• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Theres apparently far more material

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,183
3,823
136
Really? Let's say the report is revealed to be 100% fake, and our intelligence agencies (which Trump has a vendetta against) admit to taking it seriously, and CNN (which Trump has a vendetta against) admits to jumping the gun. You don't think that validates everything Trump has been accusing others of over the last several months?
You don't seem to have the first clue about how intelligence discovery works. There was ENOUGH there for them to "take it seriously" enough to look into, that's all. North of 90% of incoming intel deemed substantial enough to look into shakes out as not particularly valid in the end.That's what makes intel discovery so damn difficult, sifting the wheat from the chafe. This little "tidbit" is in that 90%.

This only validates Trump's whole cloth lies if you or the many low info idiots out there want to believe it will.

So my direct question to you is, "Do you want to believe it will?"
 

NesuD

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,999
106
106
Well, Trump is a close friend of ol' Epstein. Do people genuinely think Trump isn't a rapacious degenerate?
Even if he is I'm just trying to figure out what it has to do with his presidency. Country pretty much decided that stuff didn't matter 3 administrations ago.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,661
4,483
126
What if the hookers were underaged? Then it's a crime, under the US law, even if it happened in Russia.
 

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
21,009
20,206
136

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
14,400
4,663
136
http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/donald-trump-talks-vladimir-putin-relationship-in-2013-interview-w460547

"I do a have relationship," the real estate mogul, now 70, replied. "And I can tell you that he's very interested in what we're doing here today. He's probably very interested in what you and I am saying today, and I'm sure he's going to be seeing it in some form. But I do have a relationship with him."

so does he or doesn't he....
2013 is within the alleged 5 year "grooming" period too.
 
Feb 16, 2005
13,734
4,684
136
Have you notice the vast majority of this forum ignores your posts. Much of the left in here feel you're a plant to make their side look bad.
wow, thanks for speaking for us silent folk on the left. good thing there are so many here making the right look like complete morons
 

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,116
318
126
You don't seem to have the first clue about how intelligence discovery works. There was ENOUGH there for them to "take it seriously" enough to look into, that's all. North of 90% of incoming intel deemed substantial enough to look into shakes out as not particularly valid in the end.That's what makes intel discovery so damn difficult, sifting the wheat from the chafe. This little "tidbit" is in that 90%.

This only validates Trump's whole cloth lies if you or the many low info idiots out there want to believe it will.

So my direct question to you is, "Do you want to believe it will?"
How many Americans do you think know in great detail how intelligence agencies work? The point is perception.

Since this document has been floated around to many both in politics and news over the last few months, and since there are still a lot of contradictory stories about it coming out, I don't know how this bodes for intelligence. Is it normal for the 90% to be presented to the President/President elect, assuming that has happened at all (story varies there right now)? For terrorist/national security threats I could imagine a lot would be just because of the risk of overlooking an unverified-but-true report, so if that's procedure then it would be hard to fault them. Does the ex-MI6 guy have a rock solid history or has he gone a bit crazy in recent years? That could change things. Did intelligence show the documents to people like Harry Reid or John McCain, leading to the reports in the news just prior to election day? That would make them look as bad as the reporting on Wiener's emails.

Whichever way it pans out, I'm excited. If the results take people down, whether Trump or the media or the CIA or all three, I'll be happy.
 

Meghan54

Diamond Member
Oct 18, 2009
9,499
2,313
136
Remind me which 2016 presidential candidate sold 20% of U.S. Uranium production to a Russian company.
As was mentioned above....none. BTW...you do understand no matter who owns that mine, the uranium that comes out of it cannot leave U.S. shores. It's law, at least until Jan. 20th.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pens1566

ASK THE COMMUNITY