Former FBI Agent: Possible Russia, Trump Campaign Collusion Worries Me

[TitanDuckFan]

18 minutes ago, patsplat said:

Jokes on you if you think newspapers -- LOL -- have more influence than Facebook.

So you're saying Trump DID steal their morons?

LOL

[pat]

Facebook: $27.6 billion revenue 2016 and rising

The entire US newspaper industry: $37.6 billion revenue 2013 and falling

Most people get their daily news from Facebook.  And FB accomodates astroturfing far more readily than theWashington Post.

Am curious, how did you come across the articles posted?

[TitanDuckFan]

6 minutes ago, patsplat said:

Facebook: $27.6 billion revenue 2016 and rising

The entire US newspaper industry: $37.6 billion revenue 2013 and falling

Most people get their daily news from Facebook.  And FB accomodates astroturfing far more readily than theWashington Post.

Am curious, how did you come across the articles posted?

Not Facebook.  I don't do Facebook.

Are you thinking that makes me a luddite?

I got it from a link someone posted on a different forum.  I'm pretty sure it was a twitter posting.

[pat]

4 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Not Facebook.  I don't do Facebook.

Are you thinking that makes me a luddite?

I got it from a link someone posted on a different forum.  I'm pretty sure it was a twitter posting.

What was the other forum, if you don't mind me asking?

[TitanDuckFan]

6 minutes ago, patsplat said:

What was the other forum, if you don't mind me asking?

One of the outdoor forums I've been known to hang out in occasionally.

You know, fishing, hunting, backpacking type stuff.

Does it make a difference?

[pat]

Just now, TitanDuckFan said:

One of the outdoor forums I've been known to hang out in occasionally.

You know, fishing, hunting, backpacking type stuff.

Fair enough.

Put a different way - I trust the Titans news on this site more than any other news source.  More than the Tennessean, more than MMQB, more than any other source.  If some one wanted to influence my opinion of the team, this would be the place to do it.

Social media -- broadly inclusive of forums and networks -- is both more and less trustworthy than print or broadcast journalism.  It's an odd thing.

[TitanDuckFan]

2 minutes ago, patsplat said:

Fair enough.

Put a different way - I trust the Titans news on this site more than any other news source.  More than the Tennessean, more than MMQB, more than any other source.  If some one wanted to influence my opinion of the team, this would be the place to do it.

Social media -- broadly inclusive of forums and networks -- is both more and less trustworthy than print or broadcast journalism.  It's an odd thing.

If it doesn't have an outside reference I don't trust it.  At least where predictions are concerned.  Fans are usually too emotionally invested.  And then they like to argue about hypothetical scenarios, and that's just hilarious.

And they often can't see what's right in front of their faces, or they haven't been around long enough to recognize the pattern(s) that tend to re-emerge with alarming regularity.

And that's especially true where politics is concerned.

[pat]

6 hours ago, TitanDuckFan said:

If it doesn't have an outside reference I don't trust it.  At least where predictions are concerned.  Fans are usually too emotionally invested.  And then they like to argue about hypothetical scenarios, and that's just hilarious.

And they often can't see what's right in front of their faces, or they haven't been around long enough to recognize the pattern(s) that tend to re-emerge with alarming regularity.

And that's especially true where politics is concerned.

This is helpful.  Let me recast my critique of the article.

It contains two outside links - one to a podcast without a transcript, the other to the Wikipedia page for prison wine.  These do little to backup the authors dismissal of Russia scandal. It in fact opens with an unverified dismissal, than proceeds to backup that position with color rather than facts.

Sharing the article's incredulous tone would seem to indicate that you are spending more time in the echo chamber and less time thinking about the evidence.

I'm not saying you are a moron.  I'm saying that FB, Twitter, etc are quite vulnerable to astroturfing, that there is evidence of such astroturfing, and there is evidence of collusion.  It's a new world.

[TitanDuckFan]

24 minutes ago, patsplat said:

This is helpful.  Let me recast my critique of the article.

It contains two outside links - one to a podcast without a transcript, the other to the Wikipedia page for prison wine.  These do little to backup the authors dismissal of Russia scandal. It in fact opens with an unverified dismissal, than proceeds to backup that position with color rather than facts.

Sharing the article's incredulous tone would seem to indicate that you are spending more time in the echo chamber and less time thinking about the evidence.

I'm not saying you are a moron.  I'm saying that FB, Twitter, etc are quite vulnerable to astroturfing, that there is evidence of such astroturfing, and there is evidence of collusion.  It's a new world.

Sorry pat, but I dismissed the "Russian scandal" not long after I heard Comey and Clapper and Morell et al say repeatedly there was no evidence of collusion between the Russians and the trump team.  I''m kinda odd like that, but when that many people of that stature admit something publicly I tend to believe them. or at least realize there's no "There" there. 

Now there's evidence that the trump team's communiques have been surveilled and reviewed for a year or more, and even then, they still can't find evidence of collusion.  All they've found is the evidence of the foundation of the whisper campaign that has ensnared you.

And that leads me to the next point about the author's Trumpaphobic loonies comment that I find so humorous,...  He's not far off the mark.  I've been calling them "hand-wringers," but it's the same thing.  And there's too many of them.  They're off the rails, and they're not listening to the people they should be listening to.  Don't be that guy pat.

[Titanjuicy]

15 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Sorry pat, but I dismissed the "Russian scandal" not long after I heard Comey and Clapper and Morell et al say repeatedly there was no evidence of collusion between the Russians and the trump team.  I''m kinda odd like that, but when that many people of that stature admit something publicly I tend to believe them. or at least realize there's no "There" there. 

Now there's evidence that the trump team's communiques have been surveilled and reviewed for a year or more, and even then, they still can't find evidence of collusion.  All they've found is the evidence of the foundation of the whisper campaign that has ensnared you.

And that leads me to the next point about the author's Trumpaphobic loonies comment that I find so humorous,...  He's not far off the mark.  I've been calling them "hand-wringers," but it's the same thing.  And there's too many of them.  They're off the rails, and they're not listening to the people they should be listening to.  Don't be that guy pat.

Did you dismiss Hillary's emails when Comey said she didn't break the law? Did you dismiss Benghazi after several hearings said she did nothing wrong?

[Rogue]

35 minutes ago, Titanjuicy said:

Did you dismiss Hillary's emails when Comey said she didn't break the law? Did you dismiss Benghazi after several hearings said she did nothing wrong?

No.  He still believes there's a there there.  

Comey and Clapper have said Obama didn't order Trump team surveillance, yet he still believes it happened.  The only thing Duckie dismisses is news or evidence that doesn't back up what he wants to believe.  

[TitanDuckFan]

What is there to dismiss?  Over 30,000 of hillary's emails are gone.  Vanished.  Finito.  Cyber-Nuked.  Poof!  Bleach-Bitted into oblivion.

Emails that belonged to me, and you, and the rest of America.  When you do business as SoS your communications don't belong to you.  You don't get to decide the disposition of those communiques after the fact.  But that's what she did.  Before and after.  Comey admitted that too.  So just stop.  She committed to thwarting the FOIA process from the start.  As 4th in line to the fucking presidency.  She purposefully had them destroyed.

Buy a clue here people.  The inability to prove guilt in the legal process is not proof of innocence.

As long as none of you give a shit about that, don't accuse me of being misguided here.  That's freaking preposterous.  It's the ultimate double-standard.  Hillary clinton is a fucking criminal and there's proof of that going all the way back to Whitewater and her billing fiasco.  You know, the one she hid evidence of until the statute of limitations ran out.  We've been over this, so stop with the willful ignorance.  This is her SOP and has been for 2 decades.  That we know of.

[pat]

To my knowledge, Comey acknowledged an investigation of Russian interference and denied that Obama ordered wiretaps.

If Comey asserted that there is no evidence of collusion please share it, because the statements I've read imply that there is an ongoing investigation.

@TitanDuckFan can you provide a link to a story quoting that statement?

[TitanDuckFan]

10 minutes ago, patsplat said:

To my knowledge, Comey acknowledged an investigation of Russian interference and denied that Obama ordered wiretaps.

If Comey asserted that there is no evidence of collusion please share it, because the statements I've read imply that there is an ongoing investigation.

@TitanDuckFan can you provide a link to a story quoting that statement?

The report that obama commissioned before leaving office says so.  Clapper was on MTP and spoke about it with Chuck Todd. 

Quote

In an exclusive interview with Meet the

Press, Former Director of National Intelligence

James Clapper says that there wasn't evidence

of collusion between Russia and Trump earlier this year.

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/full-clapper-no-evidence-of-collusion-between-trump-and-russia-890509379597

 

That report included the conclusions of the DNI, CIA, FBI all saying they could find no evidence of collusion between the trump team and the Russians.

Yes they are still investigating the possibility of Russian influence on the election.  But have admitted they have no evidence of collusion with the trump team.

[reo]

1 minute ago, TitanDuckFan said:

The report that obama commissioned before leaving office says so.  Clapper was on MTP and spoke about it with Chuck Todd. 

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/full-clapper-no-evidence-of-collusion-between-trump-and-russia-890509379597

 

That report included the conclusions of the DNI, CIA, FBI all saying they could find no evidence of collusion between the trump team and the Russians.

Yes they are still investigating the possibility of Russian influence on the election.  But have admitted they have no evidence of collusion with the trump team.

For starters that was over a month ago and iirc Clapper was saying there was no direct evidence of collusion last year when he was involved in the investigation last year aka very early in the investigation. That doesn't mean there isn't evidence now. Adam Schiff, who has seen at least some of the info form the investigation, has said there now is direct evidence of collusion.