's still the case that you're a hypocrite, so don't think that you can deflect away. — Michael

And you come under the definition of “public”. Therefore you cannot present irrefutable proof. For you, someone just has to say “irrefutable proof” exists and that is evidence for you.

Please do not ever accept to do jury duty for the sake of justice.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean — Michael

I’m not surprised because it is original and not like the baaaa baaa sheep-like calls such as “what you smoking?”

You'll buy into this ridiculous conspiracy but then demand personal access to irrefutable proof before you will accept that the various investigations into Trump's campaign are warranted or that Russia hacked the DNC and tried to hack the election. — Michael

At least this is an admission from you that no irrefutable proof exists of your accusation.

As for the Wapo article you submitted, it is wapo. Wapo is owned by the oligarch Jeff Bezos. Bezos has a $600,000,000 contract with the CIA. Bezos owns Amazon packaging sweatshops where workers do not get proper breaks. He is quite the dubious character.

What are you smoking? — Michael

I’m smoking because I’m on fire. The opposite temperature to the snowflake you represent.

What? You're saying that because Lynch met with Bill Clinton on a runway then the DNC colluded with Fusion GPS and a Russian lawyer to entrap members of Trump's campaign — Michael

It’s a pattern.

So now you accept that there was collusion between Trump's campaign and representatives of the Russian government. — Michael

I’m not. But, first of all, collusion isn’t a crime. Secondly, oppo research is common, has always been common, and “opposition research” was a term the Clinton campaign also used for their spying-like excuses.

In what way did they collude, and how does that way suggest that the Trump Tower meeting was set up by the DNC? — Michael

Much in the same vein as Lynch meeting Bill Clinton on a runway prior to her decision to recuse herself from the investigation of Bill’s wife.

Just typical incestuousness behaviour, to be expected given the history of the Clintons.

just yesterday admitted that members of his campaign met with a Russian to get dirt on Clinton (and who was known to be representing the Russian government). — Michael

Yep. If she wasn’t the plant she appears to have been, or if it was someone else other than her, her or their information could have been well worth every American hearing.

It seems much more plausible and likely that the Trump campaign just colluded of its own accord. Proposing that it's actually a Dem conspiracy sounds crazier than anything the Dems say about Trump. Nobody will believe i — VagabondSpectre

Well. All the facts may eventually be revealed. Be sure to hang around to see. You can be sure I will be commenting if or when they do.

So you're saying that Trump's collusion with Russia is actually one big trap that was set by Obama and Hillary in order to try and get him impeached once he won the election? — VagabondSpectre

Stzrok: “insurance policy”.

The Trump/Russia collusion conspiracy theory isn’t anything other than a theory.

Rosenstien has addressed that there is no conclusion regarding the accusation.

No.

The Russian lawyer (NV, will do) had those connections. That isn’t disputable. She connected in her business with Fusion GPS, the dossier providers (if not constructors), and she met Trump Jr and co.

No “leap” there. Quite the intimate opposite.

That was regarding the case they were both involved in, with that first "meeting" in a Manhattan federal courtroom. — Michael

In a timeframe within which the Trump Tower meeting was held.

How convenient.

She was granted entry to represent her client. There's nothing to suggest that she was granted entry so that she could entrap members of Trump's campaign at the request of the DNC — Michael

I think there is plenty of suggestion otherwise.

I think that it is quite suggestive, for instance, that the Obama administration (AG Lynch) colluded with the Clinton campaign given that Clinton would be the Democrat’s choice over that of Trump.

Everything neatly, not at a leap, follows from that, with regard to her meetings.

It is a leap to not see connections.

So are you implying, when calling my analogy a “false dilemma”, that those who rioted as a reaction to the Trump election victory were not actually vandals but merely justified, because it was Trump, in smashing up their own neighborhood - that is was not because their preferred candidate did not win?

I presume you are aware that people vote based on which candidate they agree with the most, hence my analogy, which I repeat, below:

……………………………………………………………………………………………

>>>He: Those riots show how divisive he is.

Me: So as you and I have a different political opinion and after this conversation you leave feeling pissed off with me about that, on your way down my street you break the windows of a nearby shop and some neighbors houses.

Is you doing those acts a consequence of me “being divisive” or just you being a vandal?<<<

So as you can see, Obama’s AG, Loretta Lynch, approved entrance into the US under “extraordinary circumstances” for Veselnitskaya, who was initially denied entry.

This “extraordinary” approval by the Obama administration ALLOWED for Veselnitskaya to engage in all the meetings outlined in the above posts.

So it is all “quite a leap”, you say?

Law firm Baker Hostelter paid Fusion $523,651 between March and October 2016 on behalf of a company owned by Russian businessman and money launderer Denis Katsyv to research Bill Browder, a London banker who helped push through the Magnitsky Act - named after deceased Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, who Browder hired to investigate Russian corruption.

What's strange is that Katsyv's attorney, Natalia Veselnitskaya - a John McCain fan who hates Trump and uses Democrat lobbyists, was initially denied entry into the United States, only to be allowed in under "extraordinary circumstances" by Obama's Homeland Security Department and approved by former AG Loretta Lynch so she could represent Fusion GPS client Denis Katsyv's company, Prevezon Holdings - and attend the meeting at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. - arranged by Fusion GPS associate Rob Goldstone.

Although it was the other way around, according to Bill Browder, with regard to who hired who:

“ Veselnitskaya, through Baker Hostetler, hired Glenn Simpson of the firm Fusion GPS to conduct a smear campaign against me and Sergei Magnitsky in advance of congressional hearings on the Global Magnitsky Act. -Bill Browder, Testimony to Senate Judiciary Committee, 7/26/17.”

As you have introduced above, Veselnitskaya was connecting with Fusion in meetings immediately before Trump tower meeting and immediately after.

Clinton Campaign and Democratic Party Helped Pay for Russia Dossier
By KENNETH P. VOGELOCT. 24, 2017

WASHINGTON — The presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee paid for research that was included in a dossier made public in January that contained salacious claims about connections between Donald J. Trump, his associates and Russia.
A spokesperson for a law firm said on Tuesday that it had hired Washington-based researchers last year to gather damaging information about Mr. Trump on numerous subjects — including possible ties to Russia — on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C.
The revelation, which emerged from a letter filed in court on Tuesday, is likely to fuel new partisan attacks over federal and congressional investigations into Russia’s attempts to disrupt last year’s election and whether any of Mr. Trump’s associates assisted in the effort.

The letter that was filed in court said that Fusion GPS began working for the law firm, Perkins Coie, in April 2016. Written by the firm’s managing partner Matthew J. Gehringer, the letter said that Fusion GPS had already been conducting the research “for one or more other clients during the Republican primary contest.”

Law firm, Perkins Coie, was paid $12.4 million to represent the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C. during the 2016 campaign, accoring to filings. The role of the Clinton campaign and the national party in funding the research for the dossier was first reported on Tuesday by The Washington Post.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4116755-PerkinsCoie-Fusion-PrivelegeLetter-102417.html

That particular Russian was hired by Fusion GPS. She met with Fusion before the meeting and immediately after.

What this means is the meeting itself was orchestrated by the DNC operatives who hired Fusion GPS who in turn hired the Russian.

That adds up to the DNC colluding with Russians.

The attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, OK was also a successful conspiracy--planned by Americans against Americans in America. — Bitter Crank

A fertiliser bomb in a truck could not have caused that sort of damage. But hey! These conspirators take great pains in deception. That is why they usually succeed. The use of patsies is an old tried and true playbook. The truck blew, along with the far lager devices in synchronicity.

raza, those who know about that level of technology don't talk about it and those who talk about it likely don't understand the 'reason' behind such an advancement in technology being installed on planes. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Things leak. Smarties join dots.

That's a false dilemma, since it could be both or neither. It's also a poor analogy, since the word "divisive" is not typically used in that kind of scenario, involving just two people. It is much more applicable in relation to Trump, or, to use an example taken from a dictionary, the Vietnam war — Sapientia

Well. That’s an opinion that my analogy isn’t appropriate. I disagree.

I suggest it isn’t an appropriate analogy for you merely because it would be inconveniant to acknowledge as such.

Opinions, opinions, opinions. I have no problem that there are different opinions.

Roswell, therefore, not hologram tech but special craft tech is another matter.

None of the technology you talk about was even dreamed about back them. — Sir2u

I was referring to contemporary "sightings".

Above will be ignored, because..........Ignorance is Bliss.

This excerpt from same wiki page is more relevant.

"National Reconnaissance Office drill
Aside from military exercises, a National Reconnaissance Office drill was being conducted on September 11, 2001. In a simulated event, a small aircraft would crash into one of the towers of the agency's headquarters after experiencing a mechanical failure. The NRO is the branch of the Department of Defense in charge of spy satellites. According to its spokesman Art Haubold: "No actual plane was to be involved -- to simulate the damage from the crash, some stairwells and exits were to be closed off, forcing employees to find other ways to evacuate the building." He further explained: "It was just an incredible coincidence that this happened to involve an aircraft crashing into our facility, as soon as the real world events began, we canceled the exercise." Most of the agency's personnel were sent home after the attacks."

And so during this drill the defender team is stood down?

Who really, therefore, WAS the attack team?

The ultimate attack team certainly wasn't in "stood down" mode.

Wow! What a coincidence, eh? Our bearded "Yak-back rider" knew(?) of this exercise for the same day.

Another conspiracy theory I have heard:

If you do not buy the government explanation of 911 you must believe in a flat earth and the holocaust by the Nazis did not happen.

Maybe ignorance of the above is bliss......for those you want to believe everything their government does is for their personal benefit.

Added to above;

So to further examine the red teem vs blue team exercise protocol, it seems obvious, therefore, that on that day the defender team was STOOD DOWN.

It is admitted as such, in that security was stood down.

So what are the benefits for this?

Keep everyone in fear - great for keeping those tax funds being increased towards security business which ultimately is used to control a nation's own citizens and not to so much defend from other nations.

Other nation's citizens do not contribute the sort of money taxes do to the military industrial government. complex. (yes, it's a thing)

the US Government was responsible for 9/11 find comfort in their sealed off view of reality. — Bitter Crank

This is the conspiracy I heard on that. Some bearded guy in a cave on a yak had the sophistication to get around every highly evolved trillion dollar security protocols to achieve what was achieved on that day, and ALL during this:

" Operation Northern Vigilance, was a NORAD operation which involved deploying fighter aircraft to locations in Alaska and Northern Canada. In order to simulate a hijacking situation including terrorist pilots.[1] The operation was a response to a Russian exercise, in which long-range bombers were dispatched to Russia's high north. The operation was one part simulation, one part real world. It was immediately called off after NORAD received word from NEADS that the Federal Aviation Administration had evidence of a hijacking. All simulated information (so-called "injects") were purged from computer screens at NORAD headquarters in Colorado. On receiving news of the attacks, the Russians promptly canceled their exercise as well." (wiki)

When exercises such as the NORAD one are carried out two teams are formed. A red team and a blue team. One team is attacker and the other defender.

During the actual attack security had been stood down prior. Security NEVER gets stood down whether their are exercises or not.

All above are facts (although "caves and yaks" are for theatrical and sarcastic value).

He's quite the wee stirrer, that dude.

Ah. Fair enough, Bades. I didn't relaize Martha existed. The punking was entertaining though.