Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a logical conclusion that any laptop or hard drive that was given to Rudy Giuliani and then later given by Giuliani to the FBI has probably had files added, deleted, and modified before it was given to Giuliani and again after it was given to Giuliani. Giuliani’s possession and intervention taints the evidence even if no Russians were involved. The FBI and the journalists investigating couldn’t accept the laptop as ironclad proof so they searched for other evidence that would verify the laptop. They didn’t find any evidence of anything illegal.

The FBI had the original laptop in 2019. They KNEW that the laptop was authentic.
Your premise is wrong.
And, yes... there were illegal activities documented on the laptop.

What illegal activities were “documented” on the laptop and why is there no evidence of it except on the laptop?

I'm pretty sure smoking crack is illegal. I also believe paying for prostitutes is illegal.
And, that gun he had in the pics? Illegally acquired.

What about 10% for the "big guy?"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a logical conclusion that any laptop or hard drive that was given to Rudy Giuliani and then later given by Giuliani to the FBI has probably had files added, deleted, and modified before it was given to Giuliani and again after it was given to Giuliani. Giuliani’s possession and intervention taints the evidence even if no Russians were involved. The FBI and the journalists investigating couldn’t accept the laptop as ironclad proof so they searched for other evidence that would verify the laptop. They didn’t find any evidence of anything illegal.

The FBI had the original laptop in 2019. They KNEW that the laptop was authentic.
Your premise is wrong.
And, yes... there were illegal activities documented on the laptop.

What illegal activities were “documented” on the laptop and why is there no evidence of it except on the laptop?

I'm pretty sure smoking crack is illegal. I also believe paying for prostitutes is illegal.
And, that gun he had in the pics? Illegally acquired.

In other Twitter Files news, Elon has taken the "state-affiliated" tags off of known Chinese and Russian government mouthpieces.

Also, the new blue checkmark program continues to be a complete debacle. There are now two official-looking New York Government accounts with blue checkmarks, except one of them is fake.

It's as though Musk WANTS bad actors to flood Twitter with disinformation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a logical conclusion that any laptop or hard drive that was given to Rudy Giuliani and then later given by Giuliani to the FBI has probably had files added, deleted, and modified before it was given to Giuliani and again after it was given to Giuliani. Giuliani’s possession and intervention taints the evidence even if no Russians were involved. The FBI and the journalists investigating couldn’t accept the laptop as ironclad proof so they searched for other evidence that would verify the laptop. They didn’t find any evidence of anything illegal.

The FBI had the original laptop in 2019. They KNEW that the laptop was authentic.
Your premise is wrong.
And, yes... there were illegal activities documented on the laptop.

What illegal activities were “documented” on the laptop and why is there no evidence of it except on the laptop?

There is plenty of evidence, there just has not been a serious investigation by the FBI or anyone else yet.

We probably need to investigate why at this point.

If the Barr led DoJ couldn't find enough to bring charges, there was nothing to find

And Trump's reach went well beyond his term, with the Durham probe dragging on and on and on well after Trump and Barr were gone - and Durham also came up with nothing of substance.

All this "Lock 'em up" yet all they ever come up with is innuendo and so-called "evidence" that would never hold up in any court.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a logical conclusion that any laptop or hard drive that was given to Rudy Giuliani and then later given by Giuliani to the FBI has probably had files added, deleted, and modified before it was given to Giuliani and again after it was given to Giuliani. Giuliani’s possession and intervention taints the evidence even if no Russians were involved. The FBI and the journalists investigating couldn’t accept the laptop as ironclad proof so they searched for other evidence that would verify the laptop. They didn’t find any evidence of anything illegal.

The FBI had the original laptop in 2019. They KNEW that the laptop was authentic.
Your premise is wrong.
And, yes... there were illegal activities documented on the laptop.

What illegal activities were “documented” on the laptop and why is there no evidence of it except on the laptop?

There is plenty of evidence, there just has not been a serious investigation by the FBI or anyone else yet.

We probably need to investigate why at this point.

If the Barr led DoJ couldn't find enough to bring charges, there was nothing to find

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a logical conclusion that any laptop or hard drive that was given to Rudy Giuliani and then later given by Giuliani to the FBI has probably had files added, deleted, and modified before it was given to Giuliani and again after it was given to Giuliani. Giuliani’s possession and intervention taints the evidence even if no Russians were involved. The FBI and the journalists investigating couldn’t accept the laptop as ironclad proof so they searched for other evidence that would verify the laptop. They didn’t find any evidence of anything illegal.

The FBI had the original laptop in 2019. They KNEW that the laptop was authentic.
Your premise is wrong.
And, yes... there were illegal activities documented on the laptop.

What illegal activities were “documented” on the laptop and why is there no evidence of it except on the laptop?

There is plenty of evidence, there just has not been a serious investigation by the FBI or anyone else yet.

We probably need to investigate why at this point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So? I’m at a loss as to why this is a big deal. A bunch of private citizens writing a letter expressing their opinion at the urging of other private citizens.

Prompted by Antony Blinken - a member of the Biden campaign. Done so Biden could use the "51 IC professionals" narrative in the debate just days later.
Election interference.
Biden knew it wasn't Russia disinformation.

A campaign doing campaigning is election interference? What?

Yep. They were flat out lying and they knew it. Can't wait for a hearing in which they question Blinken about this.

I guess the republican position is that only republicans get to talk during campaigns. If democrats try to campaign, that's "election interference."

If by talking you mean claiming that your opponent is a criminal and working for foreign interests. I would say only the democrats were allowed to campaign in 2020. Maybe it will different this time?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a logical conclusion that any laptop or hard drive that was given to Rudy Giuliani and then later given by Giuliani to the FBI has probably had files added, deleted, and modified before it was given to Giuliani and again after it was given to Giuliani. Giuliani’s possession and intervention taints the evidence even if no Russians were involved. The FBI and the journalists investigating couldn’t accept the laptop as ironclad proof so they searched for other evidence that would verify the laptop. They didn’t find any evidence of anything illegal.

The FBI had the original laptop in 2019. They KNEW that the laptop was authentic.
Your premise is wrong.
And, yes... there were illegal activities documented on the laptop.

What illegal activities were “documented” on the laptop and why is there no evidence of it except on the laptop?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So? I’m at a loss as to why this is a big deal. A bunch of private citizens writing a letter expressing their opinion at the urging of other private citizens.

Prompted by Antony Blinken - a member of the Biden campaign. Done so Biden could use the "51 IC professionals" narrative in the debate just days later.
Election interference.
Biden knew it wasn't Russia disinformation.

A campaign doing campaigning is election interference? What?

Yep. They were flat out lying and they knew it. Can't wait for a hearing in which they question Blinken about this.

Here's the letter: https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000175-4393-d7aa-af77-579f9b330000
Here's the key passage: "We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal aSorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement -- just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case."
Where's the lie here? I don't see one.

Blinken knew it was a lie, but still called his buddies in the IC community to make sure this story didn't see the light of day.
Joe knew this was all a lie, but still touted the narrative in the final debate. Another lie he has told...... we cannot trust a damned thing he says.

And, the IC people who signed the letter didn't only sign it.... they added their titles for the little extra oomph to sway the American public. They think so little of the American public that they have no problem casting doubt in their minds.
And, we wonder why people don't trust what comes out of the intelligence community. This is exhibit 1.

Anonymous wrote:It is a logical conclusion that any laptop or hard drive that was given to Rudy Giuliani and then later given by Giuliani to the FBI has probably had files added, deleted, and modified before it was given to Giuliani and again after it was given to Giuliani. Giuliani’s possession and intervention taints the evidence even if no Russians were involved. The FBI and the journalists investigating couldn’t accept the laptop as ironclad proof so they searched for other evidence that would verify the laptop. They didn’t find any evidence of anything illegal.

The FBI had the original laptop in 2019. They KNEW that the laptop was authentic.
Your premise is wrong.
And, yes... there were illegal activities documented on the laptop.

It is a logical conclusion that any laptop or hard drive that was given to Rudy Giuliani and then later given by Giuliani to the FBI has probably had files added, deleted, and modified before it was given to Giuliani and again after it was given to Giuliani. Giuliani’s possession and intervention taints the evidence even if no Russians were involved. The FBI and the journalists investigating couldn’t accept the laptop as ironclad proof so they searched for other evidence that would verify the laptop. They didn’t find any evidence of anything illegal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So? I’m at a loss as to why this is a big deal. A bunch of private citizens writing a letter expressing their opinion at the urging of other private citizens.

Prompted by Antony Blinken - a member of the Biden campaign. Done so Biden could use the "51 IC professionals" narrative in the debate just days later.
Election interference.
Biden knew it wasn't Russia disinformation.

A campaign doing campaigning is election interference? What?

Yep. They were flat out lying and they knew it. Can't wait for a hearing in which they question Blinken about this.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So? I’m at a loss as to why this is a big deal. A bunch of private citizens writing a letter expressing their opinion at the urging of other private citizens.

Prompted by Antony Blinken - a member of the Biden campaign. Done so Biden could use the "51 IC professionals" narrative in the debate just days later.
Election interference.
Biden knew it wasn't Russia disinformation.

A campaign doing campaigning is election interference? What?

Yep. They were flat out lying and they knew it. Can't wait for a hearing in which they question Blinken about this.

Here's the letter: https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000175-4393-d7aa-af77-579f9b330000
Here's the key passage: "We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal aSorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement -- just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case."
Where's the lie here? I don't see one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So? I’m at a loss as to why this is a big deal. A bunch of private citizens writing a letter expressing their opinion at the urging of other private citizens.

Prompted by Antony Blinken - a member of the Biden campaign. Done so Biden could use the "51 IC professionals" narrative in the debate just days later.
Election interference.
Biden knew it wasn't Russia disinformation.

A campaign doing campaigning is election interference? What?

Yep. They were flat out lying and they knew it. Can't wait for a hearing in which they question Blinken about this.

I guess the republican position is that only republicans get to talk during campaigns. If democrats try to campaign, that's "election interference."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So? I’m at a loss as to why this is a big deal. A bunch of private citizens writing a letter expressing their opinion at the urging of other private citizens.

Prompted by Antony Blinken - a member of the Biden campaign. Done so Biden could use the "51 IC professionals" narrative in the debate just days later.
Election interference.
Biden knew it wasn't Russia disinformation.

A campaign doing campaigning is election interference? What?

Yep. They were flat out lying and they knew it. Can't wait for a hearing in which they question Blinken about this.