Bad news for the Trump Russia tinfoil hat brigade

>>137018
How about you quote the article so I don't have to give Rupert Murdoch more adsense money?

>>137019
Oh never mind, that's probably why you posted a sensationalist clickbait source like the NYpost to begin with.

>the hottest opinion of the week coming from a deranged trumpanzee conspiratard who suffers from schizophrenia

No, thanks.

>>137018
OP we post full articles here fuck your click bait
During a Capitol Hill hearing this week over his investigation into allegations President Trump worked with the Kremlin to steal the election, FBI Director James Comey showed his hand, and he’s not holding any aces. In fact, he’s got a whole lot of nothing.

In an exchange with Democratic Sen. Al Franken, Comey revealed the assumptions undergirding his investigation, which started in the heat of the 2016 presidential campaign, despite any specific evidence of a crime.

“What is your assessment of why the Russian government had a clear preference for President Trump?” Franken asked.

“One is he wasn’t Hillary Clinton,” Comey replied, “who [Russian President Vladimir] Putin hated and wanted to harm in any possible way; and so he was her opponent, so necessarily they supported him.”

Also, “Putin believed he would be more able to make deals ... with someone with a business background,” the FBI chief added. But, a disappointed Franken pressed, wasn’t it also because Trump was “ensnared in their web of patronage?” No, said Comey.

So there you have it. The conclusion that Russia tried to steal the election for Trump is based on pure speculation about how Putin thinks. The notion Trump was in Putin’s back pocket doesn’t even factor into it.

There’s more bad news for Franken and other tin-foil-hat-wearing Democrats peddling the theory Trump is Putin’s Manchurian candidate. It turns out the FBI probe doesn’t even focus on Trump or his key campaign aides. It centers almost exclusively on a former Merrill Lynch executive who was based in Moscow a decade ago.

His name is Carter Page, and he never formally worked for the Trump campaign. In fact, he first showed up on the FBI’s radar three years before Trump announced his candidacy.

Page is the main investigative target and apparently the only one remotely tied to the Trump campaign to have his communications targeted with a FISA warrant. To obtain that surveillance warrant, the FBI relied on a discredited dossier, which will make it hard to prosecute Page.

The opposition research firm behind the dossier, which alleges nefarious collusion between Trump and Putin, is Fusion GPS, which conducts “political disinformation campaigns” — sometimes for Moscow. “The relationship casts further doubt on an already highly dubious dossier,” Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley wrote the Justice Department in a recent letter.

Adding to suspicions, the author of the dodgy dossier may have been on the FBI’s payroll, according to Grassley. The GOP senator asked Comey about “payments” the bureau made to researcher Christopher Steele, and Comey dodged the question without denying payments.

So nine months in, this is where the FBI’s investigation stands: No evidence of collaboration between the Trump campaign and Moscow, something even Obama’s intelligence czar verified. No charges against any Trump aides for espionage. And one case against a single, tangentially connected suspect built on tenuous evidence at best.

Even Comey’s theory about Putin favoring Trump lacks direct evidence. In fact, there is just as much evidence Russia hackers were trying to hurt Trump.

Yes, Russian hackers may have publicized batches of emails from the DNC and the Clinton campaign chairman. But the RNC was also a Russian hacking target. The only reason hackers got deeper into the DNC is because the DNC and John Podesta bit on phishing scams.

In September, moreover, Russian hackers also leaked embarrassing emails about Trump from ex-Republican Secretary of State Colin Powell, who called the GOP nominee a “national disgrace” and an “idiot.”

And if Russia really wanted to hurt Clinton and the Democrats, why do it withhold the coup de grace: a potentially devastating memo written by a Democratic operative who expressed confidence that Obama’s attorney general would keep the Clinton email investigation “from going too far” and ensure her victory?

A copy of the document, which might have convinced already distrustful voters of her guilt, was intercepted by the FBI.

After Wednesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, CNN asked the ranking Democrat, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, if she had evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government during the election. “Not at this time,” Feinstein sheepishly replied.

The case against Trump is paper-thin. What started as a political fishing expedition has nonetheless turned into a full-fledged witch hunt, fanned by a Democrat-dominated media hellbent on demonizing and destroying Trump and his policies.

>>137032
>>137033
>>137034
Thank you Anon, you're a true /news/man.

>So there you have it
I'm so glad the NYPost has determined that the investigation is over and that nothing was found. Good thing the investigation is going to continue whether or not they keep writing damage control spin-pieces like this. To mislead their readership by boiling a 5 hour hearing down to "No, said Comey". is almost worse than outright lying by saying Comey didn't find anything..

>>137018
That's a funny headline when the real tinfoil-hat brigade on sites like rightstuff and infowars are the ones really saying "Nothing to see here!1" and "P-Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!". I guess this article just reinforces that Rupert and his sons have already taken that narrative into the mainstream.

I actually delight in the Russia conspiracy stories.

It proves something about human nature. People will believe something because they want to believe it, and then find evidence to prove it after the fact. Obama was a Muslim, Bush broke the dams in New Orleans, etc.

The media hasn't found a single inkling of evidence to prove the Russia story. But every day "the evidence is out there" stories pop up. Trump opposition line up to eat the stories en masse. If you disagree, you must be part of the conspiracy - a Russian spy, a white supremacist, a blind right winger.

I recall the media saying "the election was impossible to hack" when Trump mentioned the possibility of hacking. I recall the media saying that disagreeing with the election results would "errode democracy". And here we are.

>>137048
>implying they are "conspiracy stories"
>The media hasn't found a single inkling of evidence to prove the Russia story.

Not this tired old narrative again. The media comes out with new links every day. There are two ongoing congressional investigations on top of the FBIs ongoing investigation, on top of the independent British, French, and German investigations, all of which all found at least circumstantial evidence of contact if not outright collusion between Russian officials and Trump's underlings.

inb4 you ask for sources like you've been sticking your head under a rock for the last 6 months.

Welcome to /news/. You're a long way from /pol/ now.

>>137058
>Not this tired old narrative again.
You keep pushing it. Feel free to stop any time.

>The media comes out with new links every day.
And by "links" you mean speculative comments from anonymous sources and unnamed authorities we're told to believe without evidence because they're authorities.

>all of which all found at least circumstantial evidence of contact if not outright collusion
Collusion that has never never been defined or framed or made concrete in any fashion other than "it happened, now we just have to find out how, in the meantime don't trust muhdrumpf and buy some Resistance(TM) merch!".

>inb4 you ask for sources like you've been sticking your head under a rock for the last 6 months.

LISTEN AND BELIEVE

STOP ASKING FOR PROOFS

WE WILL WE WILL MOCK YOU

>Welcome to /news/. You're a long way from /pol/ now.
There's a reason /pol/ is exploding with traffic and has an RL presence and /news/ is sparsely occupied by the same few people spamming the same biased articles from the same few MSM outlets with with the same multi post line break formatting.

The is a board for MSM shills who think they can wage an ideological war on 4chan by having a safe space free from images to congregate and organize info dumps on other boards/websites.

Can't wait till it gets shut down for being an abysmal failure :^)

>>137060
The rest of your post is typical predictable reactionary garbage about your feelings and not facts. The one exception I'll make is your assertion that
>There's a reason /pol/ is exploding with traffic and has an RL presence
/pol/ isn't exploding with traffic.... It's gone down consistently since the election. So just what "RL presence" do you imagine /pol/ has again?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOeAXKUK6aM

switch on the subtitles

>>137068
>The rest of your post is typical predictable reactionary garbage about your feelings and not facts.
So you're refusing to address any of my points because you're offended and can't back up your own claims. Gotcha. Thanks for playing, grab your tinfoil on the way out.

>/pol/ isn't exploding with traffic, It's gone down consistently since the election.
Compared to /news/, /pol/ is the Mall of America on Black Friday

>So just what "RL presence" do you imagine /pol/ has again?
The one where the ADL is tripping over itself trying to separate basic hand gestures from alleged hate speech and every MSM article is constantly ringing the 'right wing trolls" alarm bell.

Face it kiddo. You're on the wrong side of history :^)

>>137071
Mycop

>>137071
>So you're refusing to address any of my points
Your points get refuted in every thread about this topic every time the "MSM" comes out with a new revelatation on what Trump's cronies did. Stop pretending like the OP post is in a vacuum.
>because you're offended
Now there's the typical /pol/ response we all know and love on /news/. Read the OP article again and tell me how the NYpost writer isn't offended that someone would dare to doubt the Trump administration narrative that there is nothing to see here. It's damage control to try and distract from what's being investigated as much as your post is.
>Compared to /news/, /pol/ is the Mall of America on Black Friday
You say that like it's a bad thing. Popularity doesn't make you right, son, it means you follow the herd.
>The one where the ADL is tripping over itself trying to separate basic hand gestures from alleged hate speech and every MSM article is constantly ringing the 'right wing trolls" alarm bell.The one where the ADL is tripping over itself trying to separate basic hand gestures from alleged hate speech and every MSM article is constantly ringing the 'right wing trolls" alarm bell.
Wake me up when your narrative involving /pol/'s twitter based shenanigans.
>Face it kiddo. You're on the wrong side of history :^)
Ha! Come back when you can accept that Trump and his cronies and their connections to Russia are being legitimately investigated by multiple independent entities. I know it's hard...

>>137074
>never refuted a single point.
Phew democrats on suicide watch.

>>137074
Damn do you stretch before you put your head up your ass?

>>137075
Look at a newspaper, dumbass, any newspaper at all. Your points get refuted every second of every day

>>137076
Tell me, is Trump's cock salty? Does he let you rense afterward?

>>137069

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM1LOMZjFJ4

>>137075
If only. Hitler knew how to treat the liberals.

>>137097
Hitler was a liberal though. He was a far left socialist, just like Clinton, Obama, Warren, and Sanders are. Authoritarianism is always left wing.

>>137077
>your points get refuted every second of every day
ummm not that guy but I haven't seen any of those points refuted
this whole russia trump thing is an excruciating exercise in circular logic and you should feel bad
>inb4 MSM drone spams 30 links at us that all claim the same points that skeptic anon above already refuted
circular logic I tell you

>>137077
The only news channels really, truly, and actively pushing the Russia narrative;

CNN (far left) owned by Time Warner, largest media conglomerate in the world and run by Jeff Bawkes, globalist and bilderburg member. Donated to Clinton campaign.

Washington Post (left) Owned by Jeff Bezos, Amazon billionaire founder and globalist. Has contractual work with the CIA through Amazon. Bilderburg member and Clinton Foundation donator.

NYtimes (left) Owned by Carlos Slims, richest man in Mexico and billionaire CEO of Talmex. Donator to the Clinton Foundation.

Times Magazine (left) Owned, again, by Time Warner.

Huffington Post (far left) owned by AOL, a subsidiary of fuckin Time Warner.

BuzzFeed (news? Far left) Owned and operated soley by liberal Jonah Peretti, who advocated for Clinton during her campaign.

See the fuckin trend?

>>137100
No because those aren't the only news channels reporting on the continuing investigations into TrumpCo's Russian dealings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections#References
See all the sources? Prove them wrong, faggot.

>>137099
Truly you either live in a vacuum of circlejerk bliss where at least 5 countries' intelligence services don't claim to all corroborate each other when it comes to whom on Trump's cabinet spoke with or otherwise communicated with the Russians about the 2016 US election, where, and why they did, or you're not being truthful about what's going on around you.

How long do you expect the false narrative of there not being "one single shred of blah blah blah" to keep up in the face of 243 wikipedia citations? I'll look forward to seeing you argue for your revisions on the talk page.

>>137103
I'm not disagreeing that someone from Trump's cabinet spoke with multiple people from Russia. I need more information than infowars-tier articles from NYT.
Who did they speak with? What did they say? Why does it matter?
When the 243 wikipedia citations or anything else answers any of these questions I might change my mind
I'm not disagreeing that someone from Trump's cabinet spoke with multiple people from Russia

>>137105
>I need more information than infowars-tier articles from NYT.
I'm sorry but this statement alone should tell you you don't belong on this board. Not even that I don't want you here or that I'm asking you to leave, but that if you don't trust mainstream media and think they are somehow on the same level as infowars then you simply won't like it here. This whole board revolves around MSM sources, it's in the sticky.

>Who did they speak with? What did they say? Why does it matter?
Look, you're being civil and you haven't called anyone a libtard yet so you deserve an earnest answer:
If you really care about what actually happened, as do most people on this board, read the wikipeda page to catch yourself up with what's going on and take it into context with the controversy on the talk page. I could write some tl;dr wall of text explanation that nobody would read but it's all already been written on there already and that isn't the point of this place to start with.

>>137101
Why didn't these come to light until after the election then faggot?

>>137112
They've been coming to light since 2015, faggot, you were too immersed in drudgereport's distraction articles to notice.

>>137106
It's not that I don't trust the information that they're writing, but rather I don't believe the conclusions that they're editorializing and implications they're making when it comes to this story in particular, so I'm inclined to call out them and others that spread this trumprussia meme

I read the Wikipedia, and it only reinforces those beliefs.

>>137114
Lol what are you talking about?

There was zero coverage of Russian connections until after he won. I'd like you to pull one article prior to November 2016.

It was pussy grabbing and taxes for a whole year. Fake sexual harassment claims from the 1980s and making fun of his hands. A fucking joke.

>>137098
>Authoritarianism is always left wing.

No, it isn't. No matter how eagerly you want to believe that it is, lolbertarian manchild. Authoritarianism is deeply ingrained in the body of the right-wing politics, which as you may know from history emerged after the French Revolution as the force that represents the special interests and stands by the emperors, kings, hereditary nobility, feudal class, clergymen, slave traders, etc. Yeah, not exactly a bunch of freedom lovers, but they too loved to cry crocodile tears about oppression from the evils of enlightenment and how people fighting for their civil rights were immoral and forgot their place.

In fact, you can't be in for freedom and follow the rightist dogma, without contradicting yourself. See, how every con-servative knucklehead gives blowjobs to Putin and every other authoritarian kleptomaniacs just because they smell the same backwards reactionary stench in each other. They don't give a shit about freedom of speech or economic freedom there, like they supposed to. No, they have a hard-on for seeing other people suffering and telling you to shut up and measure your actions, or you might end up like that poor guy.

>>137119
Right V Left is not the same as Authoritarian V Anarchy

Left and Right can be both.

>>137115
Your assuming these conclusions are opinions when they aren't. That's like saying you've seen on wikipedia they say 2+2=4 and provide citations to back it up but you're not convinced it might not also = 5 because you don't trust the sources.

You are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts.

Either Trump's people colluded or they didn't, just like Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch either colluded or they didn't in that plane on the tarmac in Arizona, just like Dick Cheney and Halliburton either colluded with the Iranians in 1999 or they didn't., and so on and so forth...

>>137118
Do I need to quote the link to the sources again? You can see for yourself they date back to 2015, I'm not making this up. Do you honestly think they typed those articles and backdated them in some kind of conspiracy?

>>137121
Lol you didn't respond to any of my points, and I still haven't seen the source. I can't find shit man, hook my up with those Russian connection articles prior to Nov16. I'm running a blank son!

>>137121
You keep misunderstanding what I'm disagreeing with
>Either Trump's people colluded or they didn't
well yeah sure, and I believe they did collude, but to "collude" isn't necessarily a "bad thing". I disagree specifically with the extrapolations made by the media based on the facts proving that Trump "colluded" with Russians
This phenomenon is what led me to comparing this NYT article to Infowars, since I argue this kind of journalism is conspiratorial by definition, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but can cause the phenomenon where speculation and loaded language is improperly intertwined with the facts, and their audiences have trouble telling the difference, so everything is misconstrued as purely factual

>>137123
Stop pretending like you don't know how to read, Anon, nobody is buying your schtick. You got BTFO by wikipedia and now you're playing coy.

>>137119
But seriously: Yes it is.

Let's look at the Nazis again:

- Nationalization of heavy industry.
- Central planned economy in regards to heavy industry.
- Germans being able to retain only the small businesses
- So called "four year plan" which was government made plan of how German economy should grow for the period of 4 years.

If this doesn't sound like the sort of socialism practiced all throughout leftist Europe and China to you, then your definition of liberalism is very blurred and very convenient to the point of allowing you to put the "liberal" label only on those ideologies you like and which are good for your propaganda.

>>137126
>. I disagree specifically with the extrapolations made by the media based on the facts proving that Trump "colluded" with Russians
They aren't extrapolations. If it was solely the media making these claims you would have a point, but in reality the media is just reporting the progress of the investigations around the world. In the meantime, both US Congressional intelligence committees have confirmed that there is more than circumstantial evidence there, either through leaks or direct statements from members of the committee. And they still haven't even interviewed any of the witnesses yet beyond Comey, Clapper and Rogers (out of like 15 people). That's one of the reason why this story hasn't gone away yet and isn't going away any time soon.

>>137130
I'm reading these articles and seeing no significant process
>circumstantial evidence
Of what? I see nothing illegal here
It's just not a good story and they should report on something else

>>137135
I'm sorry but even if I also wanted it to all go away it wouldn't. Not until some modicum of truth is revealed about what Trump knew about Russian interference and when he knew it.

If it takes an independent investigator pulling a Ken Starr-style clusteruck for 5 years then so be it. The only real question beyond the level of collusion is if Trump and his administration will be successful in stalling the investigation until he's out of office or not.

>>137137
whatever floats your boat man
maybe there is some sort of grand conspiracy between trump and russia but I think it's either unlikely or not necessarily a bad thing so to me you're all just beating a dead horse

>>137138
> you're all just beating a dead horse
Yeah that's what John Podesta said too...

>>137139
Who?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvRn76Fqyzc

>>137037

>I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union. 'That’s easy,' he replied. 'When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.'

>>137162
Long live Murdoch; king of bullshit mountain.

>>137170
>Litterally all mainstream media is left wing
>Despises the dude who owns the only right wing news channel

Chill out man, we can't all think like you

>>137228
Mainstream media is only all leftwing if you're so far to the right yourself that you think corporate media is liberal media. In reality there is a spectrum of partisanship and there are news outlets all along both sides of it.

>>137027
>information that contradicts my world view is conspiracy theory.

found the liberal.

>>137278
>information that isn't pulled straight out of Drumpf's ass by another crooked cheeto cultist is fake news
Found the Breitbart reader.

>>137281
You keep pulling out these lame Trump disses like anyone gives a shit

>>137258
CNN, NyTimes, MSNBC, Washpost, Independent.UK, Huffpost, Times Mag, Seattle Tribune, are all left wing.

BBC and Al Jazeera and slightly left.

Fox is slightly right.

Breitbart, Infowars, Daily Mail are right.

>>137281
>This guy disagrees with my opinion, obviously a trumptard alt-righter.

wrong on both accounts slick, never read a page of it. I'm just not grotesquely stupid enough to believe the Russian conspiracy narrative when there has to this day been ZERO hard evidence proving it. Just the CIA and DNC sperging and a bunch of idiotic rumors and suppositions pulled straight out of the liberal media's ass. Im just holding the liberals to the same standard i held the conservatives and Trump himself to when the Obama birther nonsense was going on.