Trump replaced McGuire, the DNI because he reported Russia was aiding Trump in the election again. He replaced him with another inexperienced crony because of the report, which the House Intel committee is looking into.
Is anyone surprised?
Randy, I don't think the Russians have ever stopped their hacking into our government. Why should anyone be surprised at this news?
They shouldn't be. Nor should they be surprised if other countries, any country, is found to be doing the same. There is a constant cyber war going on and it's everyone for themselves.
Anyone who still denies Russian help for Trump is an idiot, a traitor or a Russian operative.
It's really that simple.
How about if someone thinks that that "Russian help" was more to create division than to specifically help Pres. Trump, what is that person?
To be more clear, I think Russia's primary purpose, then and now, is to create division, more so than to promote one candidate over another. I can imagine that if Hillary's election would have created the divisiveness that Trump's did, then their efforts would have been to promote her.
Hillary wasn't self centered enough to buy Putin's bullshit, Gus. Nor did she need his money to keep living a lavish lifestyle because she was a bad business person.
Why do you think Deutsche Bank was the only financial lender who would trust him to repay his debts, and even then Trump sued them when they tried to collect, and guess what? They loaned him another billion on top of the two billion he already owed them.
Any of you financial wizards out there wanta chime in on this smart banking practice?
It's a rationalization that belongs in category #1.
ibid: https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/346 … ost4123623 2nd paragraph
Wishful thinking, maybe?
That's not what the experts say.
Btw, do you really think a Hillary win would have been less divisive? LOL
To answer the last, first, yes, I do think Hillary's election would have been less divisive. Not a better presidency, just a less divisive one.
As for wishful thinking . . . my comment wasn't to deny that the Russian involvement wasn't intended to help Trump, it was to that helping Trump might have been thought to be more nationally divisive than helping Hillary.
To that point, consider the recent announcement that the Russians are also interfering to help Sanders. Do you think their intention is to help Sanders become president?
Hold on now, I understand that there is the perspective that Sanders would be the easiest opponent for Trump to beat, so helping him win the nomination could amount to helping Trump, (damn, this circular reasoning is making me dizzy), get reelected, but, is that possibility enough to completely discount the idea there their purpose is more for division than a preference for a particular candidate?
My initial response was just a thought spurred by the recent announcement of the Sanders interference. It wasn't a declaration or wishful thinking, it was just a thought.
geez, I better get my act together. ;-)
They did the same in 2016. Obviously, it wasn't and it is not at the same level that they helped Trump.
So I guess that's your answer.
They did what the same in 2016? Interfere to help Sanders? Did I miss your intent?
I guess I missed that. I will hunt it down, but, and not meaning to say they didn't help Trump, doesn't that also speak to a purpose of division and chaos rather than support for a preferred candidate?
No, it wasnt a "rather than". It shows it was both, but the main purpose was to get Trump elected. They didn't just help Sanders, they attacked Rubio, Cruz, etc.
How can you tell that was the "main purpose"? Seems like it has been a Russian goal for a long, long time to damage American society and culture; what makes you think that was set aside in favor of electing Trump?
You are right. Earlier I was going to post a snippet that supports what you are saying, so here it is now:
'The document, which spells out in detail how the Russians worked to support Trump’s campaign, alleges that on or about Feb. 10, 2016, the Russians internally circulated an outline of themes for future content to be posted on social media accounts."
“Specialists were instructed to post content that focused on ‘politics in the USA’ and to ‘use any opportunity to criticize Hillary and the rest (except Sanders and Trump – we support them),’” the indictment said"
Source: USA Today - Indictment: Russians also tried to help Bernie Sanders
It appears their intent was to support Trump and Sanders. But why Sanders? Was it simply because they thought he would be an easier Trump win than Hillary? Were they hedging their bets—betting on anyone to beat Hillary?
My original thought has been turned into more than I intended. It was a thought of primary purpose; division vs. preference. To hold that their motive was pure preference then it must be accepted that their support of Sanders was simply an effort against Hillary. That's possible. Would that be the same thought to explain their support for Sanders this time?
As I am writing this, Jill Dougherty, former Moscow Bureau Chief is on CNN saying the same thing I am, with particular reference to this election's Russian support of Sanders). "Russia's primary purpose is to create division and mistrust in our system, the candidate preference is secondary"—according to Ms. Dougherty.
Maybe I am just being stubborn, but if so, it is still not intended to say the Russians didn't interfere to support Trump. It is just questioning their motivation.
According to the Mueller Report and the Senate intelligence committee report, the worst the Russians did was to buy a few thousand dollars worth of social media ads. With campaign ad budgets in the hundreds of millions, this is not much interference by the Russians. Both reports confirmed there was NO contact between the Trump campaign and the Russians, not a single vote was changed. It's not like he purchased a fake dossier to lie to a FISA court to get a FISA warrant to have the FBI illegally spy on his opposing campaign. BUT one candidate did in the 2016 election. It wasn't President Donald Trump.
I don't think you can support your thought that not one single vote was changed due to the Russian interference efforts Mike.
I can't prove votes were changed, but I don't think you can prove they weren't. Your logic says that their interference had no effect. That is something my gut tells me is wrong.
How many is a "few thousand dollars," Mike?
https://adage.com/article/digital/russi … ler/312424
Oh yes, the Russians!
Evil monstrous murderous nation that is overthrowing nations across the globe!
Hmmmm… what about China?
What about the Billions they gave to the Clintons over the last few decades? What about the 1.5 Billion they gave to Hunter Biden?
How much money have they poured into influencing our elections?
Russia... that powerhouse economy is a real threat... to Ukraine. Oh wait, Clinton and Biden loved Ukraine, another place where billions came from and disappeared to.
CNN... no one fabricates lies and misinformation more than they do.
Can't debate with people who still believe Russia had an impact, on anything of relevance, they are lost in the jungle of delusions and disinformation.
Wow Ken, I could feel the emotion behind that comment. And it would be a good discussion to pursue. But right now I am caught up in this imbroglio that any reference to Russia's interference that isn't a total declaration that it was for Trump alone is BS.
I will get back to you once that is straightened out.
GA, it is the absurdity of it all, and arguing or debating its merits.
Russia influenced our election?
Compared to what China has done, going all the way back to Bill Clinton's first run for Presidency and the millions they pumped into that campaign.
Does anyone even care how many elections the Chinese have swayed, how many politicians have been on their payroll, how many spies have worked directly for politicians in D.C.?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics … ton-money/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/vi … story.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … ibery.html
https://abcnews.go.com/International/fb … d=33990683
“Think about the scale of the two economies,” Pompeo told the BBC, referring to Chinese and Russian interference in the US. “The Chinese have a much bigger footprint upon which to execute that mission than the Russians do.”
The CIA chief raised the spectre of a concerted Chinese conspiracy, not just in the US but internationally, and said countries must do more collectively to combat Chinese efforts to exert power over the West.
“We can watch very focused efforts to steal American information, to infiltrate the United States with spies—with people who are going to work on behalf of the Chinese government against America,” he said. “We see it in our schools. We see it throughout corporate America. It’s also true in other parts of the world... including Europe and the UK.”
How many politicians have had Russian spies caught working for them lately? Yet no one seems concerned about the Chinese spies?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions … story.html
https://thefederalist.com/2018/08/27/th … deafening/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar … ar/595747/
And what about Joe and Hunter Biden's billions from China?
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news … e-dealings
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019 … y-details/
How is it that we ignore the Chinese, and their influence, yet Russia's efforts are of apocalyptic significance?
Is it because of bias? Is it because the Chinese have by-and-large only sunk billions into buying off the Democrats?
What irritates me is that some really take every advantage to blame Russia for the last election, and will blame them on the up and coming election. More or less making the assumptions that half the country are idiots that can be swayed by Russian ads. It's ridiculous, and one would think they would get over the last election --- they have a new one to face, and get over.
I have to ask, have you had a look at some of the ridiculous ads that Russia was responsible for posting on Facebook? It's insulting to think many would take any one of them seriously.
Have you noticed that the false memes repearedly posted here come from one side of the political spectrum?
I have noted that. I take them with a grain of salt. Some are funny some in poor taste. It's clear we have two very different political factions posting here at HP. It well seems never the two shall meet...
The memes are troublesome, I got caught up in one the other day that was all over the internet, and I should have known it was false. But bought in. One does have to be careful, lots of stuff floating around that is just false or the context changed to suit one's purpose.
Right. The reason I asked is you had said this: "I have to ask, have you had a look at some of the ridiculous ads that Russia was responsible for posting on Facebook? It's insulting to think many would take any one of them seriously."
It might be insulting but it is an unfortunate truth that false memes are more believed and shared by conservatives than liberals.
https://www.newsweek.com/liberals-dont- … nds-800219
Just a quick note on Russians supporting division, in the documentary The Great Hack (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 … ok-netflix), they claim that Russian sources took out Facebook ads, created pages and events, etc. in order to fuel division and agitate both sides of issues. Black Lives Matter was one example they used as a movement they attempted to co-opt (not to say there isn't a genuine black lives matter movement) and create heated opposition against.
These threads are entertaining to say the least, quite interesting to see so many buy into the fabrications and falsehoods of the media and alphabet agencies.
CNN, MSNBC, NYTimes are examples of institutions of anti-American, pro-Globalization, pro-Corporation powers that exist to program the American people, they are a source of propaganda for entities that do not have American citizen's best interests in mind, and that do not tell the truth, they distort, or fabricate.
People who believe these sources of information and consider them reliable and factual are unwitting "idiot[s], a traitor or a Russian [or Chinese, or Iranian] operative.
It is the duty of every American to question the validity of all information coming from the likes of CNN, that is time after time caught fabricating stories, calling opinions fact, and pushing a corporate globalist agenda.
Anyone who is soft minded enough to believe their lies about Trump being a Russian puppet, an anti-Semite, a traitor to the country as he is portrayed daily by the media are the very fools that will sell this nation, and their own futures, down the toilet.
The very people who rail against Trump, and believe him to be a fascist tyrant, will allow the Democratic Party to be hijacked by a true racist, sexist, fascist who will actually be the very things all Trump's opponents believe him to be.
As the truly interesting and worthwhile candidates like Yang and Tulsi are denigrated and swept aside, and the likes of Sanders and Warren are stifled by the DNC... we will watch Bloomberg or a stand-in puppet for him take the nomination.
Well said. I can add nothing but to emphasize you hit all the major points in your usual clear and articulate manner.
So you don't believe US intelligence agencies, Ken? But instead you believe a habitual liar who continues to call everything involving him a hoax. Okay!
Are you sure it's Trump the Russians are helping? Just read an article in the Dem's Bible WaPo that the Russians have decided to help Bernie win. Guess they are not pleased with the treatment they got from Trump. Maybe they think Bernie would be a better puppet? Hey, gotta believe the good old Washington Post and every other Media outlet that is posting the story. It could be fake news.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/21/poli … /index.htm
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/21/us/p … ussia.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/21/bernie- … paign.html
Further news on this event. McGuire had the guts to report to Adam Schiff and the House Russia is following a similar playbook used in the 2016 election. For this, he was replaced with a person who has no experience at all in the intelligence service.
Trump was irate when Nunes reportedly told him of McGuire's telling the committee of what he had learned. He obviously doesn't want to be reelected with another Russian cloud over his head.
So why does Russia want to help him win? What's in it for Russia they'd go so far to make sure Trump remained in office? If this doesn't make you think about Trump's involvement with Putin, then you're no patriot at all.
A colleague claims to know a former high level Russian official (don't believe he has any reason to lie) and said he was told "Trump is our revenge for Gorbachev". Make of that what you will.
It's obvious Putin has some sort of hold on Trump. There's no other explanation for the way Donnie's acting, EW. Why is Deutsche Bank the only place Trump can borrow money?
His relationship with Deutsche Bank is certainly a twisted one. From trying to stiff them, and sue them, to them being his lender again. The November elections can't come soon enough, Randy. I just hope that the DNC doesn't self-destruct in the process (by nominating someone other than the candidate the voters choose).
Don't forget EW, every day there's some sort of scandal involving Trump. He is so corrupt, there's no chance we can forget what a piece of shit he really is. Sorry to be so blunt....but there it is.
No worries there, Randy. There's no danger in me forgetting the ongoing scandals of Trump and gang (and no need to mince words as far as I'm concerned). He seems to truly enjoy being as much of a POS as he can be (as I'm sure his criminal friends do). It's going to take us a long time to live this one down.
Trump is pissed because the DNI did his duty and reported the Russian interference to the correct authorities instead of covering it up.
The flunkey he replaced the DNI with is over 17 intel agencies and has no intel experience at all. Sounds about normal for Trump, eh?
I heard on the news this morning that some Republicans are saying the firing was justified because the DNI made Trump "look bad."
And, as now expected, the Trump cult finds this to be perfectly acceptable. See how easily authoritarianism can take hold? This is really scary.
Trump doesn't need any help to "look bad," Sandy. He's been doing this his entire life. And Republicans always think Trump is justified whenever he does anything wrong. No surprise there.
It is terrifying how close the US is getting to outright fascism. I didn't think it was possible in the United States, but here we are.
Take a breath Eastward. You are letting these discussions, (and the partisan divide), push you over the edge. What is happening now in American politics is not new, and we are nowhere near a state of fascism.
Our democratic system is still working. We can see the very evidence of this in every day's political news. If we were approaching what you say you can't believe—we wouldn't be hearing about it at all.
So, as I said, take a breath, step back, and consider your thoughts of your first forum participations of a few months ago to those of today. I bet you will see you have been pulled farther down the road than you would have gone when you first started participating.
Have you seen the commercials for that phone app called 'Calm', where it prompts you to take a breath, relax, and do nothing for 30 seconds? Sort of like an abbreviated meditation routine. You should check it out. ;-)
That's quite a condescending reply.
The fact that we haven't reached the extremes of famous fascist extremes in history doesn't mean we haven't started down that path.
Some people will deny and rationalize everything until it's too late.
"Some people will deny and rationalize everything until it's too late."
You got that right, Scott!
That was an unnecessary and completely misinterpreted response promisem. Hopefully eastward will recognize the spirit of my response. You certainly didn't.
Our history says there is little chance for successful communication, so I will leave it there.
As you told Eastward, take a breath, meditate, be calm, etc.
Baloney, Gus. The condescension couldn't be more obvious.
Your history shows a pattern of disrespect to anyone who doesn't agree with you.
And as usual, you focus on the person and not the message.
Okay promisem, if you insist.
Have you followed the discussions eastward and I were having? It seems we both thought they were productive and cordial, but now you come along and want to tag me as condescending and attacking the person instead of the message.
If you feel comfortable enough with my history of commenting to claim that is my "focus" have you also followed that history enough to recognize my use of ";-)", which was clearly attached to the ending of my comment to Eastward?
Perhaps you are projecting your perception of my interactions with you, (which would not be totally inaccurate), to my interactions with other forum members.
Regarding my response to your comment, I made an effort to just offer a different perspective. I didn't declare yours to be "baloney," (as much as I thought it was). My language could have been much more in line with yours—derogatory and confrontational, but I purposely tried not to do that.
Are you so sensitive that any challenging response to your thoughts is an affront?
You are merely reaping what you sow promisem. You don't have to look to my comments with other members to find issues with my responses. You will find more than enough just in my interactions with you.
I have tried to not respond to your recent renewal of participation, but sometimes the 'low fruit' is just too tempting. However, it seems obvious I should try harder.
None of this deflection has anything to do with your condescension toward Eastward or any of my comments.
Please stay on topic.
Now it is "deflection"? That is your charge?
Okay, prove it.
Prove that my and eastward's ending comments to each other didn't express an appreciation for a rational exchange—even one that ended in disagreement. And, that making that point is a deflection from your charge of condensation.
Prove that my inclusion of a textual smiley face, ";-) hasn't been historically used to indicate a jest or light-hearted comment. And, that making that point is a deflection from your charge of condensation.
Prove that my reference to the difficulties of our, (you and I), past exchanges are a deflection from addressing your charge of condensation.
And finally, prove that I have ever shied away from responding, without deflection, to any of your comments to me.
All of those "asks" are pertinent to our current exchange, and they are all related to your charge of condensation. None are a deflection.
Can you answer, or prove any of my "asks" promisem?
I am willing to support challenges to my comments, are you willing to support challenges to yours? All the proof you need is in this thread promisem, just present it.
Even better, although I won't put him on the spot and involve him in our adversarial exchange, why don't you do it? Ask Eastward if he thought I was being condescending in my comment to him. That would certainly make one of us eat our words.
Eastward, I will reply to your actual comment instead of mocking you, unlike abusiveTrump supporters on here. I'll use Wikipedia as a point of reference. Fascism is:
1. Far right
3. Ultra nationalist
6. Economically protectionist
Sounds awfully current. But at least we have a strong (although weakening) democracy and 60% of the country to oppose any fascist trends.
That does sound about par for the course for Trump. He loves to put his toadies in charge of things they have no business "leading".
Or simply someone biased to the point that they will continue to believe that Trump is colluding with Putin after 2 years of intensive investigation utterly failed to produce any evidence of that.
Trump's own hand-picked DNI reported it, Dan. Are you saying he's biased?
Link, please, showing that Trump is colluding/has colluded with Putin to fix an election?
There is little (no) doubt that Russia has attempted and will continue to attempt to push our elections in whatever direction they see as profitable to them. Just as every other developed nation has done/will continue to do, and that most definitely includes the US "interfering" with the elections of other countries.
But that is NOT the same as collusion with Putin, which is what you said, with the added caveat that if you don't believe in that particular fairy tale then you as no patriot.
Please point out where I used the word "colluding or collusion'' in my post, Dan.
I spoke of "Trump's involvement with Putin," but it was in reference to his contacts with him monetarily, re the Moscow Tower and other business he's had with Russia. Such as selling oligarchs real estate for exorbitant profits.
I wonder why Eric Trump said several years ago they got most of their money from Russia? Do you?
"Trump's involvement with Putin"
Did you mean something else? Perhaps trade agreements? If you mean monetarily, please provide links showing Trump and Putin in a business agreement or other arrangement whereby they exchange money.
(Hint: "Russia" does not equate with "Putin" any more than "Trump" means "America".)
I said exactly what I meant, Dan. Didn't you accuse me of a lack of reading comprehension a few days ago? You need to take your own advice.
Putin wasn't involved the Moscow Tower project? Seriously? And Putin IS Russia at this point, never doubt it.
We have posted links on these forums many, many times over the last several years about the financial connections between Trump and Russian billionaires in bed with Putin.
Many of the posts have gone straight to you.
Either you have a bad memory or you are pretending those posts never existed. Regardless, please use search engines to find that information. It's widely available.
"So why does Russia want to help him win?"
Randy, this old lady remembers when, back in 1956, Soviet Premier Nikita Kruschev was in the U.S. He was visiting a farm in Iowa (I believe it was) and told our President Eisenhower: "... We will bury you from within.
You will find other reports that he said this in 1960 and later in 1962 at a meeting in Poland. So apparently he kept repeating his threat. I distinctly remember our newspapers reporting the first story and our teacher discussing this with us in school. This was during the Cold War when the U.S. was still feeling very patriotic.
We all thought the statement was too incredulous to take seriously. Now in this day and age, we would all be better off if we took it seriously and believed it.
But since we have folks who say the Holocaust never happened and man never set foot on the moon, why should any red-blooded American take it seriously and equate it to Russian hacking in our presidential elections and helping to install their own puppet at the head of our government. Putin doesn't give a dang about Trump. He just wants somebody he can manipulate.
"Putin doesn't give a dang about Trump. He just wants somebody he can manipulate."
Putin has found the perfect stooge to manipulate in Trump, Miz. As long as someone brags on him and accepts his lies, he'll do anything anytime anywhere to keep the adulation going. Pathetic actually.
Someone that can be manipulated, or any of a hundred other reasons. Perhaps someone that will sell them Uranium. Someone that will foster trade deals. Someone that will work towards world peace. Someone that will turn the other way under Russian aggression.
Or even someone that won't treat them as the ultimate evil or attempt to revive the cold war.
The old uranium deal has also been explained many times, but you still don't get it.
And if you don't like that one lawmaker was instrumental in arranging that deal, you get to ignore the rest of it and maintain that the country of Russia (meaning a single person there that micro manages every action taken by every Russian citizen) has only one reason to attempt manipulation of an election.
Claims made that Russia influenced the election in favor of Trump. A study by noted psychologist Robert Epstein presents convincing data that Google influenced the same election for Hillary (more hard data, by the way, than has been presented for the Russia influence theory)
Who do you think has more power to manipulate opinion in America today. Russia or Google?
Good point, for there is absolutely no doubt as to the answer to that question.
I read Epstein's paper and it's an opinion piece with no proof any votes were changed but lots of speculation based on his research.
You are correct. It was opinion based on research of data. The opposing view is also opinion based on review of data.
Neither can provide proof that any votes were changed.
So....what's your point?
I haven't studied Mueller's investigation enough to see if Epstein's research is better or worse than his. Is it? Mueller had more info to go through, I'd imagine.
I think we can both be certain if proof existed of changed votes the major news networks would have had a party with you invited.
But, facts don't really matter. Two opinions, conflicting conclusions, and you have repeatedly insisted opinion you agreed with was fact.
Nat'l Security Adviser: Russia's Not Trying to Help Trump Win
Robert O'Brien denies report that Moscow is working to throw the 2020 election
"There's no indication that Russia has its fingers in the 2020 election or is working to get the president re-elected, says a top Trump official. “The national security adviser gets pretty good access to our intelligence," National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien told ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday. “I haven't seen any intelligence that Russia is doing anything to attempt to get President Trump re-elected.” O'Brien's comment came after he was asked about reports that an intelligence professional told members of the House intelligence committee that it was Russia's aim to favor Trump in the election. Some officials familiar with the classified briefing said lawmakers were told that Russia was taking steps that would help Trump. And Democratic frontrunner Bernie Sanders said Friday that he was briefed last month by officials about Russian efforts to boost his candidacy."
https://www.newser.com/story/287313/nat … gn=rss_top
I am going to borrow a quote from Hillary Clinton "What difference does it make"?
Just venting -- We have not been able to stop Russia, China,
and who the hell knows what other countries from attempting to interfere in our election. It seems the Dems are looking once again, and I must say way ahead of the election to blame Russia once again for Trump winning! Wake - up this is stupid, ridiculous, and crazy...
As I have been saying over and over here on HP. Dems get yourself a good candidate. Stop scapegoating, it is getting so old...
In the end ---- all the blaming has gotten the Dems nowhere. So, I say what difference does it make. Trump will win, and it's not the fault of the Russian. It's the fault of the DNC.
Yes, and if the democratic nominee wins, then it's the fault of the RNC? Makes perfect sense!
No, the RNC is supporting Trump and his agenda. At least most from the Republican party is. They pretty much know by the numbers that have turned out for the primaries. They are not as artful as the DNC at getting rid of a candidate they just don't want. Plus they are willing to hear the voice of the people.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/1 … out-115338
Of course not! You can decide for the Left, and the Left can't decide for the Right. A Trumpism if I ever saw one!
Indeed, "the voice of the Russian people."
Is this Trump's latest flunky replacement for the DNI who has no intel experience whatsoever, Ken?
by Scott Belford 4 years ago
Donald Trump, as late as January 1, 2017, has refused to acknowledge what most everybody, Democrats and Republicans (less Trump supporters) alike know to be true ... Vladimir Putin is behind the arguably successful attack on America's democracy by swaying American voters to vote for Trump rather...
by Readmikenow 11 days ago
I said it before and I'll say it again. The intense fraud committed by the Democrats during the 2020 election will be revealed This isn't going away. It's too late to change the outcomes of the election, but it is a good time to reveal the total and complete disregard for the rule...
by PrettyPanther 3 months ago
https://www.cnbc.comPresident Joe Biden says he believes Russian leader Vladimir Putin is a killer with no soul.Biden vowed that Putin soon “will pay a price” for interfering in the 2020 U.S. presidential election and trying to boost the reelection chances of then-President Donald Trump.Trump for...
by crankalicious 2 years ago
Today in Helsinki, President Trump sided with Russian President Vladimir Putin against the U.S. Intelligence services, basically stating that he believed there wasn't any interference by Russia in the U.S. elections and believing President Putin over his own intelligence agencies.This comes after a...
by Susie Lehto 4 years ago
“The whole Russian hacking narrative is either propaganda intended to incite the American people, to anger toward Russia for some reason, or our intelligence community is so ignorant and naive that they should all be replaced.” ~ John McAfee, founder of McAfee virus protection* ...
by Randy Godwin 3 years ago
With all of Trump's Intel agencies testifying before congress that the Russians meddled in the Presidential election, he has done nothing to prevent this from happening in the future. I cannot imagine any past POTUS ignoring this threat to our country. I realize he doesn't want to bring...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|