- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
General Kelly Blocking Trump from Information that will disprove Russian Hacking
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:13 pm
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:13 pm
"Rep. Dana Rohrabacher: Someone leaked 'very important' call with John Kelly concerning WikiLeaks
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher said someone leaked information about his call this week with White House chief of staff John Kelly, possibly to undermine his ability to speak directly with President Trump about WikiLeaks.
The Republican congressman from California spoke with Kelly on Wednesday regarding his recent meeting with WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange in London, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday evening, and broached a possible trade.
Rohrabacher reportedly used the word "deal" in his conversation with Kelly and said Assange would get a pardon or "something like that" in exchange for information files on a data-storage device showing that Russia did not hack Democratic emails that WikiLeaks published last year during the 2016 campaign.
"I don't know who it is, all I know is I'm up against an array of very powerful forces, including the intelligence services and major newspapers that are basically allied with the liberal Left who have every reason to undermine communication on this issue," he told the Washington Examiner.
"Look, there are very powerful forces at work," he added. "We've got the NSA, the FBI and the CIA, all of whom confirmed a major lie that was being used for political purposes and a lie that was repeated and repeated in order to undercut our new president."
LINK
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher said someone leaked information about his call this week with White House chief of staff John Kelly, possibly to undermine his ability to speak directly with President Trump about WikiLeaks.
The Republican congressman from California spoke with Kelly on Wednesday regarding his recent meeting with WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange in London, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday evening, and broached a possible trade.
Rohrabacher reportedly used the word "deal" in his conversation with Kelly and said Assange would get a pardon or "something like that" in exchange for information files on a data-storage device showing that Russia did not hack Democratic emails that WikiLeaks published last year during the 2016 campaign.
"I don't know who it is, all I know is I'm up against an array of very powerful forces, including the intelligence services and major newspapers that are basically allied with the liberal Left who have every reason to undermine communication on this issue," he told the Washington Examiner.
"Look, there are very powerful forces at work," he added. "We've got the NSA, the FBI and the CIA, all of whom confirmed a major lie that was being used for political purposes and a lie that was repeated and repeated in order to undercut our new president."
LINK
This post was edited on 9/16/17 at 10:41 am
9
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:25 pm to Volkosoby
Dana makes me Laffy. Although, I wouldn't bet against some of this far out shite being true. The IC is largely comprised of traitors and little girls it seems.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:29 pm to Volkosoby
I think Assange will say anything to get a pardon. I don't trust him, even though I like Wikileaks.
But what Dana says about "powerful forces" is true. I have no doubt the IC spread a lot of nonsense in the press to hurt Trump and I have no doubt they will do whatever to cover their misdeeds.
But what Dana says about "powerful forces" is true. I have no doubt the IC spread a lot of nonsense in the press to hurt Trump and I have no doubt they will do whatever to cover their misdeeds.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:40 pm to Volkosoby
quote:Well Dana. If the information "disproves" something, then this has nothing to do with the validity of the information.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher said someone leaked information about his call this week with White House chief of staff John Kelly, possibly to undermine his ability to speak directly with President Trump about WikiLeaks.
When McCarthy's comments about Russia were revealed:
quote:They tried to play if off as a joke:
On May 17, 2017, the Washington Post reported that a month before Donald Trump clinched the GOP nomination, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy stated “There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump. Swear to God.”
quote:I actually think he was joking about Trump, but I'm not so sure he was joking about Rohrbacher. And even if he was, then I think he may have actually been on to something. In other words, Muh Russians is probably closest to being true in Dana's case.
Brendan Buck, Counselor to Speaker Ryan, initially denied these reports but later, after being informed that the Post would cite a recording as evidence, claimed that Congressman McCarthy was joking
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:41 pm to AUstar
quote:
I think Assange will say anything to get a pardon. I don't trust him, even though I like Wikileaks. But what Dana says about "powerful forces" is true. I have no doubt the IC spread a lot of nonsense in the press to hurt Trump and I have no doubt they will do whatever to cover their misdeeds.
So, either Assange has legit info...or he don't. Trust but verify.
They will circle the wagons; too many Bureaucratic Lifers who have ties to the corrupt Obama Machine and legal liability therein. Kelly will give them a pass for the 'security' of the Nation.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:42 pm to AUstar
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/19/21 at 10:45 pm
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:44 pm to AUstar
quote:Yeah. I don't think it is a coincidence that Dana is his information conduit. For a person whose credibility is a result of releasing secrets, it's odd that he chose the shady Russian supporter to deliver secret information.
I think Assange will say anything to get a pardon. I don't trust him, even though I like Wikileaks
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:50 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
's odd that he chose the shady Russian supporter to deliver secret information.
What the frick are you talking about
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:50 pm to RCDfan1950
quote:And for a person who has gained credibility, fame, and notoriety for revealing a ton of legitimate information, this is the complete opposite of that.
So, either Assange has legit info...or he don't. Trust but verify.
And even if the secrecy is a result of leveraging against the possibility of criminal charges, he chose the least credible person to rely on when it apparently involves the Russians. Assange undboutely knows that Dana has the reputation as a Russian supporter (even as far as payrolled employee), and probably has access to more information than we have. And since he hasn't released anything to make Dana seem more credible isn't hat regard, I'm guessing that Dana was chosen for a reason.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 8:55 pm to buckeye_vol
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/19/21 at 10:45 pm
Posted on 9/15/17 at 9:03 pm to SDVTiger
quote:From his wiki page:
What the frick are you talking about
quote:
] sided with Russia in the Russia–Georgia war, gave a qualified defense of the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and supports cooperating with Russia in Syria and in other areas. There have been questions about his relation with Putin and the Russian government
quote:
Although he later insisted he was joking, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy was overheard saying, "There's two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and [Donald] Trump. Swear to God.
quote:
He was warned in 2012 by the FBI that Russian spies may have been trying to recruit him to act on Russia's behalf, after he met with a member of the Russian foreign ministry privately in Moscow
quote:
An article in The Atlantic suggested that there was serious concern in the State Department of ties between Rohrabacher and the Russian government
quote:
In April 2014, he supported the idea of Alaskans rejoining Russia if a majority voters in Alaska wanted to.
quote:
According to a 2015 article by Politico reporter Luke O'Brien, Rohrabacher is known for his long-time friendship with Russia's Vladimir Putin and his defense of "the Russian point of view."
quote:
Rohrabacher had planned, in his capacity as chair of the Europe subcommittee, to hold a hearing on the Magnitsky Act, which bars certain Russian officials from entering the United States or holding any financial assets in American banks. At the hearing Bill Browder, the American-born investor who had lobbied for the act's passage after what he claims was the illegal appropriation of his hedge fund's assets and the subsequent murder of his Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky after he discovered this, was to testify. Rohrabacher planned to subject him to what was described as a "show trial", where in addition to questioning Browder closely and skeptically about his claims, a feature-length documentary film critical of the Magnitsky claims directed by Eduard Nekrasov was to be shown in its entirety. Among the other witnesses scheduled to testify were Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya,
quote:
When Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Ed Royce learned of the plans, he canceled the hearing and forbade Rohrabacher from showing the film. In its stead, he held a full committee hearing on U.S.-Russia relations at which Rohrabacher was allowed to submit some of the pro-Russian claims into evidence. The film was ultimately shown at the Newseum, and an intern in Rohrabacher's office who later worked for the Trump transition team sent emails promoting the film from the subcommittee offices.
quote:
After Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election, Rohrabacher defends his approach to improve the U.S.-Russia relations. He had previously met at least twice to discuss Russian sanctions with Rinat Akhmetshin, a former Soviet spy, who was later revealed to be present at the June 2016 meetin
quote:Basically you could take the most hyperbole regarding Trump and Russia, and apply it to Rohrbacher, and it would probably be true in his case.
In a May 2017 interview with CNN, Rohrabacher said, "We have a huge double standard with Russia when it comes to prisoners and other things," and further stated that interference by the Russian intelligence services' in the 2016 U.S. election was the same as the NSA bugging German Chancellor Angela Merkel's phone
Dana would be the least credible person to believe in regards to secretive information that benefits Russia, and he's the least likely to question its validity. So why would Assange choose him knowing his reputation?
Posted on 9/15/17 at 9:42 pm to tide06
quote:It's probably fairly short (Rand, Amash, etc.), but it doesn't make sense to choose the person least likely to take on the Russian IC. In fact, he's defended the Russian IC.
I agree his track record makes him questionable, but do you also acknowledge that the list of lawmakers on capital hill willing to take on the IC is likely extremely short?
quote:It still doesn't make sense, and is almost completely backwards from the typical way Assange works:
My guess is that Assange doesn't have his pick of conduits for information these days.
1. Assange is known as a revealer of secrets, not the keeper of them. It is a conduit itself.
2. Wikileaks is a highly advanced information and communication system. It's like an IC in its own right.
3. Since obtaining the information requires secrecy, Wikileaks has been able to create a communication system that protects the identity of sources. So a system of sharing information secretly already exists for inputs, so it seems logical that it can be applied to outputs.
So I'm not sure why he would need to use Dana as the conduit anyways. But if he is going to use him to transmit secret information, why would they do it so publically? Why not just announce that he has the information to get Trump's attention and then deliver it to him without a conduit then?
In addition, this has been going on for a month already. It shouldn't take that long anyways. If it is as valid and important as Dana says, then taking so long to transmit it seems counterproductive. And if it's because people are preventing Dana from delivering it, then that goes back to what my previous points. Why use Dana at all then, and if he's going to use Dana, why make it so publically and warn those who would try to stop it anyways?
And since it only take a quick personal of Dana's Wikipedia page to understand his reputation, then Assange assuredly knows that reputation was going to make the transmission more difficult ESPECIALLY with such a public announcement. Furthermore, if Assange has access to this type of information, then he probably has access to more information regarding Dana's involvement with Russia. So if he had information that would contradict Dana's reputation, why wouldn't he release that since Dana's reputation is a major defense against the transmission?
On the other hand, if he had information that actually supported Dana's reputation, then it wouldn't make sense to use Dana UNLESS it's not valid in the first place so Dana would either be too biased to see that or he's essentially using it as blackmail against Dana. And in that case, doing it so publically is probably iintentional. It doesn't matter if invalid information isn't ever delivered, and it doesn't matter if people will naturally question it since there is nothing to lose and even getting some public favor is a benefit to Assange.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 10:01 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
After Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election, Rohrabacher defends his approach to improve the U.S.-Russia relations.
That is just awful.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 10:05 pm to themunch
quote:Well his approach is nothing like any one elses's, even Trump's.
That is just awful.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 10:07 pm to buckeye_vol
This post was edited on 1/19/21 at 10:44 pm
Posted on 9/15/17 at 10:34 pm to tide06
quote:It sounds like the complete opposite actually. The meeting actually occurred BEFORE Bannon was dismissed, and over a month later, he hasn't transmitted the information. So that's not very much access, even prior to Bannon's dismissal.
It sounds as though DR also has some access to the President which is a very valuable commodity in the post Bannon administration.
quote:Well if he wants Trump to know, then what would be the most effective way of achieving that? Maybe releasing it on Wikileaks so Trump and the world can see, the same way he releases other secret information he wants people to see?
Could Kelly be acting on behalf of elements in the MIC/IC that don't want Trump to know they are controlling his information and Assange wanted Trump to know it? Yes
quote:And this is where the problem lies. He's gained credibility by batting 1000 releasing information to the public. This is essentially the antehsis of that, so I think it's wrong, if not dangerous, to apply that credibility to these circumstances.
None of those mean DR isn't providing accurate information from Assange who to this point is batting 1000%.
Personally, I think Assange and Wikileaks are necessary evils. The necessariness does not negate the evilness, so to speak. So while he's earned the benefit of the doubt regarding the veracity of information he leaks, I think it's dangerous to apply that unconditionally to him under all circumstances. And given the way he's released information, and especially the way he's unnecessarily added fuel to the Seth Rich conspiracy, I think it's clear that his motives aren't as pure as some think.
He is in a position to greatly benefit from the same asymmetry of information that he is exposing, especially if he's given unconditional trust under all circumstances. And given that assymetry, he doesn't need to ever explicitly lie to be dishonest--specially through "lies of omission." In other words, it's like a prosecutor who provides all truthful facts at a trial to obtain a conviction. Yet, despite never telling a lie or presenting any false information, withholding exculpatory information would be just as dishonest and corrupt as presenting lies.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 10:49 pm to Volkosoby
quote:
possibly to undermine
That sounds like an open and shut deal. Great job, Nancy Drew.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:02 pm to tide06
quote:
A refusal to acknowledge and resolve mistakes leads to a continual downward cycle based on new decision trees that are extremely limited by previously fixed variables.
You see it with dying companies and compulsive gamblers. They can't acknowledge the root cause of their predicament due to cognitive dissonance or sheer ugly arrogance and it results in them making comically bad future decisions because in their mind that decision is better than acknowledging that their last decision was wrong and why.
yup.
the 2Bush/Cheney regime in a nutshell.
Posted on 9/16/17 at 4:28 am to RCDfan1950
SETH RICH LEAKED TO WIKILEAKS AND THEN PODESTA HAD HIM KILLED!!!
Posted on 9/16/17 at 7:23 am to CptBengal
8/12
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News