FBI Says Russia Tried to Get Trump Elected

[MI2AZ]

The FBI is supporting the CIA's conclusion that Russia interfered in the presidential election with the goal of supporting Republican candidate Donald Trump. In a message sent to employees, CIA Director John Brennan said he had spoken with FBI Director James Comey and James Clapper, the director of national intelligence. Brennan said in the message that "there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election." A US official who had seen the unclassified message from Brennan confirmed it to the AP on Friday. Per CNN, "Multiple sources say the CIA director was responding in part to anger and frustration in the agency at charges ... that the CIA was somehow politicizing intelligence and analysis regarding Russian hacking."

The explosive accusation suggests Putin, the leader of perhaps America's greatest geopolitical foe, directly undermined US democracy. US officials have not contended, however, that Trump would have been defeated by Clinton on Nov. 8 if not for Russia's assistance. Nor has there has been any indication of tampering with the vote-counting. Trump has been under increasing pressure from both parties to acknowledge Russia's actions, despite his insistence that he doesn't believe Moscow was meddling. Trump has rejected the CIA's assessment that Russia's aim was to help him win and argued on Twitter that "these are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction."

.

 

[Greg T.]

Hhhhhmmmmmm.......Killary sent thousands of classified emails on an unsecured server, deleted said emails after being subpoenaed, lied thru her teeth about them and Benghazi, (add about 100 more things here), but then Trump shouldn't be president because Russia MAY HAVE exposed them?

 

[WAMO]

HOW MANY TIMES HAS AMERICA PUT BOOTS ON THE GROUND TO OUST A LEADER OF ANOTHER COUNTRY. AND IF WE KNOW RUSSIA REALLY DID SUCH A THING, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE DONE THAT TO SOMEONE ELSE?

 

[AlwaysWrite]

Hhhhhmmmmmm.......Killary sent thousands of classified emails on an unsecured server, deleted said emails after being subpoenaed, lied thru her teeth about them and Benghazi, (add about 100 more things here), but then Trump shouldn't be president because Russia MAY HAVE exposed them?

TRUE ... and why should there be any consequences for Russia and/or Putin whereas there apparently are NO consequences whatsoever for Hillary (and no call for consequences by the lamestream media or government officials)?

 

[AlwaysWrite]

HOW MANY TIMES HAS AMERICA PUT BOOTS ON THE GROUND TO OUST A LEADER OF ANOTHER COUNTRY. AND IF WE KNOW RUSSIA REALLY DID SUCH A THING, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE DONE THAT TO SOMEONE ELSE?

... but keep in mind that Trump may be correct when he implies that Russian leaders are smarter than Barack Hussein Obama and this country's leaders.

 

[Robadat]

Come back with some real evidence that Russia

a) hacked and released any of this info. WikiLeaks has said that it did not come from Russia but was leaked by Democrat insiders who had access to these E-mails. All we get from our government is a "consensus" by the "experts" that the Russians did it without any proof they did. And that opinion seems to change every other day among those experts. Seems to me that these experts are being told what their opinions are by someone higher up.

b) made public any information that was made up or untrue. No one has disputed that these E-mails are truthful and unedited in any way. At this point, you would have to admit that the Russians are more honest than our own government if they were in fact the ones who hacked the e-mails. The Democrats have been playing the people of this country for fools, sucks for them somebody showed the American people what the democrats really thought about us.

There is also no evidence that any of this had a direct effect on the election. I know of no one that has said that the release of these emails had changed their support of candidate from Hillary to Donald. Everyone I knew had long before that made up their mind on who they'd be voting for. Quite a few just wouldn't come out and say so for fear of being labeled a racist, homophobe, deplorable or whatever else the non-Hillary supporters were being labeled...

 

[AlwaysWrite]

No one has disputed that these E-mails are truthful and unedited in any way. At this point, you would have to admit that the Russians are more honest than our own government if they were in fact the ones who hacked the e-mails. The Democrats have been playing the people of this country for fools, sucks for them somebody showed the American people what the democrats really thought about us.

Not only is the above true, but it's IMPORTANT. Because the e-mail contents are obviously true -- otherwise, Podesta and others would have long ago challenged the lack of validity -- there is no reason why the contents shouldn't have been made available to the American people.

Also, no one seems to mention it, but if it was so easy for the Russians to "hack into" U.S. information, isn't it possible -- or even likely -- that THEY were able to hack into Hillary's ultra-vulnerable e-mail situation?