Brennan Suppressed Intel Showing Russia Favored Clinton

FreeSpeech said:
Yes. They couldn't have because that fake Obama intel report was based entirely on Crowdstrikes fake investigation and Crowdstrike now admits that they don't even have evidence that Russia hacked the DNC.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't be fibbing, now would you?????????????????
 
FreeSpeech said:
Yes. They couldn't have because that fake Obama intel report was based entirely on Crowdstrikes fake investigation and Crowdstrike now admits that they don't even have evidence that Russia hacked the DNC.
Click to expand...

Imagine being so steeped in denial and delusion that you are compelled to post trash like this on an anonymous forum.
 
Trumpet said:
You wouldn't be fibbing, now would you?????????????????
Click to expand...

Well, if FreeSpeech IS Truth Detector, then it really confirms everything we've been saying about Conservatism. That its support is small, mostly artificial and AstroTurfed, and its proponents are compelled to create people out of thin air to agree with themselves on anonymous message boards.
 
LV426 said:
Wait - FreeSpeech is Truth Detector?

Why is it that Conservatives have to literally create imaginary people to agree with them?
Click to expand...

FreeSpeech = Truth Detector is what I'm beginning to suspect. TD is on so many ignore list that he needs to change his user name.
 
Trumpet said:
FreeSpeech = Truth Detector is what I'm beginning to suspect. TD is on so many ignore list that he needs to change his user name.
Click to expand...

Well, if it is, it has to be killing him to not to use his lame hashtags. And his gutter language.
 
LV426 said:
Right, everyone who doesn't indulge your fantasy is conspiring against you.

Victimhood at its worst.

What a baby.

You can just say that you got duped by Trump into toiling his baggage...that way, you can at least dig out of this cult hole you've found yourself in now.
Click to expand...

Look we get it, the DNC ministry of propaganda hasn't spoon fed you your taking points yet, so tell you what, how about you sit back, relax and wait a few hours so you can suck your spin out of the tip of Don Lemon's cock?

In the meantime choke on the fact that we now know that even Crowdstrike admits that they dont even have concrete evidence that Russia hacked the DNC:

"We did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated [moved electronically] from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated," Henry said.

Henry reiterated his claim on multiple occasions:

"There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."
"There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated."
"There is circumstantial evidence that that data was exfiltrated off the network. … We didn't have a sensor in place that saw data leave. We said that the data left based on the circumstantial evidence. That was the conclusion that we made."
"Sir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didn't see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw."
Asked directly if he could "unequivocally say" whether "it was or was not exfiltrated out of DNC," Henry told the committee: "I can't say based on that."

https://www.realclearinvestigations...d_no_proof_of_russian_hack_of_dnc_123596.html
 
FreeSpeech said:
Another fucking retard who hasn't got his DNC ministry of propaganda talking points yet. It's kind of hard to respond when haven't sucked your fake news out of Don Lemon's cock yet isn't it faggot?
Click to expand...

Look who is always first to bring up Homosexuality around here!

Makes one wonder why? Here is a man who struggles with his sexuality, and as a cover he accuses others of something he is!

And now we know who he has a man crush for- DON LEMON!

Very telling dude!
 
Trumpet said:
FreeSpeech = Truth Detector is what I'm beginning to suspect. TD is on so many ignore list that he needs to change his user name.
Click to expand...

I am not sure if it's a matter of being seen, so much as a matter of fabricating a person out of thin air to make it look like there's more support than there actually is.

It's no different than when Joe (not his name) the Plumber (not his job) lied to Obama about being a "small business owner", or when Julie "fat cow" Boonstra pretended that her insurance costs went up because of the ACA, when her insurer confirms that they went down, or when Ashley Todd carved a "B" into her own face (backwards, because she was looking in a mirror while she did it) to pretend that she was attacked by an Obama supporter.

Conservatism has a long, long, long sordid history of lying, exaggerating, and fabricating (See: Phyllis Schlafly). That's its only function now. Conservatism is not a legitimate belief system. There has been no single Conservative policy accomplishment. None. They have nothing to show for anything.
 
LV426 said:
Well, if FreeSpeech IS Truth Detector, then it really confirms everything we've been saying about Conservatism. That its support is small, mostly artificial and AstroTurfed, and its proponents are compelled to create people out of thin air to agree with themselves on anonymous message boards.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'll to put freespeech on my ignore list, if he/she get annoying like TD did.
 
LV426 said:
Imagine being so steeped in denial and delusion that you are compelled to post trash like this on an anonymous forum.
Click to expand...

We have the under oath testimony but you likely didn't hear about it because you get your "news" from the DNC ministry of propaganda:

"There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."
"There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated."
"There is circumstantial evidence that that data was exfiltrated off the network. … We didn't have a sensor in place that saw data leave. We said that the data left based on the circumstantial evidence. That was the conclusion that we made."
"Sir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didn't see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw."
Asked directly if he could "unequivocally say" whether "it was or was not exfiltrated out of DNC," Henry told the committee: "I can't say based on that."

https://www.realclearinvestigations...d_no_proof_of_russian_hack_of_dnc_123596.html
 
FreeSpeech said:
Look we get it, the DNC ministry of propaganda hasn't spoon fed you your taking points yet, so tell you what, how about you sit back, relax and wait a few hours so you can suck your spin out of the tip of Don Lemon's cock?

In the meantime choke on the fact that we now know that even Crowdstrike admits that they dont even have concrete evidence that Russia hacked the DNC:

"We did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated [moved electronically] from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated," Henry said.

Henry reiterated his claim on multiple occasions:

"There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."
"There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated."
"There is circumstantial evidence that that data was exfiltrated off the network. … We didn't have a sensor in place that saw data leave. We said that the data left based on the circumstantial evidence. That was the conclusion that we made."
"Sir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didn't see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw."
Asked directly if he could "unequivocally say" whether "it was or was not exfiltrated out of DNC," Henry told the committee: "I can't say based on that."

https://www.realclearinvestigations...d_no_proof_of_russian_hack_of_dnc_123596.html
Click to expand...

What a little bitch.

And what's even more bitchy about you is that you had to create a new account just so people would see the type of crap you post.

So you invented someone out of thin air, pose as that person, because no one takes you seriously under your other IDs.
 
Trumpet said:
You wouldn't be fibbing, now would you?????????????????
Click to expand...

No you stupid bitch:

"There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."
"There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated."
"There is circumstantial evidence that that data was exfiltrated off the network. … We didn't have a sensor in place that saw data leave. We said that the data left based on the circumstantial evidence. That was the conclusion that we made."
"Sir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didn't see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw."
Asked directly if he could "unequivocally say" whether "it was or was not exfiltrated out of DNC," Henry told the committee: "I can't say based on that."

https://www.realclearinvestigations...d_no_proof_of_russian_hack_of_dnc_123596.html
 
Trumpet said:
I'm not sure yet.
Click to expand...

It's definitely someone's sock. The account was created just this May. If it is Truth Detector, we can very easily just see if he was smart enough to switch his IDs often enough to give the illusion that the two accounts are two separate people. It's how anatta was outed.
 
LV426 said:
What a little bitch.

And what's even more bitchy about you is that you had to create a new account just so people would see the type of crap you post.

So you invented someone out of thin air, pose as that person, because no one takes you seriously under your other IDs.
Click to expand...

Keep the ad-hominems coming you laughable faggot because you know you have no rebuttal whatsoever I've completely debunked every falsifiable claim you have made over the last two weeks, you're not very good at this.
 
FreeSpeech said:
We have the under oath testimony but you likely didn't hear about it because you get your "news" from the DNC ministry of propaganda:

"There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."
"There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated."
"There is circumstantial evidence that that data was exfiltrated off the network. … We didn't have a sensor in place that saw data leave. We said that the data left based on the circumstantial evidence. That was the conclusion that we made."
"Sir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didn't see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw."
Asked directly if he could "unequivocally say" whether "it was or was not exfiltrated out of DNC," Henry told the committee: "I can't say based on that."

https://www.realclearinvestigations...d_no_proof_of_russian_hack_of_dnc_123596.html
Click to expand...

So...the quote you have here doesn't say that Crowdstrike says the DNC wasn't hacked...it says this one guy can't say personally if they were based on that.

So you didn't even read the thing you posted because it completely contradicts the claims you make against it.

What a fucking fraud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top