4 ms·
Then how did they "hack the election" if the content was so benign?
by KekDemaga 9y ago
Then how did they "hack the election" if the content was so benign?
- akhilcacharya 9y agoBecause our enemies even attempting to influence the election should be outrageous to a patriot.
- KekDemaga 9y agoThe same enemies the Clinton sold all that uranium to? This narrative is falling apart.
- akhilcacharya 9y agoYou understand that you can't sell something you don't own, right?
- akhilcacharya 9y agoHN has a max depth but here is a fantastic rebuttal to the absurd Uranium One allegations: http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/ http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/
- KekDemaga 9y agoI'll take the New York Times over an organization who's founder embezzled money to pay for escort services. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clin...
- akhilcacharya 9y agoThe snopes article directly cites the NYTimes article. The entire ordeal is totally blown out of proportion (read: intentionally misread by the same people that think the DNC emails were damning), given Hillary had barely anything to do with it.
- KekDemaga 9y agoPayments made to Clinton tied organizations by Russian banks who profited off of a uranium deal days after the ink had dried = Nothing to see here Cyrillic characters in a binary = Definitive evidence
- akhilcacharya 9y agoSecret meetings with Kremlin-linked individuals days before the DNC hacks were first released and lying about why they were set up - nothing to see here. Emails talking about collaboration with Russian government during the campaign to obtain damning information about Hillary Clinton released by his own son - nothing to see here. Firing the director of the FBI "because of the Russia investigation" according to the man himself - nothing to see here. Repeatedly downplaying the influence of Russia in Ukraine and changing the GOP platform after hiring a pro-Russian political operative to be his campaign manager - nothing to see here. Repeatedly disagreeing with the evidence provided by American intelligence agencies and dozens of cybersecurity firms while agreeing with the statements of Russian intelligence after being president - nothing to see here. Having a national security advisor who sat at the same table as Vladimir Putin in December 2015 during a gala for the state propaganda network - nothing to see here. Having the same national security advisor lie about meeting the Russian ambassador - nothing to see here. Having a campaign operative in Roger Stone (who he still in contact with) openly allege that he has a backchannel with Julian Assange - nothing to see here. Peter Smith coordinating with Russian hacker groups, only to kill himself a few weeks after telling the WSJ? Nothing to see here! ....but a highly regarded charity founded by one of the most popular presidents in recent history raising money...now, that's a scandal! I'll be honest, if our enemies are this afraid of someone, I want that person on my side.