“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” I hacked his quote online. I'm running late and can't hack my keys....more later if I ever hack my keys.
I thought it was treasonous when he said it and I think it is treasonous today.
Thoughts on Obama calling for intel on election hacking back to 2008? Thoughts on intel reps not briefing congress on intel hacks? Thoughts on expected release of intel reports before Jan 20th? If this is even close to treasonous and undermining of democracy by foreign states, it seems as if Obama and the intel agencies aren't in any hurry to inform the college electors, congress or you and I.
I don't speak for Obama, only myself. And I stand by calling Trump's remarks treasonous.
I'm no expert on intelligence gathering. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. One thing I do know though is that intelligence agencies are constantly trying to develop new methods for gathering information, and constantly trying to keep those new methods secret. I wouldn't expect nor would I want the curtain pulled back on everything we know and how we know it.
I didn't ask you to speak for Obama I asked for your thoughts.
You don't have any questions or thoughts as to why our sitting president would commission a report back to 2008 when all anyone is interested in is the that took place on Nov 8th 2016?
If we think it happened this time why we wouldn't we question if it happened before? That seems logical to me. It seems like the President is acting in a non-partisan way. He could've easily just asked for a report on this election. He chose not to. I see that as a positive.
Who thinks any other elections were hacked? Never heard it before and I find it strange that he would ask for those other years when nobody cares. He said himself just 4 weeks ago, this past election is in the past.
Why at this point would the president with 34 days remaining in his presidency care about non partisan? He campaigned big time for Hilliary? So did his wife.
How about asking for a report on 2016 elections like now interests of essence of time, then for whatever reasons asked for the other years nobody cares about or questions by Jan 20th?
You think this is logical?
If the elections were hacked by a hostile foreign actor we should know about it before it's too late!
“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” I hacked his quote online. I'm running late and can't hack my keys....more later if I ever hack my keys.
I thought it was treasonous when he said it and I think it is treasonous today.
Thoughts on Obama calling for intel on election hacking back to 2008? Thoughts on intel reps not briefing congress on intel hacks? Thoughts on expected release of intel reports before Jan 20th? If this is even close to treasonous and undermining of democracy by foreign states, it seems as if Obama and the intel agencies aren't in any hurry to inform the college electors, congress or you and I.
I don't speak for Obama, only myself. And I stand by calling Trump's remarks treasonous.
I'm no expert on intelligence gathering. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. One thing I do know though is that intelligence agencies are constantly trying to develop new methods for gathering information, and constantly trying to keep those new methods secret. I wouldn't expect nor would I want the curtain pulled back on everything we know and how we know it.
I didn't ask you to speak for Obama I asked for your thoughts.
You don't have any questions or thoughts as to why our sitting president would commission a report back to 2008 when all anyone is interested in is the that took place on Nov 8th 2016?
If we think it happened this time why we wouldn't we question if it happened before? That seems logical to me. It seems like the President is acting in a non-partisan way. He could've easily just asked for a report on this election. He chose not to. I see that as a positive.
How thinks any other elections were hacked? Never heard it before and I find it strange that he would ask for those other years when nobody cares. He said himself just 4 weeks ago, this past election is in the past.
Why at this point would the president with 34 days remaining in his presidency care about non partisan? He campaigned big time for Hilliary? So did his wife.
How about asking for a report on 2016 elections like now interests of essence of time, then for whatever reasons asked for the other years nobody cares about or questions by Jan 20th?
You think this is logical?
If the elections were hacked by a hostile foreign actor we should know about it before it's too late!
Because it's also been said that the investigation centers on what happened and lessons learned, not on overturning Trump. I absolutely think it logical to look at more than one election.
You seem confused by a President being able to campaign for his hoped-for successor (partisan) and at the same time being able to carry out the duties and responsibilities of his office (non-partisan).
“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” I hacked his quote online. I'm running late and can't hack my keys....more later if I ever hack my keys.
I thought it was treasonous when he said it and I think it is treasonous today.
Thoughts on Obama calling for intel on election hacking back to 2008? Thoughts on intel reps not briefing congress on intel hacks? Thoughts on expected release of intel reports before Jan 20th? If this is even close to treasonous and undermining of democracy by foreign states, it seems as if Obama and the intel agencies aren't in any hurry to inform the college electors, congress or you and I.
I don't speak for Obama, only myself. And I stand by calling Trump's remarks treasonous.
I'm no expert on intelligence gathering. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. One thing I do know though is that intelligence agencies are constantly trying to develop new methods for gathering information, and constantly trying to keep those new methods secret. I wouldn't expect nor would I want the curtain pulled back on everything we know and how we know it.
I didn't ask you to speak for Obama I asked for your thoughts.
You don't have any questions or thoughts as to why our sitting president would commission a report back to 2008 when all anyone is interested in is the that took place on Nov 8th 2016?
If we think it happened this time why we wouldn't we question if it happened before? That seems logical to me. It seems like the President is acting in a non-partisan way. He could've easily just asked for a report on this election. He chose not to. I see that as a positive.
How thinks any other elections were hacked? Never heard it before and I find it strange that he would ask for those other years when nobody cares. He said himself just 4 weeks ago, this past election is in the past.
Why at this point would the president with 34 days remaining in his presidency care about non partisan? He campaigned big time for Hilliary? So did his wife.
How about asking for a report on 2016 elections like now interests of essence of time, then for whatever reasons asked for the other years nobody cares about or questions by Jan 20th?
You think this is logical?
If the elections were hacked by a hostile foreign actor we should know about it before it's too late!
Because it's also been said that the investigation centers on what happened and lessons learned, not on overturning Trump. I absolutely think it logical to look at more than one election.
You seem confused by a President being able to campaign for his hoped-for successor (partisan) and at the same time being able to carry out the duties and responsibilities of his office (non-partisan).
Obviously very confused.
Who's duty is it to make certain we had fair and uncompromised election results?
“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” I hacked his quote online. I'm running late and can't hack my keys....more later if I ever hack my keys.
I thought it was treasonous when he said it and I think it is treasonous today.
Thoughts on Obama calling for intel on election hacking back to 2008? Thoughts on intel reps not briefing congress on intel hacks? Thoughts on expected release of intel reports before Jan 20th? If this is even close to treasonous and undermining of democracy by foreign states, it seems as if Obama and the intel agencies aren't in any hurry to inform the college electors, congress or you and I.
I don't speak for Obama, only myself. And I stand by calling Trump's remarks treasonous.
I'm no expert on intelligence gathering. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. One thing I do know though is that intelligence agencies are constantly trying to develop new methods for gathering information, and constantly trying to keep those new methods secret. I wouldn't expect nor would I want the curtain pulled back on everything we know and how we know it.
I didn't ask you to speak for Obama I asked for your thoughts.
You don't have any questions or thoughts as to why our sitting president would commission a report back to 2008 when all anyone is interested in is the that took place on Nov 8th 2016?
If we think it happened this time why we wouldn't we question if it happened before? That seems logical to me. It seems like the President is acting in a non-partisan way. He could've easily just asked for a report on this election. He chose not to. I see that as a positive.
How thinks any other elections were hacked? Never heard it before and I find it strange that he would ask for those other years when nobody cares. He said himself just 4 weeks ago, this past election is in the past.
Why at this point would the president with 34 days remaining in his presidency care about non partisan? He campaigned big time for Hilliary? So did his wife.
How about asking for a report on 2016 elections like now interests of essence of time, then for whatever reasons asked for the other years nobody cares about or questions by Jan 20th?
You think this is logical?
If the elections were hacked by a hostile foreign actor we should know about it before it's too late!
Because it's also been said that the investigation centers on what happened and lessons learned, not on overturning Trump. I absolutely think it logical to look at more than one election.
You seem confused by a President being able to campaign for his hoped-for successor (partisan) and at the same time being able to carry out the duties and responsibilities of his office (non-partisan).
You think a desire to be nonpartisan had anything to do with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton not campaigning for John McCain and Al Gore? Bush was wildly unpopular by 2008 and rightfully so. Clinton was only recently freed from the impeachment fiasco. Barack Obama., meanwhile, is still wildly popular among the Democratic base. There is an obvious difference, whether or not you choose to see it.
“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” I hacked his quote online. I'm running late and can't hack my keys....more later if I ever hack my keys.
I thought it was treasonous when he said it and I think it is treasonous today.
Thoughts on Obama calling for intel on election hacking back to 2008? Thoughts on intel reps not briefing congress on intel hacks? Thoughts on expected release of intel reports before Jan 20th? If this is even close to treasonous and undermining of democracy by foreign states, it seems as if Obama and the intel agencies aren't in any hurry to inform the college electors, congress or you and I.
I don't speak for Obama, only myself. And I stand by calling Trump's remarks treasonous.
I'm no expert on intelligence gathering. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. One thing I do know though is that intelligence agencies are constantly trying to develop new methods for gathering information, and constantly trying to keep those new methods secret. I wouldn't expect nor would I want the curtain pulled back on everything we know and how we know it.
I didn't ask you to speak for Obama I asked for your thoughts.
You don't have any questions or thoughts as to why our sitting president would commission a report back to 2008 when all anyone is interested in is the that took place on Nov 8th 2016?
If we think it happened this time why we wouldn't we question if it happened before? That seems logical to me. It seems like the President is acting in a non-partisan way. He could've easily just asked for a report on this election. He chose not to. I see that as a positive.
How thinks any other elections were hacked? Never heard it before and I find it strange that he would ask for those other years when nobody cares. He said himself just 4 weeks ago, this past election is in the past.
Why at this point would the president with 34 days remaining in his presidency care about non partisan? He campaigned big time for Hilliary? So did his wife.
How about asking for a report on 2016 elections like now interests of essence of time, then for whatever reasons asked for the other years nobody cares about or questions by Jan 20th?
You think this is logical?
If the elections were hacked by a hostile foreign actor we should know about it before it's too late!
Because it's also been said that the investigation centers on what happened and lessons learned, not on overturning Trump. I absolutely think it logical to look at more than one election.
You seem confused by a President being able to campaign for his hoped-for successor (partisan) and at the same time being able to carry out the duties and responsibilities of his office (non-partisan).
You think a desire to be nonpartisan had anything to do with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton not campaigning for John McCain and Al Gore? Bush was wildly unpopular by 2008 and rightfully so. Clinton was only recently freed from the impeachment fiasco. Barack Obama., meanwhile, is still wildly popular among the Democratic base. There is an obvious difference, whether or not you choose to see it.
Off topic but I'll answer your questions...McCain and Gore didn't want them to campaign for them.
Gore didn't want Clinton campaigning for him because of Monica and Gore's refusal to lean left and capture a few more Nadar supporters cost him the election, particularly in Florida, Florida, Florida!!!
JC, why rush the investigation? Worried where the trail will lead? Follow the money, money, money!!!
“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” I hacked his quote online. I'm running late and can't hack my keys....more later if I ever hack my keys.
I thought it was treasonous when he said it and I think it is treasonous today.
Thoughts on Obama calling for intel on election hacking back to 2008? Thoughts on intel reps not briefing congress on intel hacks? Thoughts on expected release of intel reports before Jan 20th? If this is even close to treasonous and undermining of democracy by foreign states, it seems as if Obama and the intel agencies aren't in any hurry to inform the college electors, congress or you and I.
I don't speak for Obama, only myself. And I stand by calling Trump's remarks treasonous.
I'm no expert on intelligence gathering. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. One thing I do know though is that intelligence agencies are constantly trying to develop new methods for gathering information, and constantly trying to keep those new methods secret. I wouldn't expect nor would I want the curtain pulled back on everything we know and how we know it.
I didn't ask you to speak for Obama I asked for your thoughts.
You don't have any questions or thoughts as to why our sitting president would commission a report back to 2008 when all anyone is interested in is the that took place on Nov 8th 2016?
If we think it happened this time why we wouldn't we question if it happened before? That seems logical to me. It seems like the President is acting in a non-partisan way. He could've easily just asked for a report on this election. He chose not to. I see that as a positive.
How thinks any other elections were hacked? Never heard it before and I find it strange that he would ask for those other years when nobody cares. He said himself just 4 weeks ago, this past election is in the past.
Why at this point would the president with 34 days remaining in his presidency care about non partisan? He campaigned big time for Hilliary? So did his wife.
How about asking for a report on 2016 elections like now interests of essence of time, then for whatever reasons asked for the other years nobody cares about or questions by Jan 20th?
You think this is logical?
If the elections were hacked by a hostile foreign actor we should know about it before it's too late!
Because it's also been said that the investigation centers on what happened and lessons learned, not on overturning Trump. I absolutely think it logical to look at more than one election.
You seem confused by a President being able to campaign for his hoped-for successor (partisan) and at the same time being able to carry out the duties and responsibilities of his office (non-partisan).
You think a desire to be nonpartisan had anything to do with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton not campaigning for John McCain and Al Gore? Bush was wildly unpopular by 2008 and rightfully so. Clinton was only recently freed from the impeachment fiasco. Barack Obama., meanwhile, is still wildly popular among the Democratic base. There is an obvious difference, whether or not you choose to see it.
Off topic but I'll answer your questions...McCain and Gore didn't want them to campaign for them.
Off topic? It's a response to the article you posted.
Gore didn't want Clinton campaigning for him because of Monica and Gore's refusal to lean left and capture a few more Nadar supporters cost him the election, particularly in Florida, Florida, Florida!!!
JC, why rush the investigation? Worried where the trail will lead? Follow the money, money, money!!!
Who said rush the investigation?
In fact, I'm calling for the exact opposite, all resources to be focused on this election not 2012 2010 and 2008 that nobody cares about.
Weren't you calling for an investigation? Well let's investigate!
“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” I hacked his quote online. I'm running late and can't hack my keys....more later if I ever hack my keys.
I thought it was treasonous when he said it and I think it is treasonous today.
Thoughts on Obama calling for intel on election hacking back to 2008? Thoughts on intel reps not briefing congress on intel hacks? Thoughts on expected release of intel reports before Jan 20th? If this is even close to treasonous and undermining of democracy by foreign states, it seems as if Obama and the intel agencies aren't in any hurry to inform the college electors, congress or you and I.
I don't speak for Obama, only myself. And I stand by calling Trump's remarks treasonous.
I'm no expert on intelligence gathering. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. One thing I do know though is that intelligence agencies are constantly trying to develop new methods for gathering information, and constantly trying to keep those new methods secret. I wouldn't expect nor would I want the curtain pulled back on everything we know and how we know it.
I didn't ask you to speak for Obama I asked for your thoughts.
You don't have any questions or thoughts as to why our sitting president would commission a report back to 2008 when all anyone is interested in is the that took place on Nov 8th 2016?
If we think it happened this time why we wouldn't we question if it happened before? That seems logical to me. It seems like the President is acting in a non-partisan way. He could've easily just asked for a report on this election. He chose not to. I see that as a positive.
How thinks any other elections were hacked? Never heard it before and I find it strange that he would ask for those other years when nobody cares. He said himself just 4 weeks ago, this past election is in the past.
Why at this point would the president with 34 days remaining in his presidency care about non partisan? He campaigned big time for Hilliary? So did his wife.
How about asking for a report on 2016 elections like now interests of essence of time, then for whatever reasons asked for the other years nobody cares about or questions by Jan 20th?
You think this is logical?
If the elections were hacked by a hostile foreign actor we should know about it before it's too late!
Because it's also been said that the investigation centers on what happened and lessons learned, not on overturning Trump. I absolutely think it logical to look at more than one election.
You seem confused by a President being able to campaign for his hoped-for successor (partisan) and at the same time being able to carry out the duties and responsibilities of his office (non-partisan).
You think a desire to be nonpartisan had anything to do with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton not campaigning for John McCain and Al Gore? Bush was wildly unpopular by 2008 and rightfully so. Clinton was only recently freed from the impeachment fiasco. Barack Obama., meanwhile, is still wildly popular among the Democratic base. There is an obvious difference, whether or not you choose to see it.
Off topic but I'll answer your questions...McCain and Gore didn't want them to campaign for them.
Off topic? It's a response to the article you posted.
Article was referencing the campaign for successor, whats more partisan than that? I'm guessing that the non partisan stuff went out the window the second Obama agreed to stump. Also guessing he would have preferred not to.
“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” I hacked his quote online. I'm running late and can't hack my keys....more later if I ever hack my keys.
I thought it was treasonous when he said it and I think it is treasonous today.
Thoughts on Obama calling for intel on election hacking back to 2008? Thoughts on intel reps not briefing congress on intel hacks? Thoughts on expected release of intel reports before Jan 20th? If this is even close to treasonous and undermining of democracy by foreign states, it seems as if Obama and the intel agencies aren't in any hurry to inform the college electors, congress or you and I.
I don't speak for Obama, only myself. And I stand by calling Trump's remarks treasonous.
I'm no expert on intelligence gathering. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. One thing I do know though is that intelligence agencies are constantly trying to develop new methods for gathering information, and constantly trying to keep those new methods secret. I wouldn't expect nor would I want the curtain pulled back on everything we know and how we know it.
I didn't ask you to speak for Obama I asked for your thoughts.
You don't have any questions or thoughts as to why our sitting president would commission a report back to 2008 when all anyone is interested in is the that took place on Nov 8th 2016?
If we think it happened this time why we wouldn't we question if it happened before? That seems logical to me. It seems like the President is acting in a non-partisan way. He could've easily just asked for a report on this election. He chose not to. I see that as a positive.
How thinks any other elections were hacked? Never heard it before and I find it strange that he would ask for those other years when nobody cares. He said himself just 4 weeks ago, this past election is in the past.
Why at this point would the president with 34 days remaining in his presidency care about non partisan? He campaigned big time for Hilliary? So did his wife.
How about asking for a report on 2016 elections like now interests of essence of time, then for whatever reasons asked for the other years nobody cares about or questions by Jan 20th?
You think this is logical?
If the elections were hacked by a hostile foreign actor we should know about it before it's too late!
Because it's also been said that the investigation centers on what happened and lessons learned, not on overturning Trump. I absolutely think it logical to look at more than one election.
You seem confused by a President being able to campaign for his hoped-for successor (partisan) and at the same time being able to carry out the duties and responsibilities of his office (non-partisan).
You think a desire to be nonpartisan had anything to do with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton not campaigning for John McCain and Al Gore? Bush was wildly unpopular by 2008 and rightfully so. Clinton was only recently freed from the impeachment fiasco. Barack Obama., meanwhile, is still wildly popular among the Democratic base. There is an obvious difference, whether or not you choose to see it.
Off topic but I'll answer your questions...McCain and Gore didn't want them to campaign for them.
Off topic? It's a response to the article you posted.
Article was referencing the campaign for successor, whats more partisan than that? I'm guessing that the non partisan stuff went out the window the second Obama agreed to stump. Also guessing he would have preferred not to.
And I pointed out the two most recent examples of why a campaigning candidate may not want the sitting president stumping for them. That Obama can't stump for Clinton in a partisan way and then do his job in a nonpartisan way remains quite the stretch. One has nothing to do with the other.
Feeling fine, fine, fine. Just want to see Trump come clean, clean, clean. He's bought and paid for by Russia, Russia, Russia. Maybe not? Only the Don knows?
” … the Department of Homeland Security was very actively engaged, reaching out to every state to make sure that they had access to every resource they needed to protect the state electoral system as well.
“And fortunately, we didn’t see the sort of technical interference that I know people had concerns about also in terms of voting machines, and the like,” Lynch said.
^^^ The last minute was like listening to AMT radlibs against the straight talkers.
I learned a new word today: conservatroll hadn't heard that one before
I learned libtroll today. Conservatroll A internet troll who tries to popularize conservative beliefs. Along with his counterpart and nemesis, the libtroll, he is the most poisonous of trolls http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Conservatroll
I'm a lifelong independent so partisan ideology is admittedly foreign to me. However, when did it become partisan to call attention to treasonous comments made by the incoming President during his pursuit of the presidency? Seems like both parties should be concerned by that.
WaPo quotes anonymous sources, then NYT quotes WaPo and anonymous sources, then NBC quotes WaPo and the NYT.
Not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that the Washington Post made up the info just because they site anonymous sources? Since when were anonymous sources irrelevant?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
WaPo quotes anonymous sources, then NYT quotes WaPo and anonymous sources, then NBC quotes WaPo and the NYT.
Not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that the Washington Post made up the info just because they site anonymous sources? Since when were anonymous sources irrelevant?
When you don't agree with them.
JC and others will believe a random meme on the internet before they will believe an article from The Washington Post, NBC or The New York Times. It doesn't fit their viewpoint.
WaPo quotes anonymous sources, then NYT quotes WaPo and anonymous sources, then NBC quotes WaPo and the NYT.
Not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that the Washington Post made up the info just because they site anonymous sources? Since when were anonymous sources irrelevant?
I doubt WaPo made up the story, they probably did get anonymous source information from someone(s). Anonymous sources aren't irrelevant. Clear
WaPo quotes anonymous sources, then NYT quotes WaPo and anonymous sources, then NBC quotes WaPo and the NYT.
Not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that the Washington Post made up the info just because they site anonymous sources? Since when were anonymous sources irrelevant?
When you don't agree with them.
JC and others will believe a random meme on the internet before they will believe an article from The Washington Post, NBC or The New York Times. It doesn't fit their viewpoint.
That's how Trumps are elected.
Nothing to do with me. I posted government officials agencies that don't agree with it or will not confirm it. You have anyone or agency that does agree with it? Post it.........
WaPo quotes anonymous sources, then NYT quotes WaPo and anonymous sources, then NBC quotes WaPo and the NYT.
Not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that the Washington Post made up the info just because they site anonymous sources? Since when were anonymous sources irrelevant?
I doubt WaPo made up the story, they probably did get anonymous source information from someone(s). Anonymous sources aren't irrelevant. Clear
Then don't post the shitty meme. It should at least be funny.
WaPo quotes anonymous sources, then NYT quotes WaPo and anonymous sources, then NBC quotes WaPo and the NYT.
Not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that the Washington Post made up the info just because they site anonymous sources? Since when were anonymous sources irrelevant?
I doubt WaPo made up the story, they probably did get anonymous source information from someone(s). Anonymous sources aren't irrelevant. Clear
Okay, so you assume the anonymous source was lying because they're anonymous? Or at least think any info coming from an anonymous source shouldn't be seriously considered? I mean, you must have posted that bad meme for a reason. Perhaps you think protecting sources is a bad idea? Just trying to get a grasp of how you think when you post your memes.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Comments
Why at this point would the president with 34 days remaining in his presidency care about non partisan? He campaigned big time for Hilliary? So did his wife.
How about asking for a report on 2016 elections like now interests of essence of time, then for whatever reasons asked for the other years nobody cares about or questions by Jan 20th?
You think this is logical?
If the elections were hacked by a hostile foreign actor we should know about it before it's too late!
You seem confused by a President being able to campaign for his hoped-for successor (partisan) and at the same time being able to carry out the duties and responsibilities of his office (non-partisan).
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Who's duty is it to make certain we had fair and uncompromised election results?
http://www.npr.org/2016/07/05/484817706/looking-back-at-a-century-of-presidents-not-campaigning-for-their-successor
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
JC, why rush the investigation? Worried where the trail will lead? Follow the money, money, money!!!
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
In fact, I'm calling for the exact opposite, all resources to be focused on this election not 2012 2010 and 2008 that nobody cares about.
Weren't you calling for an investigation? Well let's investigate!
I'm guessing that the non partisan stuff went out the window the second Obama agreed to stump. Also guessing he would have preferred not to.
Definitely.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
“And fortunately, we didn’t see the sort of technical interference that I know people had concerns about also in terms of voting machines, and the like,” Lynch said.
hadn't heard that one before
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-russia-hacking-kellyanne-conway-232673
Conservatroll
A internet troll who tries to popularize conservative beliefs. Along with his counterpart and nemesis, the libtroll, he is the most poisonous of trolls
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Conservatroll
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
JC and others will believe a random meme on the internet before they will believe an article from The Washington Post, NBC or The New York Times. It doesn't fit their viewpoint.
That's how Trumps are elected.
Anonymous sources aren't irrelevant.
Clear
Post it.........
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Intelligence_Community