Alan Dershowitz rips his own party apart

First of all, 17 agencies did not come out all indepdently and say that. It was one guy speaking on BEHALF of those agencies.

The evidence they have is spurious. It is literally childs play to fake the origins and fingerprints of the things they are talking about. On a jr. level people do it on JPP everyday when they use VPNs to hide their IP's. With regards to russia obviously things are more advanced and we aren't talking about IP's, but when it comes to certain programs utilized or maybe a particular exploits used, such things can easily be found and bought on the dark web. Furthermore our intel agencies have been open about their own capabilities of faking origins of "attacks" and their desire to do so in various situations. Lastly our intel agencies make a habit of lying to the american people about their activities. They have lied under oath to congress about domestic spying. They always lie and don't give a fuck about us. Their word isn't worth dogshit to me.

Go look up Operation Northwoods to see what our intel and military industrial complex is capable of coming up with.

Isn't it funny that the same intel agencies said Iraq had WMD? And Deshtard hated that

I will work hard to reelect Trump if for no other reason than maybe it will drive liberals to suicide
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Dershowitz



Dershowitz has been involved in several legal cases and is a commentator on the Arab–Israeli conflict.[6] As a criminal appellate lawyer, he has won 13 of the 15 murder and attempted murder cases he has handled,[7] and has represented a series of celebrity clients, including Mike Tyson, Patty Hearst, and Jim Bakker. His most notable cases include his role in 1984 in overturning the conviction of Claus von Bülow for the attempted murder of his wife, Sunny, and as the appellate adviser for the defense in the O.*J. Simpson murder trial in 1995.[8]
She is so fucking predictable, using her vast knowledge of copy and paste to post a Wiki entry.

Sent from my iPhone 25 GT Turbo
 
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/04/opini...-not-another-cia-fiasco-like-iraq-wmd-bergen/



'Curveball'
The faulty assumption that Saddam Hussein was reconstituting his weapons of mass destruction program rested, in part, on intelligence sources who were lying. One of them was an Iraqi defector with the telling alias of "Curveball," who claimed that Hussein possessed mobile bioweapons labs.
This became a central exhibit in the George W. Bush administration's assertions that Hussein had a biological weapons program. But Curveball later admitted he had made up the whole story.
A month before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, CIA Director George Tenet testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that Iraq had "provided training in poisons and gases to two al Qaeda associates." But what Tenet didn't know was that this information had come from a militant who had been tortured in Egypt.
In December 2001, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a Libyan militant affiliated with al Qaeda, was captured in Pakistan. The CIA then "rendered" Libi to Egypt. Once in Egypt's grim prisons, to improve his chances of better treatment, Libi fed his interrogators a number of fairy tales, including that Osama bin Laden had sent two operatives to Iraq to learn about biological and chemical weapons.






Trump promises to reveal info on hacking 01:45
Because Libi's story encapsulated the key arguments for the Iraq War, his tale was picked up by President Bush in a keynote speech in Cincinnati on October 7, 2002, in which Bush laid out his rationale for the coming war with Iraq, saying, "We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."
But once he was back in American custody, on February 14, 2004, Libi recanted what he had falsely told his Egyptian jailors. Libi told his US interrogators that he had "fabricated" his tale of the Saddam Hussein-al Qaeda-poison connection to the Egyptians following "physical abuse and threats of torture."
 
you would rather be kept in the dark with regards to corruption of our candidates. You would rather not know the full truth. You think our democracy is better if the public simply didn't know about the nefarious actions of our candidates. To be better informed is a bad thing, solely because you may not like the source.

A more informed citizenry will always be better for democracy, not worse.

Democrats wanted people in the dark and they are mad people received more information to make their decision.

Trollin' for dollars, I see.

Hillary was investigated to the hilt. So, I'm not sure what you're talking about. And I never took a stand against investigating Hillary (like you have w/ Trump).

Methinks your protests are somewhat ideologically motivated.
 
Isn't it funny that the same intel agencies said Iraq had WMD? And Deshtard hated that

I will work hard to reelect Trump if for no other reason than maybe it will drive liberals to suicide

That's really the only reason you guys support Trump. It's actually kind of funny how much you & the other Trumpsters talk about that aspect - how much it just drives the libbies crazy.

Pretty telling as to what you think of him as POTUS. I don't remember anyone on the left trumpeting that about Obama.
 
Trollin' for dollars, I see.

Hillary was investigated to the hilt. So, I'm not sure what you're talking about. And I never took a stand against investigating Hillary (like you have w/ Trump).

Methinks your protests are somewhat ideologically motivated.

i'm not talking about investigations. I am talking about the scenario of your fake news russia story actually being true.
 
the russia story is fake news, there was no collusion, and there is no evidence as such. but if there were, see post 60

Well, it isn't "my" story. But whether you like it or not, there was enough there for the FBI to instigate an investigation (I know, I know - deeeep staaaate).

All I have advocated is that the investigation play out. There is certainly enough "there" there for me, at least to warrant an investigation. If Trump & his minions didn't complain about it all the time, it wouldn't get nearly the coverage that it does.

And if they find nothing, that still puts him 2-3 fruitless investigations behind Clinton.
 
Honestly, I'm MUCH more concerned about the possibility of Russia being involved in our election. I wasn't one of those that was against the Patriot Act; to me, it's all how the info is used.

What's actually amazing to me is that you wouldn't care at all if Russia did influence our election.

Russia involved in our elections is fake news....
The Patriot act is being abused, used as political tool life the IRS, revealed by the FICA courts...
No votes were changed anywhere in the entire country by Russia or anyone else....
Hillary broke the law and was let go...to big to arrest, no one is excused from breaking the law by their lack of intent or ignorance of the law....
Brennen started investigating Trump over a year ago, no end in sight.
 
Well, it isn't "my" story. But whether you like it or not, there was enough there for the FBI to instigate an investigation (I know, I know - deeeep staaaate).

All I have advocated is that the investigation play out. There is certainly enough "there" there for me, at least to warrant an investigation. If Trump & his minions didn't complain about it all the time, it wouldn't get nearly the coverage that it does.

And if they find nothing, that still puts him 2-3 fruitless investigations behind Clinton.

clinton was literally smashing hard drives with hammers. She should be in jail and the only reason she isn't is that she owns washington D.C.

in contrast this russia story is little more than vapornews. There has still been zero evidence presented to anyone, minus anonymous friends of friends word.
 
but more to the point thing1, we are arguing something completely different. You either ignored what I said above or it went over your head. Why do you believe democracy is worse off when there is MORE transparency and the citizens are MORE informed with regards to the corruption of their candidates?
 
What's despicable about him? The man is honest, an increasingly rare quality in US politics these days.

Sent from my iPhone 25 GT Turbo

Wasn't he OJ's lawyer? Jeffrey Epstein?????

It would be nice to post the entire interview, wouldn't it? Here it is:

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1705/27/cnr.07.html

Isn't that a tragedy, that in America you have President- elect and his staff trusting the Russians more than they trust the Obama administration? It tells us something pretty awful about the level of trust in the country. But there is nothing even arguably in my view at least, criminal about any of this. And that's why a special counsel is a wrong person to investigate this. These are political issues that should be investigated by independent outside commission set up by Congress which with do everything under the sunlight of the TV camera rather than behind the secret walls of grand jury where we are not gone to learn anything.

Dershowitz is a civil libertarian. And he expressed his opinion. I hope we can still do that in this country.
 
but more to the point thing1, we are arguing something completely different. You either ignored what I said above or it went over your head. Why do you believe democracy is worse off when there is MORE transparency and the citizens are MORE informed with regards to the corruption of their candidates?

I don't.

Where did I say that I did?
 
I don't.

Where did I say that I did?

that's what all this "russia collusion" story points derives from. This all began when hillary cried about the russsssians and their "hacking" and costing her the election.

"The russians revealed my corruption and made me lose"

People find this to be a valid argument ^
 
Back
Top