Author Topic: [NEWS] CIA concludes with "high confidence" that Russia aided Annoying Orange in election  (Read 11895 times)

actually the way you said it makes it sound even more ridiculous
you're actually saying you'd rather trust 4chan than the CIA...?
I'd rather trust the people who are willing to give out evidence and risk being proven wrong then the people who refuse to give us evidence to backup their claims. The names behind it are irrelivant.

I don't think you can just believe authority on account of authority. I'd wait and see what evidence if any they can produce about Russia being involved. As of right now, it's just finger pointing.


willing to give out evidence

You mean classified information? You idiots do realize there's more to it than the CIA not releasing their information for the sake of specifically pissing you off, right?

Counterpoint before you respond with bullstuff considering who you are, what reason could the CIA possibly hold onto information about a foreign country we've been at odds with possibly aiding and abetting in the rigging of our biggest political election? Not only would it be straight up career Self Delete to be involved with releasing falsified or inaccurate information of that caliber, there's just no good reason to jump the gun so quickly and release it.

The information is being collected and will make it's way to the people calling for the investigation, to which they will review and act on it as it's their job to do so. Once that happens, we will see for sure what Russia's involvement in the election's turnout is. Until then, you people are just going to make complete and utter fools of yourself stuffting on each other over complete conjecture.

I don't think you can just believe authority on account of authority. I'd wait and see what evidence if any they can produce about Russia being involved. As of right now, it's just finger pointing.
I'm a little hesitant to agree with this statement because it seems like the stock hypocrisy i see a lot of.

There are some people here who, in the case of an unarmed black teen being shot or some stuff, they say "the cop had the right to do it / he should've complied / it was justified" which is essentially saying that authority has the power to take lives without any punishment. these same people go on to bash others for believing in the government and say things along the lines of "the government has too much power! / its corrupt!"

Honestly, the government and authority are more credible than websites like wikileaks or opinion news sites like fox. Despite the fact that wikileaks claims all of their things are actual leaked documents, they aren't a credible source of information. Right now we need evidence and studies that prove it, not fingerpointing and counter-fingerpointing. If the CIA suggests that something is fact but doesn't confirm it, then it's not fact, but speculation. Right now this is just speculation, but is more than just fingerpointing.

Clinton sort of confirmed Wikileaks during one of the debates when the moderator read off part of one email and she explained the context.

Clinton sort of confirmed Wikileaks during one of the debates when the moderator read off part of one email and she explained the context.
Wikileaks isn't one person finding and leaking information; its a collective of moderated sources that come from different leaks and such. The credibility behind each leak is questionable but worth seeking information on. Also worth noting that people who leak information are very biased and will usually search for information that pertains to a person that they are biased against the most. If wikileaks were on Clinton's side we'd probably have a slew of Annoying Orange dirt and almost no Clinton dirt being dug up. It just happens that the people that are leaking this information are against Clinton.

You mean classified information? You idiots do realize there's more to it than the CIA not releasing their information for the sake of specifically pissing you off, right?
Classified information they're allowed to tell us they have?

That doesn't make anysense. And even if it did, its not important, if they have information they cant release, they shouldn't have had any reason to have said anything, but because they have, there is an obvious intention behind it. And hiding behind 'oh its classified' doesn't cut it. Either you're allowed to tell us or you are not, there is no inbetween.

Classified information they're allowed to tell us they have?

That's the gist of it, pretty much. It's not within their best interest to release the information so they haven't. That's kind of how the CIA works.


Either you're allowed to tell us or you are not, there is no inbetween.

You really don't get to draw arbitrary lines in the sand here, considering your history of political insight (or lack thereof). Sorry you got blue balled by the CIA, but until they actually release anything, any further arguing is going to make us both look stupid.

That's the gist of it, pretty much. It's not within their best interest to release the information so they haven't. That's kind of how the CIA works.


You really don't get to draw arbitrary lines in the sand here, considering your history of political insight (or lack thereof). Sorry you got blue balled by the CIA, but until they actually release anything, any further arguing is going to make us both look stupid.
My point was there has to be some motive to making this claim without the proper authorization to give us evidence to back it up.

There is no way they did this for stuffs and giggles.

NEWS: man votes for cause he believes in; millions shocked

Better dead then red


So because the CIA said it, it must be true, no matter how wild, and if 4chan releases evidence to support their wild theory they are 'crazy conspiracy theorists.' Wow not biased at all. I may not entirely believe either of these claims, but at least one of them released some evidence.
lmao what are you serious

I'd rather trust the people who are willing to give out evidence and risk being proven wrong then the people who refuse to give us evidence to backup their claims. The names behind it are irrelivant.
I don't know about you but i'd rather trust a collective of adults appointed to protect and investigate issues with the country than a group of heavily-biased teens and college students on an online forum posting from god-knows-where