THE ERA OF TRUMP

[Alexander PhiAlipson]

Levin's argument contains like 7 references to reputable papers like the NYT. You wouldn't know that if you didn't listen or read because he is a conservative.

He also cites the BBC.

[Kazmyr]

ssu -

In light of the Vault 7 release today, do you still believe in the narrative you posted above?

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/839117937042735104

[The Conservative]

ssu -

In light of the Vault 7 release today, do you still believe in the narrative you posted above?

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/839117937042735104

Or get it from here...

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/

[ssu]

Yep, that's from Levin's article from Bannon's Breitbart. Any other references than the one?

Ad hominem. Respond to the arguments made by Levin and Breitbart or BTFU.

Nope, not ad hominem. All I'm saying that it's basically the article everybody is talking about. And I'm responding to them:

(Just get other references, stories totally unrelated to this one. When those articles fit in with it, that makes it more credible.)

Anyway the whole story starts when Manafort comes to be Trump's campaign manager and Trump's early foreign policy team starts with Carter Page. That's in March. Now I totally agree that this is basically the event that wakes up the intelligence services, the "deep state" to you. I remember the first article in the spring coming out and especially looking at Carter Page's remarks (like that Ukraine is an artificial country etc). That's also the first time when Trump starts to lay out his foreign policy in a more detailed manner.

One important milestone here is May 18 (2016). Then James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, says at a Washington event there are “some indications” of cyberattacks aimed at the presidential campaigns. See Clapper: Cyber threats against presidential campaigns are growing

That likely is the first public news that the US intelligence services are noticing something. Just by doing their job, following the Russians.

Trump's tweets are one thing. That the whole US intelligence & military apparatus is in quite a turmoil is another thing.

[ssu]

ssu -

In light of the Vault 7 release today, do you still believe in the narrative you posted above?

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/839117937042735104

Or get it from here...

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/

? ? ?

What's your point? That the CIA spies? Are we going to start with talking about ECHELON?

And I do believe the narrative because I GODDAM FOLLOWED IT HAPPENING with you. Before we were kicked out from Dan's Place, remember?

I brought up back then that Trump had pro-Russia people in his foreign policy advisory team. Because... you could read that they had said pro-Russian things. Then I gave the reason that if Trump reaches out to people that do business in Russia, those have to have close ties to the Kremlin and hence likely are a bit pro-Russia. I just found it a bit bizarre. But Trump never has been your ordinary Republican candidate.

[The Conservative]

ssu -

In light of the Vault 7 release today, do you still believe in the narrative you posted above?

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/839117937042735104

Or get it from here...

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/

? ? ?

What's your point? That the CIA spies? Are we going to start with talking about ECHELON?

And I do believe the narrative because I GODDAM FOLLOWED IT HAPPENING with you. Before we were kicked out from Dan's Place, remember?

I brought up back then that Trump had pro-Russia people in his foreign policy advisory team. Because... you could read that they had said pro-Russian things. Then I gave the reason that if Trump reaches out to people that do business in Russia, those have to have close ties to the Kremlin and hence likely are a bit pro-Russia. I just found it a bit bizarre. But Trump never has been your ordinary Republican candidate.

If the CIA is spying on people inside the US, they are breaking quite a few laws.

[Kazmyr]

What's your point? That the CIA spies? Are we going to start with talking about ECHELON?

And I do believe the narrative because I GODDAM FOLLOWED IT HAPPENING with you. Before we were kicked out from Dan's Place, remember?

I brought up back then that Trump had pro-Russia people in his foreign policy advisory team. Because... you could read that they had said pro-Russian things. Then I gave the reason that if Trump reaches out to people that do business in Russia, those have to have close ties to the Kremlin and hence likely are a bit pro-Russia. I just found it a bit bizarre. But Trump never has been your ordinary Republican candidate.

I wasn't angling about Trump's Russian ties. I'm talking about the DNC hack by the Russians. The continuous claims that the Russians are meddling in our election.

If the Police claim that they can be "reasonably sure that Person X murdered Person Y because we have a match on Person X's fingerprints on the murder weapon on the scene," you tend to believe them right? What if you found out the Police were capable of planting perfect duplicates of Person X's fingerprints on the knife? You wouldn't think to question their conclusions?

[ssu]

What's your point? That the CIA spies? Are we going to start with talking about ECHELON?

And I do believe the narrative because I GODDAM FOLLOWED IT HAPPENING with you. Before we were kicked out from Dan's Place, remember?

I brought up back then that Trump had pro-Russia people in his foreign policy advisory team. Because... you could read that they had said pro-Russian things. Then I gave the reason that if Trump reaches out to people that do business in Russia, those have to have close ties to the Kremlin and hence likely are a bit pro-Russia. I just found it a bit bizarre. But Trump never has been your ordinary Republican candidate.

I wasn't angling about Trump's Russian ties. I'm talking about the DNC hack by the Russians. The continuous claims that the Russians are meddling in our election.

If the Police claim that they can be "reasonably sure that Person X murdered Person Y because we have a match on Person X's fingerprints on the murder weapon on the scene," you tend to believe them right? What if you found out the Police were capable of planting perfect duplicates of Person X's fingerprints on the knife? You wouldn't think to question their conclusions?

So it's a CIA hoax, all of it? And all the other intelligence services went along with it. Or what simply is your idea here? What do you think happened? Yes, we don't yet know for sure, but still.

What Trump has said, what are his ties, all they are important when looking at the thing.

How gigantic the whole conspiracy would then be? Because one thing I know is that the FBI wasn't particularly fond of Hillary in the first place, yet it went along with other services and acknowledge that indeed it was the Russians. The idea that this all is a vast conspiracy against a totally innocent victimized Russia is simply a bit too thick, when you include a) the statements everybody has said, b) all the Trump's denials and then people having to resign.

And yes, they did drink Champagne in Moscow:


And when you simply look at what then has happened, you see that a) Trump's cabinet has had different ideas and b) Trump himself has pivoted from his earlier pro-Russia stance. Now it's just a bad recurring dream for Trump which won't leave him alone, even if all of the open Russophiles are already gone from the administration.

[ssu]

If the CIA is spying on people inside the US, they are breaking quite a few laws.

That's true. But in any case if it's OK to kill US citizens with drones as has happened...

[The Conservative]

What's your point? That the CIA spies? Are we going to start with talking about ECHELON?

And I do believe the narrative because I GODDAM FOLLOWED IT HAPPENING with you. Before we were kicked out from Dan's Place, remember?

I brought up back then that Trump had pro-Russia people in his foreign policy advisory team. Because... you could read that they had said pro-Russian things. Then I gave the reason that if Trump reaches out to people that do business in Russia, those have to have close ties to the Kremlin and hence likely are a bit pro-Russia. I just found it a bit bizarre. But Trump never has been your ordinary Republican candidate.

I wasn't angling about Trump's Russian ties. I'm talking about the DNC hack by the Russians. The continuous claims that the Russians are meddling in our election.

If the Police claim that they can be "reasonably sure that Person X murdered Person Y because we have a match on Person X's fingerprints on the murder weapon on the scene," you tend to believe them right? What if you found out the Police were capable of planting perfect duplicates of Person X's fingerprints on the knife? You wouldn't think to question their conclusions?

So it's a CIA hoax, all of it? And all the other intelligence services went along with it. Or what simply is your idea here? What do you think happened? Yes, we don't yet know for sure, but still.

What Trump has said, what are his ties, all they are important when looking at the thing.

How gigantic the whole conspiracy would then be? Because one thing I know is that the FBI wasn't particularly fond of Hillary in the first place, yet it went along with other services and acknowledge that indeed it was the Russians. The idea that this all is a vast conspiracy against a totally innocent victimized Russia is simply a bit too thick, when you include a) the statements everybody has said, b) all the Trump's denials and then people having to resign.

And yes, they did drink Champagne in Moscow:


And when you simply look at what then has happened, you see that a) Trump's cabinet has had different ideas and b) Trump himself has pivoted from his earlier pro-Russia stance. Now it's just a bad recurring dream for Trump which won't leave him alone, even if all of the open Russophiles are already gone from the administration.

When you had Obama willing to go to a war stance, and Hillary doubling down on said stance, don't you think anyone not wanting to go to war would be celebrating that Trump won?