‘Stand Down’ On Russia Interference From Susan Rice.....

Mueller is all in to protect the collective. He is as big as sellout as any of the other globalist in power here.

 

So you can't. What a surprise.

 

This should be to much of a spotlight.....for him to avoid. Everybody will be able to ask why he didn't investigate Rice nor talk to Daniels and his staff.

He hooked up the Russians. How can he avoid Rice giving a Stand down order concerning the prevention of Russian Meddling.

 

The same way they gave a pass for The Stand Down order in Benghazi

 

You could actually read the book.

It has been out for a couple of months now.

Instead, you rely on out of context references from one right wing blog that has about ten follower, and another one that has a well deserved reputation for making stuff up.

 

Wrong again Tom your usual.....we rely on what was told to the Senate Intel Committee yesterday. That which your kind just can't cant get around that fact and reality.

 

Prove its out of context. Go ahead.

 

Please provide us all with the context that changes the STAND DOWN ORDER....as verified by Obama's cyber war chief, Daniels...

 

Sorry, but the OP never referenced the Senate in any way. And both of the blog posts were drawn from Michael Isakoff's book.

That still does not make this news.

I realize that you Trumpsters are now trying to manufacture a new narrative in which it's Obama's fault that he didn't stop the Russians (and by extension, Trump).

But it doesn't make any more sense than the last one.

After all, you've been spending months blaming Obama for running an imaginary campaign to "delegitimize Trump" after the election. Now you're talking out of the other side of your mouth.

One can fault Obama for not going public and agressively attacking Russian meddling. Of course, by the time period mentioned in your post, the FBI and a number of foreign intelligence agencies were well aware of the very odd pattern of frequent contacts between Russians operatives and various people associated with the Trump campaign.

Naturally, had Obama made all of this public knowledge at the time, the Trumpsters and the GOP would have screamed their heads off, claiming that it was a desperate play to keep Trump out of an election he was generally expected to lose.

Maybe before it's all over, you'll come up with a narrative that makes sense and isn't self contradictory. But I'm not counting on it.

 

So you still can't prove its false or that he lied during his testimony. Got it.

 

Testimony before the Senate Intel Committee....isn't news now. Are you trying to replace Jimmy Kimmel?





What goes up must come down
Spinnin' wheel got to go 'round
Talkin' 'bout your troubles it's a cryin' sin
Ride a painted pony let the spinnin' wheel spin

You got no money and you got no home
Spinnin' wheel all alone
Talkin' 'bout your troubles and you, you never learn
Ride a painted pony let the spinnin' wheel turn.....snip~

 

I never made either claim.

 

No, it isn't.

Unless, of course, Fox Noise and your favorite right wing AM radio personality never talked about it.

I could have told you this a year ago.

So could anyone else actually following the timeline of the Trump/Russia scandal (as opposed to the right wing noise).

 

Actually, you did.

"Instead, you rely on out of context references from one right wing blog that has about ten follower, and another one that has a well deserved reputation for making stuff up."

Now what?

 

Yes it is Tom.....Testimony in front of the Senate Intel Committee is news.

Oh and if you knew Rice did this. Then all you have done is give cover to those that were about the Slim Shady.

 

"According to Daniel multiple plans were in the works to make Putin back off. Some of those included: bombarding Russian news sites with bot traffic to force them to be shut them, to meddle in Russia ’s upcoming national election, and reveal corruption in Putin’s political party."

If he came to me with these plans I would have fired him on the spot lol these are terrible ideas and he "labored into the night" to come up with them. Lol.

 

And Victoria Nuland's Senate Intel testimony seems to have been completely ignored. http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...-department-briefed-officials-on-pee-dossier/ Ms Nuland seems to have committed perjury in the space of just seconds, in response to 2 simple questions posed by chairman Burr.

 

Yet, that has nothing to do with Rice telling Him and his Staff to Stand down.

 

No, I did not/

And quoting me not making that claim does not make your claim either.

I never claimed that the story was false.I noted that the right wing noise machine is trying to make an issue out of something that the rest of the world has known for a year.

Playing on the confirmation bias and the deliberate selective ignorance of the Trumpster audience is getting common in right wing media.

 

Yes, you did and I proved it with your own words.

Of course it does.

You want to play that game? You claimed it was out of context without providing the fake context you claim would justify your position then you claimed the source was a liar without proof.

I'm confused how you think that isn't a complete denial of the story's validity. Of course with zero facts to back you up.

 

Republicans are upset there’s an investigation and are also upset it wasn’t made public earlier??
Do you all think anyone is falling for this stupidity?
It’s like Nixon blaming hotel security for watergate lol
Bill blaming the dry cleaner for Monica lol

 

What a difference a President with a set, makes.

White House Authorizes “Offensive Operations” As Part of New Cyber Security Strategy.

According to national security adviser John Bolton, the new policy will ease the rules on the use of cyber weapons to protect the nation and includes a new classified presidential directive that replaced one from the Obama administration.

According to the Washington Post, “In general, the president’s directive — called National Security Presidential Memorandum 13, or NSPM 13 — frees the military to engage, without a lengthy approval process, in actions that fall below the “use of force” or a level that would cause death, destruction or significant economic impacts, said individuals familiar with the policy who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss nonpublic information.”

Most analysts believe the strategy does not differ too much from the Obama administration’s cybersecurity national action plan (CNAP) issued in 2016; the problem, according to some former officials “was not the policy, but the inability of agencies to deliver a forceful response.”

 

What law school did you go to where get to declare the things you don't want to hear or account for "theories"?

That's the better question.

 

MAGA is made in such ways.

Obama was a chump.

 

Ever wonder WHY the Obama Administration STOOD DOWN during the Russian attacks on our election?