Deep State "sleeper cells" awake. Threatening America. Treason runs amuck.

[IPA4Me]

There are likely other idioms buried in there.

[sys]

I am pretty sure it is someone who you wouldn't be able to pick out of a lineup and you have never heard their name before.  It for sure is not Mike Pence.  Come on.

the times will look pretty bad if that's the case.  anon rando doesn't like the president is not news.

[gatoveintisiet]

Journalism at its finest

[DaBigTrain]

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1183037520503885824

[bucket]

https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1536377641980264448

 

[sonofdaxjones]

Someone missed the recent report from our own cyber security agency. 

Elections are always secure:  When we win (#blueanon)

When we don’t win, it was the Russians - or racism (#blueanon)

Stand down! (Susan Rice and Barrack Obama to our then cyber security director)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[catastrophe]

Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.

[sonofdaxjones]

Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.

Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.

We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.

Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.

[catastrophe]

Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.

Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.

We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.

Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.

I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.

If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.

[sonofdaxjones]

Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.

Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.

We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.

Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.

I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.

If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.

How to say you haven't been paying attention without actually saying it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html

[bucket]

We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.

Mike Lindell's cyber security people?

Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.

What is this in reference to? Rich coming from the party where Trump is trying to put people who wanted to overthrow the 2020 election in charge of the next election.

[catastrophe]

Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.

Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.

We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.

Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.

I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.

If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.

How to say you haven't been paying attention without actually saying it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html

I think it’s pretty clear Hillary is talking about his qualification to be president, not that the votes were counted incorrectly.

You are saying Democrats impugned the security of the 2016 election. That’s the claim I’m asking you to back up. But I do (sincerely) appreciate the mostly topical response.

[sonofdaxjones]

We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.

Mike Lindell's cyber security people?

Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.

Bucket, why are you always so far behind?

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-technology-georgia-election-2020-a746b253f3404dbf794349df498c9542

But rest assured, they found no evidence of hacking . . . the thing is, good hackers don't leave behind any evidence. 

Relative to 2022 and 2024, the continued propagation of al lie that people are being denied the right the vote because states have actual rules is one form of de-legitimization.   

[sonofdaxjones]

Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.

Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.

We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.

Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.

I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.

If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.

How to say you haven't been paying attention without actually saying it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html

I think it’s pretty clear Hillary is talking about his qualification to be president, not that the votes were counted incorrectly.

You are saying Democrats impugned the security of the 2016 election. That’s the claim I’m asking you to back up. But I do (sincerely) appreciate the mostly topical response.

You're so full of crap dude.   Hacking was referenced multiple times in that story.

[catastrophe]

Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.

Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.

We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.

Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.

I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.

If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.

How to say you haven't been paying attention without actually saying it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html

I think it’s pretty clear Hillary is talking about his qualification to be president, not that the votes were counted incorrectly.

You are saying Democrats impugned the security of the 2016 election. That’s the claim I’m asking you to back up. But I do (sincerely) appreciate the mostly topical response.

You're so full of crap dude.   Hacking was referenced multiple times in that story.

DNC emails were hacked (everyone knows this). Not voting machines.

[sonofdaxjones]

DNC emails were not hacked, they were removed from the premises by an insider.   There's a reason the "investigation" by the FBI was a joke. 

You didn't even read the article.

There's entire white papers instructing Dems to stop talking about Russian hacking of elections.

[catastrophe]

I don’t know what you’re on about here. The word “hack” appears once in the article. Trump literally appointed a commission to prove the 2016 election was not secure in multiple states, and then he claimed the 2020 election was marred by rampant voter fraud.

Link the white paper and I’ll read it.

[sonofdaxjones]

I don’t know what you’re on about here. The word “hack” appears once in the article. Trump literally appointed a commission to prove the 2016 election was not secure in multiple states, and then he claimed the 2020 election was marred by rampant voter fraud.

Link the white paper and I’ll read it.

That changes nothing about the fact that from the top on down, your party continually tried to de-legitimize the 2016 election and one of the tactics was claiming it was hacked by the Russians.    On top of the ridiculous claims of voter purging and voter suppression.

The Trump commission literally has nothing to do with the continuous claims by Democrats.   Your leaders turned the nuanced into a widespread false narrative that as always was parroted by millions of #blueanon, the fact that you weren't aware of it is not the least bit surprising in any way.

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/735470

[catastrophe]

I don’t know what you’re on about here. The word “hack” appears once in the article. Trump literally appointed a commission to prove the 2016 election was not secure in multiple states, and then he claimed the 2020 election was marred by rampant voter fraud.

Link the white paper and I’ll read it.

That changes nothing about the fact that from the top on down, your party continually tried to de-legitimize the 2016 election and one of the tactics was claiming it was hacked by the Russians.    On top of the ridiculous claims of voter purging and voter suppression.

The Trump commission literally has nothing to do with the continuous claims by Democrats.   Your leaders turned the nuanced into a widespread false narrative that as always was parroted by millions of #blueanon, the fact that you weren't aware of it is not the least bit surprising in any way.

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/735470

Dax, that article is literally about the fact that people misunderstood the term “hacking” to refer to hacking of voting machines, which no one seriously argued was the case.

Despite consensus that Russia’s interference in the 2016 election did not extend to actual hacking of voting technology, Russian efforts to intervene on behalf of the Trump campaign have been defined as “hacking” by elements of the liberal media. This definition is broadly accepted in liberal circles, and there is now a widespread misperception that Russia tampered with voting technology to alter the outcome of the election. In this essay, we trace the emergence of this definition of Russia’s role in the 2016 election and explain the factors that led to its acceptance, arguing that the debate over Russia’s “hacking” illustrates that definitional arguments may operate differently than scholars have previously conceived. Traditional studies of definition emphasize the role of political leaders in crafting salient definitions, adopting a top-down approach. We argue that definitions also emerge from the bottom up, moving from media sources toward institutional centers of power. Our findings both illustrate the dangers of efforts to define Russia’s influence campaign as “hacking” and extend previous scholarship on definitional argument.

Only one party has actually argued that US elections are not secure.

[sonofdaxjones]

I'm going to be really nice, and politely remind you again what i just said:

Your leaders turned the nuanced into a widespread false narrative that as always was parroted by millions of #blueanon, the fact that you weren't aware of it is not the least bit surprising in any way.

That's exactly what the paper is trying to stop.   Your movement parroted hacking into election hacking, because rank and file #blueanon is not capable of understanding nuanced things.     

[LickNeckey]

I don't think that I have ever heard anyone make the case that Russia hacked or interfered with the voting process.

The Russian interference in our elections that I have heard discussed always centered on influence campaigns.

[sonofdaxjones]

I don't think that I have ever heard anyone make the case that Russia hacked or interfered with the voting process.

The Russian interference in our elections that I have heard discussed always centered on influence campaigns.

Anecdotally Lick has said he's never heard that . . . fantastic for you, Lick.

Meanwhile JHU feels the need to write an entire paper to tell #blueanon to stop doing it.   

[LickNeckey]

Never thought I would see you all worked up over a paper written by a couple KU grad students

[sonofdaxjones]

Never thought I would see you all worked up over a paper written by a couple KU grad students

The expected tapout

[Dugout DickStone]

Someone thinks the russians hacked into the electronic voting hardware?  no crap?  who?