United We Stand - uwsboard.com

USN_Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote: Yeh, that's what I said. And I've said it previously. All those things you are describing are them having an influence on our election.

You've reduced you definition "influence" to something meaningless.

Their objective was to create interference, discord, unrest in the US in order to preoccupy the administration with domestic issues, allowing Russia to pursue its foreign policy unfettered. They succeeded. Congratulations.

He said he didn't meddle. He said he didn't meddle. I asked him again. You can only ask so many times.

Every time he sees me, he says, ‘I didn't do that’, and I believe, I really believe, that when he tells me that, he means it.

133743Hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:This is the sort of thing I was talking about during the election. Somebody get hoof an icepack.

As I've been saying for over a year now, the Russians didn't try and influence the election for one candidate or another. They tried to disrupt the democratic process, give us a black eye, create turmoil so that we citizens felt that the process was not fair or was tampered with. It was one big disinformation campaign to cause civil unrest, confusion and dissention among all of us. And it has worked extremely well.

As a side note, I also believe that Kremlin agents were the bulk of the Russian "sources" for Steele's dossier. Again, intentional disinformation to create hate and discontent and turmoil among US citizens of both political parties.

HokieFanDC wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote:
In your head, sure.

The Russians definitely interfered with the election. The goal of the interference is to influence. That's what social media does.

Wrong. The goal of their interference was to create turmoil and discontent among our citizenry, to give our democracy and electorial process a black eye. It was to create social unrest in the US, and it has worked masterfully.

Yeh, that's what I said. And I've said it previously. All those things you are describing are them having an influence on our election.

No, they didn't influence the election, i. e. their actions did not impact the election. They influenced peoples perception of the election and the overall electoral process. So they influenced people, not the election. There is a big difference.

Good lord. What's the matter with you people. Is your purpose to downplay the magnitude of creating discontent and turmoil, giving our electoral process a black eye? That's a big deal. It's not a nothing burger.
How about stop arguing over the context of the influence, and just say, hey it's a big deal, and we need to stop if from happening again. I don't necessarily think you're saying that, but there are plenty of people that are.

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:This is the sort of thing I was talking about during the election. Somebody get hoof an icepack.

As I've been saying for over a year now, the Russians didn't try and influence the election for one candidate or another. They tried to disrupt the democratic process, give us a black eye, create turmoil so that we citizens felt that the process was not fair or was tampered with. It was one big disinformation campaign to cause civil unrest, confusion and dissention among all of us. And it has worked extremely well.

As a side note, I also believe that Kremlin agents were the bulk of the Russian "sources" for Steele's dossier. Again, intentional disinformation to create hate and discontent and turmoil among US citizens of both political parties.

LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

133743Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote:
In your head, sure.

The Russians definitely interfered with the election. The goal of the interference is to influence. That's what social media does.

Wrong. The goal of their interference was to create turmoil and discontent among our citizenry, to give our democracy and electorial process a black eye. It was to create social unrest in the US, and it has worked masterfully.

Yeh, that's what I said. And I've said it previously. All those things you are describing are them having an influence on our election.

No, they didn't influence the election, i. e. their actions did not impact the election. They influenced peoples perception of the election and the overall electoral process. So they influenced people, not the election. There is a big difference.

Good lord. What's the matter with you people. Is your purpose to downplay the magnitude of creating discontent and turmoil, giving our electoral process a black eye? That's a big deal. It's not a nothing burger.
How about stop arguing over the context of the influence, and just say, hey it's a big deal, and we need to stop if from happening again. I don't necessarily think you're saying that, but there are plenty of people that are.

I think it's a huge deal , more so than if they had just tried influence the election by swinging it one way or another. They actually tried to undermine our government by sowing seeds of doubt across the board. This influencing of the populace is much more significant than working an election. So the word "influence" and who or what was influenced DOES have meaning as it goes to the severity.

HokieFanDC wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote: Yeh, that's what I said. And I've said it previously. All those things you are describing are them having an influence on our election.

You've reduced you definition "influence" to something meaningless.

Their objective was to create interference, discord, unrest in the US in order to preoccupy the administration with domestic issues, allowing Russia to pursue its foreign policy unfettered. They succeeded. Congratulations.

You think that’s a nothing burger. I don’t. Move on.

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:This is the sort of thing I was talking about during the election. Somebody get hoof an icepack.

As I've been saying for over a year now, the Russians didn't try and influence the election for one candidate or another. They tried to disrupt the democratic process, give us a black eye, create turmoil so that we citizens felt that the process was not fair or was tampered with. It was one big disinformation campaign to cause civil unrest, confusion and dissention among all of us. And it has worked extremely well.

As a side note, I also believe that Kremlin agents were the bulk of the Russian "sources" for Steele's dossier. Again, intentional disinformation to create hate and discontent and turmoil among US citizens of both political parties.

LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

USN_Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote: Yeh, that's what I said. And I've said it previously. All those things you are describing are them having an influence on our election.

You've reduced you definition "influence" to something meaningless.

Their objective was to create interference, discord, unrest in the US in order to preoccupy the administration with domestic issues, allowing Russia to pursue its foreign policy unfettered. They succeeded. Congratulations.

You think that’s a nothing burger. I don’t. Move on.

No, it's a nothingburger from the trump-russia collusion/election stolen from Hillary perspective.

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:This is the sort of thing I was talking about during the election. Somebody get hoof an icepack.

As I've been saying for over a year now, the Russians didn't try and influence the election for one candidate or another. They tried to disrupt the democratic process, give us a black eye, create turmoil so that we citizens felt that the process was not fair or was tampered with. It was one big disinformation campaign to cause civil unrest, confusion and dissention among all of us. And it has worked extremely well.

As a side note, I also believe that Kremlin agents were the bulk of the Russian "sources" for Steele's dossier. Again, intentional disinformation to create hate and discontent and turmoil among US citizens of both political parties.

LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

The Russians wanted trump to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:This is the sort of thing I was talking about during the election. Somebody get hoof an icepack.

As I've been saying for over a year now, the Russians didn't try and influence the election for one candidate or another. They tried to disrupt the democratic process, give us a black eye, create turmoil so that we citizens felt that the process was not fair or was tampered with. It was one big disinformation campaign to cause civil unrest, confusion and dissention among all of us. And it has worked extremely well.

As a side note, I also believe that Kremlin agents were the bulk of the Russian "sources" for Steele's dossier. Again, intentional disinformation to create hate and discontent and turmoil among US citizens of both political parties.

LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

The Russians wanted trump to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, the Russians wanted to undermine the whole process. It wasn't about Hillary or Trump, it was about damaging Americas confidence in its institutions.

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote: As I've been saying for over a year now, the Russians didn't try and influence the election for one candidate or another. They tried to disrupt the democratic process, give us a black eye, create turmoil so that we citizens felt that the process was not fair or was tampered with. It was one big disinformation campaign to cause civil unrest, confusion and dissention among all of us. And it has worked extremely well.

As a side note, I also believe that Kremlin agents were the bulk of the Russian "sources" for Steele's dossier. Again, intentional disinformation to create hate and discontent and turmoil among US citizens of both political parties.

LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

The Russians wanted trump to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, the Russians wanted to undermine the whole process. It wasn't about Hillary or Trump, it was about damaging Americas confidence in its institutions.

Whatever makes yourself feel better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Russians wanted trump to win.

HooFighter wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:This is the sort of thing I was talking about during the election. Somebody get hoof an icepack.

As I've been saying for over a year now, the Russians didn't try and influence the election for one candidate or another. They tried to disrupt the democratic process, give us a black eye, create turmoil so that we citizens felt that the process was not fair or was tampered with. It was one big disinformation campaign to cause civil unrest, confusion and dissention among all of us. And it has worked extremely well.

As a side note, I also believe that Kremlin agents were the bulk of the Russian "sources" for Steele's dossier. Again, intentional disinformation to create hate and discontent and turmoil among US citizens of both political parties.

LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

The Russians wanted trump to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

HokieJoe wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:This is the sort of thing I was talking about during the election. Somebody get hoof an icepack.

As I've been saying for over a year now, the Russians didn't try and influence the election for one candidate or another. They tried to disrupt the democratic process, give us a black eye, create turmoil so that we citizens felt that the process was not fair or was tampered with. It was one big disinformation campaign to cause civil unrest, confusion and dissention among all of us. And it has worked extremely well.

As a side note, I also believe that Kremlin agents were the bulk of the Russian "sources" for Steele's dossier. Again, intentional disinformation to create hate and discontent and turmoil among US citizens of both political parties.

LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

The Russians wanted trump to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm curious to hear what evidence you can cite to support that claim.

HokieJoe wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

USN_Hokie wrote:This is the sort of thing I was talking about during the election. Somebody get hoof an icepack.

As I've been saying for over a year now, the Russians didn't try and influence the election for one candidate or another. They tried to disrupt the democratic process, give us a black eye, create turmoil so that we citizens felt that the process was not fair or was tampered with. It was one big disinformation campaign to cause civil unrest, confusion and dissention among all of us. And it has worked extremely well.

As a side note, I also believe that Kremlin agents were the bulk of the Russian "sources" for Steele's dossier. Again, intentional disinformation to create hate and discontent and turmoil among US citizens of both political parties.

LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

The Russians wanted trump to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm curious to hear what evidence you can cite to support that claim.

ip_law-hokie wrote:

HokieJoe wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:
LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

The Russians wanted trump to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm curious to hear what evidence you can cite to support that claim.

I made it up. You guys are right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

HokieFanDC wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

HokieJoe wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:
LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

The Russians wanted trump to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm curious to hear what evidence you can cite to support that claim.

I made it up. You guys are right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This guy really gets it.
Mueller's indictment shows Russian intent to elect Trump.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/17/opinions ... index.html

























Just kidding. That's a really stupid conclusion.

133743Hokie wrote:

HokieFanDC wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

HokieJoe wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

133743Hokie wrote: What do you find so humorous? Reality sucks for you, doesn't it.

The Russians wanted trump to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm curious to hear what evidence you can cite to support that claim.

I made it up. You guys are right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This guy really gets it.
Mueller's indictment shows Russian intent to elect Trump.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/17/opinions ... index.html

























Just kidding. That's a really stupid conclusion.

Yep, it was a stupid conclusion. And the author of that column is a partisan hack wishing, hoping, dare i say praying, for there to be something, anything, to come from the Mueller snipe hunt. Unfortunately for him the latest indictment isn't that golden bullet. It's actually just the opposite, he just can't make himself admit it.