ADVERTISEMENT

Trump clarifies himself

mk_peters

All-American
Aug 9, 2004
13,863
14,632
113
U.S. President Donald Trump, grappling with a torrent of criticism over his performance at a Helsinki summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, said on Tuesday he misspoke at their joint news conference and meant to say he saw no reason why it was not Russia that interfered in the 2016 U.S. election.

Yeah, that reconciles perfectly with this:

"I don't see any reason why it would be," Trump said. "President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today."
 
And now this:

First off, CrowdStrike, the company the DNC brought in to initially investigate and remediate the hack, actually shared images of the DNC servers with the FBI. For the purposes of an investigation of this type, images are much more useful than handing over metal and hardware, because they are bit-by-bit copies of a crime scene taken while the crime was going on. Live hard drive and memory snapshots of blinking, powered-on machines in a network reveal significantly more forensic data than some powered-off server removed from a network. It’s the difference between watching a house over time, carefully noting down who comes and goes and when and how, versus handing over a key to a lonely boarded-up building. By physically handing over a server to the FBI as Trump suggested, the DNC would in fact have destroyed evidence. (Besides, there wasn’t just one server, but 140.)

The FBI and Robert Mueller’s investigators discovered when and how specific Russian military officers logged into a control panel on a leased machine in Arizona. They found that the GRU officers secretly surveiled an empoyee of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee all day in real time, including spying on “her individual banking information and other personal topics.” They showed that “Guccifer 2.0,” the supposed lone hacker behind the DNC hack, was in fact managed by a specific GRU unit, and even reconstructed the internet searches made within that unit while a GRU officer with shoddy English skills was drafting the first post as Guccifer 2.0. None of this information could have possibly come from any DNC server.

I'm not a computer expert. Can anyone verify?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
I'm not a computer expert. Can anyone verify?
“Ultimately what was agreed to is the private company [Crowdstrike] would share with us what they saw… Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that’s involved, so it’s the best evidence.” -- Comey

Yes the servers were cloud based, but you still have control over your cloud assets like you do the computer in front of you. Just not the hardware. The original servers were wiped and all software reinstalled down to the operating system without the FBI getting their hands on them. Now that doesn't mean anything nefarious per se...but it means you can never recover that information for further examination. I don't know if the DNC bore any legal responsibility to maintain that information. It doesn't appear so.
 
This is a must listen. Trump in his own words.

"Could be other people also, a lot of people out there."

 
LOL. What an asshat. Lap it up, Trumpers.
You've stated that you're in the NAVY....and I've thanked you for your service. Now I have to ask, how can anyone military like Hillary over Trump? Obama/Hillary reduced the military, cut wages, cut equipment, sold our uranium to Putin, and in a short time Trump is giving you the equipment you need.
 
You've stated that you're in the NAVY....and I've thanked you for your service. Now I have to ask, how can anyone military like Hillary over Trump? Obama/Hillary reduced the military, cut wages, cut equipment, sold our uranium to Putin, and in a short time Trump is giving you the equipment you need.
Republicans do nothing for actual soldiers, military contractors love when they're in charge though. It's Democrats that try to help veterans with housing, healthcare, jobs training, wages, etc.
 
I too would prefer a trained seal over the most corrupt woman ever....oop's, that's not right. Her friends like Pelosi and Maxine are just as corrupt. And you can toss in Chelsea.
I don't care for her, but Clinton would have been the most vetted president of all time. She has been investigated a thousand times, and no allegations have ever stuck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: indy35
I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Clarification by Donald Trump: Where he said "will" he meant "won't."
 
It is very obvious that Trump is reading a prepared statement which others have written for him. I do detect some of his input such as "no collusion" but most of it, I believe, was written for him.
 
I would prefer a trained seal, as long as it could balance a ball on its nose.
I too would prefer a trained seal over the most corrupt woman ever....oop's, that's not right. Her friends like Pelosi and Maxine are just as corrupt. And you can toss in Chelsea.

Wtf does Chelsea have to do with anything? This is why you’re nothing more than a garden variety troll, just throwing out random names. It’s also a hoot you try to drag her when Trumps goon kids are as shady as they come.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
Wtf does Chelsea have to do with anything? This is why you’re nothing more than a garden variety troll, just throwing out random names. It’s also a hoot you try to drag her when Trumps goon kids are as shady as they come.
Some mental defective in another thread was foaming at the mouth because he hasn’t been granted access to Clinton’s personal emails. The GOP’s Clinton strategy has been nothing less than a rousing success.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PurdueFan1
Republicans do nothing for actual soldiers, military contractors love when they're in charge though. It's Democrats that try to help veterans with housing, healthcare, jobs training, wages, etc.
uh...no. lol. just stop.
 
Republicans do nothing for actual soldiers, military contractors love when they're in charge though. It's Democrats that try to help veterans with housing, healthcare, jobs training, wages, etc.
Well, they want to privatize the VA which could be a huge boon to vets .... as long as they are officers in the healthcare industry.
 
You've stated that you're in the NAVY....and I've thanked you for your service. Now I have to ask, how can anyone military like Hillary over Trump? Obama/Hillary reduced the military, cut wages, cut equipment, sold our uranium to Putin, and in a short time Trump is giving you the equipment you need.
Whoa there, slick. Where did I ever say I preferred Hillary? I prefer a Commander in a Chief who doesn’t side with adversaries over his own agencies and generally act boorish at every opportunity - someone who respects the office in which they serve.

And “need” is a relative term. Trump hasn’t given me or my command a damn thing, nor is he going to any time soon.

What we “need” is a reduction in military spending, and especially to reform our acquisitions processes so we stop giving handouts to corporations who try to build stuff that is ultimately of little utility or doesn’t meet a practical requirement. You claim to be a conservative - the military wastes more money than any social program there is.
 
Wtf does Chelsea have to do with anything? This is why you’re nothing more than a garden variety troll, just throwing out random names. It’s also a hoot you try to drag her when Trumps goon kids are as shady as they come.
Oy. This is the state of the entrenched left and the entrenched right. So many “adults” would do well to remember sticks and stones...
 
Whoa there, slick. Where did I ever say I preferred Hillary? I prefer a Commander in a Chief who doesn’t side with adversaries over his own agencies and generally act boorish at every opportunity - someone who respects the office in which they serve.

And “need” is a relative term. Trump hasn’t given me or my command a damn thing, nor is he going to any time soon.

What we “need” is a reduction in military spending, and especially to reform our acquisitions processes so we stop giving handouts to corporations who try to build stuff that is ultimately of little utility or doesn’t meet a practical requirement. You claim to be a conservative - the military wastes more money than any social program there is.

Awaiting the rebuttal from all of our resident chest thumping arm-chair patriots. BuilderBob has seen American Sniper 217 times (cried on each occasion). He is far more qualified than you to say what our armed forces need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DamienSandow
Republicans of late have targeted military pensions for reforms, including a 2015 budget measure which reduced COLA for actual retired people actively receiving pensions significantly, to the tune of $150,000 over the course of 20 years for an O5 retiree. They did that in a budget measure - not a reform bill - and pulled the rug out from under actual retirees in one day. MOAA and other organizations pointed this out, and they removed the clause from their budget, but only after MOAA called them on it. Total savings would've been $620 million dollars. There's a system known as RAMICS which was designed, built and tested to be put on helicopters to serve as a gatling gun to shoot surface and near-surface maritime mines. The development and testing cost $640 million dollars, and it never met the requirement and the program was scrapped. Republicans have done nothing to reform acquisitions. John McCain is trying, but fighting an uphill battle in his own party.

Now, the creation of the Blended Retirement System was a necessary step, and I applaud it. The other measure they snuck in the budget was a low blow and a poor attempt to save money.

Sorry to tell you some truth, but Republican (indeed the whole Government) priorities are all screwed up with respect to military spending, IMO. As a future retiree, I'd rather have Democrats in control because they're less likely to screw the people in order to keep funneling money to defense contractors. Republicans are fine when you're serving. They *generally* approve better pay raises and expand the force, but they're not looking out for Veterans basically ever.

Both parties need to target acquisitions before they go poking around personnel benefits.
 
Last edited:
Republicans of late have targeted military pensions for reforms, including a 2015 budget measure which reduced COLA for actual retired people actively receiving pensions significantly, to the tune of $150,000 over the course of 20 years for an O5 retiree. They did that in a budget measure - not a reform bill - and pulled the rug out from under actual retirees in one day. MOAA and other organizations pointed this out, and they removed the clause from their budget, but only after MOAA called them on it. Total savings would've been $620 million dollars. There's a system known as RAMICS which was designed, built and tested to be put on helicopters to serve as a gatling gun to shoot surface and near-surface maritime mines. The development and testing cost $640 million dollars, and it never met the requirement and the program was scrapped. Republicans have done nothing to reform acquisitions. John McCain is trying, but fighting an uphill battle in his own party.

Now, the creation of the Blended Retirement System was a necessary step, and I applaud it. The other measure they snuck in the budget was a low blow and a poor attempt to save money.

Sorry to tell you some truth, but Republican (indeed the whole Government) priorities are all screwed up with respect to military spending, IMO. As a future retiree, I'd rather have Democrats in control because they're less likely to screw the people in order to keep funneling money to defense contractors. Republicans are fine when you're serving. They *generally* approve better pay raises and expand the force, but they're not looking out for Veterans basically ever.

Both parties need to target acquisitions before they go poking around personnel benefits.

I do not disagree on acquisitions part. I am ok with projects failing. That will happen in any industry. Not ok with the process itself.

As far as when I was serving and as a vet, will take my chances with a Republican over a Democrat. Not that either are great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinDegrees2
Republicans of late have targeted military pensions for reforms, including a 2015 budget measure which reduced COLA for actual retired people actively receiving pensions significantly, to the tune of $150,000 over the course of 20 years for an O5 retiree. They did that in a budget measure - not a reform bill - and pulled the rug out from under actual retirees in one day. MOAA and other organizations pointed this out, and they removed the clause from their budget, but only after MOAA called them on it. Total savings would've been $620 million dollars. There's a system known as RAMICS which was designed, built and tested to be put on helicopters to serve as a gatling gun to shoot surface and near-surface maritime mines. The development and testing cost $640 million dollars, and it never met the requirement and the program was scrapped. Republicans have done nothing to reform acquisitions. John McCain is trying, but fighting an uphill battle in his own party.

Now, the creation of the Blended Retirement System was a necessary step, and I applaud it. The other measure they snuck in the budget was a low blow and a poor attempt to save money.

Sorry to tell you some truth, but Republican (indeed the whole Government) priorities are all screwed up with respect to military spending, IMO. As a future retiree, I'd rather have Democrats in control because they're less likely to screw the people in order to keep funneling money to defense contractors. Republicans are fine when you're serving. They *generally* approve better pay raises and expand the force, but they're not looking out for Veterans basically ever.

Both parties need to target acquisitions before they go poking around personnel benefits.
Lucky to have COLA at all as Indiana teachers get zip COLA increases. Times are changing and its not good.
 
Lucky to have COLA at all as Indiana teachers get zip COLA increases. Times are changing and its not good.
Lucky? How many deployments have the teachers in Indiana been on? Luck has not a god damned thing to do with it. It was part of the deal when those people served at least 20 and retired, and a Republican Congress tried to sneak it out from under them to save money.

If they want to reform the COLA out, they can. Taking it from people who are already retired by a single pen stroke hidden in a budget act is about as low as it gets, and I won’t ever defend Republicans as friendly to Vets after that. They don’t deserve it.
 
I agree with you. Lucky was the wrong word and pensions should not be messed with when a person signs up for employment.
 
Republicans of late have targeted military pensions for reforms, including a 2015 budget measure which reduced COLA for actual retired people actively receiving pensions significantly, to the tune of $150,000 over the course of 20 years for an O5 retiree. They did that in a budget measure - not a reform bill - and pulled the rug out from under actual retirees in one day. MOAA and other organizations pointed this out, and they removed the clause from their budget, but only after MOAA called them on it. Total savings would've been $620 million dollars. There's a system known as RAMICS which was designed, built and tested to be put on helicopters to serve as a gatling gun to shoot surface and near-surface maritime mines. The development and testing cost $640 million dollars, and it never met the requirement and the program was scrapped. Republicans have done nothing to reform acquisitions. John McCain is trying, but fighting an uphill battle in his own party.

Now, the creation of the Blended Retirement System was a necessary step, and I applaud it. The other measure they snuck in the budget was a low blow and a poor attempt to save money.

Sorry to tell you some truth, but Republican (indeed the whole Government) priorities are all screwed up with respect to military spending, IMO. As a future retiree, I'd rather have Democrats in control because they're less likely to screw the people in order to keep funneling money to defense contractors. Republicans are fine when you're serving. They *generally* approve better pay raises and expand the force, but they're not looking out for Veterans basically ever.

Both parties need to target acquisitions before they go poking around personnel benefits.
The use it or lose it mentality is a killer. It's what keeps bad programs alive when the money should just be redistributed. Defense contractors are kind of indirectly a "veterans" program. I have yet to see a green suiter retire and go into something like...banking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gr8indoorsman
Republicans do nothing for actual soldiers, military contractors love when they're in charge though. It's Democrats that try to help veterans with housing, healthcare, jobs training, wages, etc.
That is the most bizarre post ever. Our local VA is one of the worst in the US, and Trump is aware. I look for it to become so much better under the current regime.
 
Wtf does Chelsea have to do with anything? This is why you’re nothing more than a garden variety troll, just throwing out random names. It’s also a hoot you try to drag her when Trumps goon kids are as shady as they come.
Give it up and realize how much Chelsea was being paid out of the Clinton slushfund...oop's..."trust". Her wedding was also paid out of that same "trust"...oop's...Slush fund. The whole damn family is as corrupt as it gets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SKYDOG
No....the allegations are real. Obama protected her as did Jarrett with the meeting with Slick on the tarmac.
LOL. Yes, the allegations were real. It's just that the allegations had no factual bases. It's not that the Clintons were never investigated by republican majorities; it's just that those republican majorities couldn't prove wrongdoing.
 
LOL. Yes, the allegations were real. It's just that the allegations had no factual bases. It's not that the Clintons were never investigated by republican majorities; it's just that those republican majorities couldn't prove wrongdoing.
Okay...I know you're never going to believe it...but if you had done what the Clinton's have done, your ass would be picking up soap at Terre Haute. I guess you don't find it strange that Hillary the C sold our uranium to the Russians and a couple of months later they paid Slick $500k for a 20 minute speech.
 
LOL. Yes, the allegations were real. It's just that the allegations had no factual bases. It's not that the Clintons were never investigated by republican majorities; it's just that those republican majorities couldn't prove wrongdoing.
Okay...I know you're never going to believe it...but if you had done what the Clinton's have done, your ass would be picking up soap at Terre Haute. I guess you don't find it strange that Hillary the C sold our uranium to the Russians and a couple of months later they paid Slick $500k for a 20 minute speech.

You’re batshit. That’s about the nicest thing I can think of to say about you. Get help.
 
Okay...I know you're never going to believe it...but if you had done what the Clinton's have done, your ass would be picking up soap at Terre Haute. I guess you don't find it strange that Hillary the C sold our uranium to the Russians and a couple of months later they paid Slick $500k for a 20 minute speech.
The republican majority hasn't investigated those allegations. I wonder why.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT