Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
personreal

Noam Chomsky on Russian Interference

Recommended Posts

Of course Noam Chomsky is no fan of Trump...but even he calls the claims of Russian interference BS...

 

"Noam Chomsky explained in an interview why accusations of Russian election meddling and Trump-Russia collusion were "a joke."

 

"Furthermore, does the U.S. interfere in elections? In Russia for example, yes, and proudly. In 1996, Clinton took pride in the fact that large scale U.S. interference in the Russian election swung it to the favor of Boris Yeltsin. The U.S. goes far beyond interfering in elections, it overthrows governments."

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/04/01/noam_chomsky_trump-russia_collusion_claims_a_joke.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Chomsky is right. He usually is. I thought Russian collusion was a joke from the get-go. The only time I have ever seen him wrong was on the issue of AI. He is out of his depth on that issue. It was sad to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, drvoke said:

 

Chomsky is right. He usually is. I thought Russian collusion was a joke from the get-go. The only time I have ever seen him wrong was on the issue of AI. He is out of his depth on that issue. It was sad to see.

The dems under Obama did far more to undermine our democracy than Russia could ever do.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, drvoke said:

 

Chomsky is right. He usually is. I thought Russian collusion was a joke from the get-go. The only time I have ever seen him wrong was on the issue of AI. He is out of his depth on that issue. It was sad to see.

Social justice platforms allowed Russia to play games with our election by running ads, etc. which were paid for in Russian Rubles.

 

Guess which party these social platforms support...that's right, the democrat party. Were these platforms incompetent and/or corrupt like Hillary?

 

At the end of the day Hillary lost cause she's a bad campaigner.  She blamed everyone, including Obama and her own party, for her loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, personreal said:

Of course Noam Chomsky is no fan of Trump...but even he calls the claims of Russian interference BS...

 

"Noam Chomsky explained in an interview why accusations of Russian election meddling and Trump-Russia collusion were "a joke."

 

"Furthermore, does the U.S. interfere in elections? In Russia for example, yes, and proudly. In 1996, Clinton took pride in the fact that large scale U.S. interference in the Russian election swung it to the favor of Boris Yeltsin. The U.S. goes far beyond interfering in elections, it overthrows governments."

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/04/01/noam_chomsky_trump-russia_collusion_claims_a_joke.html

 

Then he forgot to read the first page where Mueller says the very term "collusion" has no meaning. too bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NOAM CHOMSKY: I think it is so farcical that I barely even read the reports. It's a joke.

 

 

End of interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, leftwinger said:

 

Then he forgot to read the first page where Mueller says the very term "collusion" has no meaning. too bad

Why can't the left admit that Hillary was not a good candidate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, leftwinger said:

 

Why can't you respond to what I actually write?

You mean you don't have me on ignore anymore?

 

Hillary is why Hillary lost.

 

Here's some blaming...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, drvoke said:

 

Chomsky is right. He usually is. I thought Russian collusion was a joke from the get-go. The only time I have ever seen him wrong was on the issue of AI. He is out of his depth on that issue. It was sad to see.

 

Chomsky is wrong. He admitted to not reading the report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, leftwinger said:

 

Chomsky is wrong. He admitted to not reading the report.

We already had enough information to know what happened.  And the Mueller report confirmed it even though the dems won't accept it now.

 

Hillary lost cause she's corrupt, dishonest, and a poor candidate.

 

No one could cite Hillary's accomplishments as SOS...not even Hillary could cite her own accomplishment in a national TV interview.  

 

I would think yer side wants someone better than Hillary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, drvoke said:

 

Chomsky is right. He usually is. I thought Russian collusion was a joke from the get-go. The only time I have ever seen him wrong was on the issue of AI. He is out of his depth on that issue. It was sad to see.

"EVERY EXCUSE HILLARY CLINTON HAS GIVEN FOR HER 2016 ELECTION LOSS"

 

Actually this isn't every excuse Hillary made for her loss...but it's a good starter...

 

https://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-blames-sexism-russia-and-bernie-sanders-her-election-loss-685971

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, personreal said:

"EVERY EXCUSE HILLARY CLINTON HAS GIVEN FOR HER 2016 ELECTION LOSS"

 

Actually this isn't every excuse Hillary made for her loss...but it's a good starter...

 

https://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-blames-sexism-russia-and-bernie-sanders-her-election-loss-685971

The truth of why Hillary lost is front and center...and it had nothing to do with Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, leftwinger said:

 

Then he forgot to read the first page where Mueller says the very term "collusion" has no meaning. too bad

If it has no meaning then why are the dems sweating bullets because of the scrutiny that is now being focused on their Collusion with british intelligence now called spygate?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Whitemajikman said:

If it has no meaning then why are the dems sweating bullets because of the scrutiny that is now being focused on their Collusion with british intelligence now called spygate?

 

 

You refuse to read even page one of Mueller's report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, leftwinger said:

 

You refuse to read even page one of Mueller's report.

I have read the entire report ...two times now.

While you still refuse to acknowledge that spygate is real and is now being investigated by our country's AG and that there is a report due to be released  by the IG very shortly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Whitemajikman said:

I have read the entire report ...two times now.

 

You have not read it once. Mueller says "collusion" is a meaningless term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, leftwinger said:

 

You have not read it once. Mueller says "collusion" is a meaningless term.

What was his reasoning ....

In your own words...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Whitemajikman said:

I have read the entire report ...two times now.

While you still refuse to acknowledge that spygate is real and is now being investigated by our country's AG and that there is a report due to be released  by the IG very shortly.

 

 

 

Leftwinger is moron who thinks he’s a genius.

 

he has no interest in facts or reality.   

 

He is about to be in for a big surprise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EltonJohnson said:

 

 

Leftwinger is moron who thinks he’s a genius.

 

he has no interest in facts or reality.   

 

He is about to be in for a big surprise. 

All the hoax believers are in for a big surprise.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whitemajikman said:

I have read the entire report ...two times now.

While you still refuse to acknowledge that spygate is real and is now being investigated by our country's AG and that there is a report due to be released  by the IG very shortly.

 

 

I said this in other thread start by kfools I think.

 

We know "collusion" is not a legal term, but Mueller said this
 
Like collusion, “coordination” does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law. We understood coordination to require an agreement — tacit or express — between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference. That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other’s actions or interests. volume 1 page 2 ( second last paragraph
 
so Coordination and conspiracy are on the table at first 
 
IV. RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT LINKS TO AND CONTACTS WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN
 except

 
The Office identified multiple contacts — “links,” in the words of the Appointment Order — between Trump Campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government. The Office investigated whether those contacts constituted a third avenue of attempted Russian interference with or influence on the 2016 presidential election. In particular, the investigation examined whether these contacts involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination.
(notice the bold part) page 66 first paragraph
 
 
conclusion Volume 2 page 2 (third last paragraph)
excerpt 

Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.
 
___________ so couldn't prove conspiracy or Coordination so moved to "obstruction of justice" _________________
 
L. Overarching Factual Issues
 
On Obstruction Volume 2 page 157  second paragraph 
excerpt

In this investigation, the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference
 
and to be fair Mueller did say this 
 
 But the evidence does point to a range of other possible personal motives animating the President’s conduct. These include concerns that continued investigation would call into question the legitimacy of his election and potential uncertainty about whether certain events — such as advance notice of WikiLeaks’s release of hacked information or the June 9, 2016 meeting between senior campaign officials and Russians — could be seen as criminal activity by the President, his campaign, or his family.
 
Layman terms, well because of the Russian Moscow Trump Tower he wasn't totally convinced and the wiki leaks release of hacked info, but he isnt sure by whom, the President, which we know He never visited Moscow, the campaign or Donny Jr.
 
 
 
so what are we to make of this Mueller's own word from the report? 


In layman's term , He couldn't find evidence beyond a reasonable doubt,  so Im going to leave it up to the AG , he can deal with Congress and Im going back to my regular job and Democrats don't call me , or call me ever 
 

Nowhere in the report does Mueller say TRUMP DID IT and here is the proof 

 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, leftwinger said:

 

Then he forgot to read the first page where Mueller says the very term "collusion" has no meaning. too bad

Yes, instead he called it conspiracy. Same damn thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whitemajikman said:

What was his reasoning ....

In your own words...

 

Literally he said the word has no legal meaning. Now blow of you two bit troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×