U.S. indictments show technical evidence for Russian hacking accusations

We should send the cia to nab these guys and send them to gitmo. Once someone gets there the RW doesn’t need evidence or convictions to trust their guilt

 

We have evidence. You just haven’t seen it.
Have you seen evidence of the NK or Iranian nuclear program? Did you see evidence of who was behind 911? The Syrian chemical weapon attacks?
Sounds like you only want evidence when it’s your pals in Russian Intel

 

Law is not politics, unless evidence is uncovered it'll be utterly laughable for Rosenstein to have publicly defended "the honor of the American People", in conjunction with "no Americans were charged" and then say "Oh wait, here's something on Trump."

I guess until words clearing Trump come from Mueller's mouth(who disgracefully has never ever showed himself), this theory is going to continue right?

 

But there isn't any evidence in the indictment. That's what made your Reuters article fake news.

Let's put it this way, the details of the indictment could only have come from US intelligence sources, not from any investigation of the Mueller team, which is why I was suspicious of it. Assuming the "story" of the indictment is true, how would you prove that in court without declassifying a great deal of intelligence? In fact, the indictment itself reveals a great deal and if you were the Russians, you would be scouring it for clues to US sources and methods.

Interestingly enough, Devin Nunes gives a clue to that in a Daily Caller article. He claims that the Mueller indictment is lifted right from a House Committee intelligence report. The issue with that is those sections are still classified. Although Nunes wants Trump to declassify them, how is it that Mueller can plagiarize that without getting it declassified?

So the "evidence" is no doubt linked in the House Report. Naturally it's classified, so how Mueller is expecting to use that in court if any of these defendents show up and demand discovery, aka Concord, makes me suspicious, once again, of an investigation that has been suspicious from the beginning.

So we are probably never going to see any evidence, and it sure isn't in the indictment, in spite of the blind faith you are giving Reuters.

 

Thank you, Mello. This very revealing post of yours tells VOLUMES about the way that a Leftist's mind works. "We have evidence. You just haven't seen it"...? So, exactly when the hell is this 'evidence' ever going to be shown to the American public?! Who has it? Where is it? Why hasn't it been released to the American public already? You want Trump to be thrown out, gutted, and burned at the stake -- so -- just show us the evidence and you and your cohort can start 'dancing around the campfire'....

Yes, we have seen NK set off hydrogen bombs. The North Korean nuclear program exists. Otherwise, what are we negotiating with Kim about?

Yes, we have seen Iran spinning 19,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium as part of its nuclear program. The program exists, and, under the provisions of the 'nuclear inspection agreement' that Obama/Kerry put together, all Iran would need to do to escape any inspections whatsoever would be to put those R&D facilities on places that Iran declares to be "military bases" (if they aren't already). If the Iranians aren't working on nuclear weapons, then what were Obama/Kerry negotiating with them about?

911 evidence? All of those 19 terrorists were Muslim jihadis who executed a highly-detailed plan that had been developed over a long time... or do you know differently...?

Syrian chemical attacks? The perps of those attacks have never been adequately identified in my opinion. Some say it was the Syrian military, and some say the attacks were conducted by any one of several factions in this Syrian 'civil war' conflict. But maybe you can tell us?

But back to the Mueller 'investigation' -- to this moment, WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN NOTHING that proves "the Russians hacked the election for Trump"! Absolutely NOTHING!

 

Well “hacked the election” doesn’t really mean anything, it’s just a sound bite. My point is they don’t release intel evidence to us.

 

How can you trace and examine the malware that was placed on the server without the server itself?

 

How do you know without investigating it and tracking it's source don't we need to make sure there was no crime and no Russian involvement?

 

I believe there is or already was an fbi invesigation into the foundation.

 

The server it originated from was the same one used to distribute it

 

Not really aware how this works do you? You cannot forensically examine a server without the server. Kinda basic ****.

 

Oh horseshit, they never even examined the servers. The way that a great nation responds to aggression by a foreign power is with a bunch of pointless indictments?

 

They know server a sent to sever b, then server a had data from server b. You don’t need server b for that.

 

As the evidence continues to mount up and the connection is all but made.

 

No, I'm not going to bother with these idiotic right wing fake scandals.

 

Have you ever pondered the possibility that this might be the Left's version of the 9/11 twin towers demolition theory?

 

Which server originated what? The allegation is malware was placed in the DNC server. Can't examine the malware without the server.

 

I'm talking about the DNC and Clinton campaign.

 

Oh, NOW I get it. So, you on the Left are chewing at the straps to eviscerate Trump, but you think you're going to get to do that because the EVIDENCE is just too sensitive to put before us, the stinking, 'unwashed-masses' who work, pay taxes, and VOTE?!

We're supposed to just "take your word for it" (because the hyperliberal Left always knows everything so much better than the rest of us) that the only reason that Trump beat Hillary was because of THE RUSSIANS?!

Thanks to Google Translate it is now easy to say "BULLSHIT!" in about one hundred different languages!

Hint: Hillary Clinton's blathering-assed stupidities and criminal behavior with classified information, national security, and deliberately obstructing justice were published and repeated FAR AND WIDE, but that didn't stop party-line, lock-step liberal Democrats from enthusiastically supporting her -- but the rest of us are supposed to sit back and let these same rabid Democrats tear Trump to pieces without any evidence coming into the light of public view? Again -- BULLSHIT!

 

Why? I thought the current deflection was uranium one....

 

No, the "current deflection" is one which seeks to tell us that we Americans are too stupid to understand that "the Russians hacked the election for Trump". That's been the Democrat mantra that they started spewing about ten minutes after the 2016 election results came out.

And, FINE, we on the Right will be quite willing to see Trump thrown out of office for just reasons! BUT, you on the Left will have to give us PROOF first! This isn't France in the 18th-century, where you can just destroy people without just cause, for no verifiable reason at all!

. Yeah, sure -- but first, PROVIDE PROOF OF TRUMP'S 'COLLUSION'!

 

Some things we know:

1) The Russians were involved in our 2016 election.
2) Their spending was 0.0000002% of the total amount spent in the election.
3) No Americans (including Donald J Trump) were knowingly involved and "in cahoots" with the Russians.

 

How many votes were changed? How many votes were stolen? Where's the collusion? Was the vote tally changed at all?

 

Then provide the technical evidence ... Standing up saying "email, social media, and crypto currency" was used is not evidence meddling in the electoral process of another nation.

Especially in this case where what is said is "meddling" - does not constitute meddling in any real sense of the word.

I do not agree that the facebook posts constituted meddling to begin with .. unless one considers an add which speaks "The Truth" - meddling.

How does the voter knowing "The Truth" prior to casing a vote harmful to our electoral process ?

 

Explaining Russiagate