The Russian "Collusion" Conspiracy Theory

[Bob the Slob]

1. This is a call out thread.
2. The op does them all of the time.
3. Call out threads aren't allowed.
4. This one is still here.
5. Ethereal must be special.

What's a "call-out" thread?

[Bob the Slob]

I will use this thread to examine, address, and rebut the main points of the Russian "collusion" conspiracy theory being peddled by the deep state and its minions. And I will use a specific iteration of that theory, promoted by one of the strongest proponents of the "collusion" narrative, as a baseline for demonstrating just how empty and baseless that theory is.

To wit:


Point one: There is no proof that Wikileaks is backed by the Kremlin. This is pure speculation based on nothing concrete.

Point two: There is no proof that Wikileaks "stole" Podesta's email. That is not even Wikileaks MO. They are known for receiving and publishing documents, not extracting them.

Point three: The entity known as Guccifer 2.0 is alleged to have hacked the DNC's servers, NOT Podesta's email account. The hack of Podesta's email account is a SEPARATE incident from the hack of the DNC's servers by Guccifer 2.0. There is no proof at all that Guccifer 2.0 hacked Podesta's emails, nor is there any proof that Guccifer 2.0 is an agent of Wikileaks.

Point four: Hints in the press? So speculative that it's not even worth addressing

So in about ten minutes, I've been able to dismantle months worth of conspiracy theory. And it wasn't hard at all. Now just imagine how easily Trump's high-powered lawyers would rip this "theory" to shreds if it ever found its way into a courtroom. That would be fun to watch.

Is it a call out thread because it's not about any news, just some insecure right winger calling you out?

[Tahuyaman]

1. This is a call out thread.
2. The op does them all of the time.
3. Call out threads aren't allowed.
4. This one is still here.
5. Ethereal must be special.

How do you figure this is a " call out" thread? Who specifically was he calling out? All he did was quote you and show how your comment was not fact based.

[Bob the Slob]

Point one: There is no proof that Wikileaks is backed by the Kremlin. This is pure speculation based on nothing concrete.

Given that Assange is the founder. He spent the 2016 election in the US helping Trump win by going through the Russians.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...ssian-hacking/

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...p-jr-wikileaks

So I think a smart person could deduce he was helping Russia help Trump win.
Point two: There is no proof that Wikileaks "stole" Podesta's email. That is not even Wikileaks MO. They are known for receiving and publishing documents, not extracting them.
Trump colluded with Assange to get clinton emails.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...clinton-emails

We know the Russians hacked the mails. The fact that Assange released them is his part in all of this. His COLLUSION with Russia.
Point three: The entity known as Guccifer 2.0 is alleged to have hacked the DNC's servers, NOT Podesta's email account. The hack of Podesta's email account is a SEPARATE incident from the hack of the DNC's servers by Guccifer 2.0. There is no proof at all that Guccifer 2.0 hacked Podesta's emails, nor is there any proof that Guccifer 2.0 is an agent of Wikileaks.sThe proof is that RUSSIA hacked the emails from Podesta. As a side note, did you know that Guccifer is helping Mueller now>

https://www.apnews.com/dea73efc01594839957c3c9a6c962b8a
Point four: Hints in the press? So speculative that it's not even worth addre What's this about?
So in about ten minutes, I've been able to dismantle months worth of conspiracy theory. And it wasn't hard at all. Now just imagine how easily Trump's high-powered lawyers would rip this "theory" to shreds if it ever found its way into a courtroom. That would be fun to watch.

You've dismantled nothing. You've shown no links to prove your statements so all you've shown are the opinions you have.

[Ethereal]

1. This is a call out thread.
2. The op does them all of the time.
3. Call out threads aren't allowed.
4. This one is still here.
5. Ethereal must be special.

Only a giant drama queen would label this thread a "call out".

[Ethereal]

What's a "call-out" thread?

In Bethere's mind, it's any thread that challenges statements or arguments he's made on the internet. For everyone else in the world, a "call out" thread is where someone starts a thread for the purposes of attacking another poster personally.

For some reason, Bethere believes an attack on his arguments equates to an attack on him personally. And he's been asserting this asinine belief for months. But the real reason he spews this nonsense is simply because he is too intellectually intimidated by me to defend his crackpot conspiracy theory, which I dismantled in mere minutes.

[Ethereal]

Is it a call out thread because it's not about any news, just some insecure right winger calling you out?

It's not a "call-out" thread. Bethere is just making lame excuses because he doesn't want to defend his asinine theories about Russian collusion.

I know this may come as a surprise to some, but challenging the lamebrain arguments of liberals is a perfectly legitimate use of a political forum.

[Ethereal]

You've dismantled nothing. You've shown no links to prove your statements so all you've shown are the opinions you have.

My statements are merely observations that your "collusion" narrative lacks proof, and one does not need a "link" in support of an observation.

[stjames1_53]

My statements are merely observations that your "collusion" narrative lacks proof, and one does not need a "link" in support of an observation.

Yes, he's been at it for months now. He posts his "facts" and I ask for links, he claims my request is a personal attack, but never supplies the links............or if I dispute his links with some of mine, he still claims I'm attacking him personally........
He's a hack. What can you say about a person who relies upon Mother Jones as a Bible for knowledge.............

[Ethereal]

The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate

By Ray McGovern

Russia-gate is becoming FBI-gate, thanks to the official release of unguarded text messages between loose-lipped FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok and his garrulous girlfriend, FBI lawyer Lisa Page. (Ten illustrative texts from their exchange appear at the end of this article.)

Despite his former job as chief of the FBI’s counterintelligence section, Strzok had the naive notion that texting on FBI phones could not be traced. Strzok must have slept through “Security 101.” Or perhaps he was busy texting during that class. Girlfriend Page cannot be happy at being misled by his assurance that using office phones would be a secure way to conduct their affair(s).

It would have been unfortunate enough for Strzok and Page to have their adolescent-sounding texts merely exposed, revealing the reckless abandon of star-crossed lovers hiding (they thought) secrets from cuckolded spouses, office colleagues, and the rest of us. However, for the never-Trump plotters in the FBI, the official release of just a fraction (375) of almost 10,000 messages does incalculably more damage than that.

We suddenly have documentary proof that key elements of the U.S. intelligence community were trying to short-circuit the U.S. democratic process. And that puts in a new and dark context the year-long promotion of Russia-gate. It now appears that it was not the Russians trying to rig the outcome of the U.S. election, but leading officials of the U.S. intelligence community, shadowy characters sometimes called the Deep State.

[...]