Barr asks Foreign Gov's about CIA

[_moksha]

So all of this Trumpian effort is for two purposes:

1. To lift sanctions on Russia.

2. To get Trump reelected.

[_Res Ipsa]

So all of this Trumpian effort is for two purposes:

1. To lift sanctions on Russia.

2. To get Trump reelected.

Not necessarily in that order.

[_Dr Exiled]

CrowdStrike had the server, no? So, what's the problem, Exile?

- Doc

Wasn't crowdstrike paid by the DNC? Also, keeping the server out of the hands of the FBI keeps the information away from FOIA requests. So, we can't test whether or not Crowdstrike got it right or not. These guys say they didn't: https://consortiumnews.com/2019/03/13/vips-muellers-forensics-free-findings/

How about we find out if the VIPS guys have something or not? We shouldn't have to trust these partisans. Do you want to find out the truth or do you want to keep living in a world where progressively everything is hidden behind a wall of "national security?"

Are you satisfied that Trump only gave us a memorandum of the Ukrainian call? What if he proposes to have republicanstrike make a mirror of the server that contains the actual recording of the conversation? I'm sure he will vouch for the trustworthiness of the good folks at republicanstrike to do the job properly and show no quid pro quo happened.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

What in the world are you trying to say about that linked 'memo' from 'VIPS'?

- Doc

[_moksha]

So all of this Trumpian effort is for two purposes:

1. To lift sanctions on Russia.

2. To get Trump reelected.

Not necessarily in that order.

Good point. Do we put Putin before the horse or the other way around?

[_Res Ipsa]

Good point. Do we put Putin before the horse or the other way around?

Putin goes under the horse. A shirt is optional for the horse.

[_Some Schmo]

So all of this Trumpian effort is for two purposes:

1. To lift sanctions on Russia.

2. To get Trump reelected.

Not necessarily in that order.

I don't know... I think the penguin got this right.

[_Dr Exiled]

What in the world are you trying to say about that linked 'memo' from 'VIPS'?

- Doc

VIPS claims crowdstrike got it wrong, that the emails came from a leak and not a hack. It would be nice to verify, independently, who is correct here. We are three years out from the wrong doing, so I don't think "national security" would be harmed if the public could verify whether or not there was a hack or a leak. It might force us to question our most holy intelligence professionals or perhaps they will be vindicated. Even so, I would like to see what really happened. The people at VIPS seem to make a good case that internet speeds at the time cannot justify a hack but maybe they are wrong. I don't know. However, I don't want to have to trust crowdstrike or republicanstrike or whomever happens to be in control of the investigation. Let's see what happened. Let's independently verify what our leaders try to feed us.

[_Res Ipsa]

What in the world are you trying to say about that linked 'memo' from 'VIPS'?

- Doc

VIPS claims crowdstrike got it wrong, that the emails came from a leak and not a hack. It would be nice to verify, independently, who is correct here. We are three years out from the wrong doing, so I don't think "national security" would be harmed if the public could verify whether or not there was a hack or a leak. It might force us to question our most holy intelligence professionals or perhaps they will be vindicated. Even so, I would like to see what really happened. The people at VIPS seem to make a good case that internet speeds at the time cannot justify a hack but maybe they are wrong. I don't know. However, I don't want to have to trust crowdstrike or republicanstrike or whomever happens to be in control of the investigation. Let's see what happened. Let's independently verify what our leaders try to feed us.

You won’t trust the independent verification you already have. The FBI took the server images and did their own independent analysis. And they concluded it was The Russians. But that doesn’t matter to you because you will reject any evidence that doesn’t show what you wish to be true.

[Guest]

What in the world are you trying to say about that linked 'memo' from 'VIPS'?

- Doc

VIPS claims crowdstrike got it wrong, that the emails came from a leak and not a hack. It would be nice to verify, independently, who is correct here. We are three years out from the wrong doing, so I don't think "national security" would be harmed if the public could verify whether or not there was a hack or a leak. It might force us to question our most holy intelligence professionals or perhaps they will be vindicated. Even so, I would like to see what really happened. The people at VIPS seem to make a good case that internet speeds at the time cannot justify a hack but maybe they are wrong. I don't know. However, I don't want to have to trust crowdstrike or republicanstrike or whomever happens to be in control of the investigation. Let's see what happened. Let's independently verify what our leaders try to feed us.

You and I have been through the VIPS memo before, especially as it relates to internet speed. I'll leave it up for others to decide but I don't think their case can be described as "good".

One of the strangest parts when conversing on this topic with you is how easily you seem to see a conspiracy in the way that the Clinton investigation was handled but seem totally blind to the vast conspiracy from the Trump administration that is right in front of your face.