patrick.net

From your own sources: "The CIA’s conclusion...was an analysis of what many believe is overwhelming circumstantial evidence — evidence that others feel does not support firm judgments." Yup. Confirmation bias and individual conjecture.

Some suspect, assume, theorize. THEY. DONT. KNOW.

"Read your quote again. It doesnt say what you think it says. You have made this mistake at least 3 times now."

It says exactly what I think it says. Trump agrees with the intelligence community assessment. The intelligence community thinks Russia hacked the DNC and released the emails to hurt Clinton's chances in the election.

http://fortune.com/2017/01/08/trump-intelligence-russia-hack/

Specifically what part of that statement do you disagree with?

"There is no community assessment."

Of course there is. It has been reported many, many, many times that all intelligence agencies are in agreement. I could provide another 50 sources showing this, but I don't think it matters how many sources I provide--you seem to be immune to facts.

My quote was from your first source. "The evidence does not support firm judgments." Undeniable proof of difference of opinions in the intelligence community.

You either cant or wont differentiate between facts and theories. You are perpetuating fake news.

Russia hacked dnc is the accepted fact. Everything else is a theory. Everything else is fake news based on conjecture.

"Russia hacked dnc is the accepted fact. Everything else is a theory. Everything else is fake news based on conjecture."

Wrong. The same people who have examined the evidence and accepted that Russia hacked the DNC is a fact also believe that the motive behind the attack was to harm Clinton in the election. That is a fact. There is human intelligence that verifies it.

You incorrectly represent this conjecture as a community assessment.

You further incorrectly put trust in intelligence community assessments. Weapons of mass destruction were an accepted intelligence community assessment.

Wikileaks is the only source w a perfect record. Disagreeing w their statement that this was not a Russian source is just your delusion feeding itself.

There's more evidence to suggest Seth Rich than Russia as the source. To suggest you know either to be true is pure fake news.

OK so now we're back to you not even believing Russia is the source? Like I said--it's no point discussing this with you as you are not interested in the truth.

Graybox says

Neither are no more than a trade and don't have odds of moving more than a few %.

SubOink says

Does that mean you expect a pullback on the market soon?

We may have a bit of a pullback in this general area 2350-2375 however It's nothing I'm counting on and doubt if
it will be much and will be looking for confirmation where price is now for either direction. 2425 looks good before
any pullback with strength. If price does walk back I'll be watching 2325 as strong support and have doubt investors will
see much if any pricing below 2300..
.

Russia is the source is a matter of ODDS not BELIEF. Attributing odds to a belief, either for or against, is proof that your logic is wrong. Not just flawed, wrong.

No one knows Russia is the source. Some suspect Russia. Others suspect Seth Rich.

They don't know, neither do you.

At least think about it logically and leave beliefs out of it.

"No one knows Russia is the source. Some suspect Russia. Others suspect Seth Rich."

That's ridiculous. Nobody who has seen all the evidence suspects Seth Rich. The only people who even mention Seth Rich are nutjobs reading Breitbart.

What I DO know is that EVERYONE, including Trump, who has seen all the evidence believes it was Russia. That is the logic.

joeyjojojunior says

What I DO know is that EVERYONE, including Trump, who has seen all the evidence believes it was Russia.

Why do you keep lying? The only possible answer is you do not understand the difference between facts and conjecture. Russia is the source = conjecture. You also willfully put words into "everyone"'s mouths w amazing ease. Pure delusion. Trump, his team, the intelligence communities... none of them have said what you represent them as having said.

"Everyone, including TRUMP," does NOT think Russia was the source. FACT. Wikileaks specifically said Russia was not the source. FACT. So far they have not lied. FACT.

They agree that some specifically identified DNC hacks can be traced to a russian source(s). Everything else is fake news. Trump also mentioned other hacks traced to other sources. The emails revealed in the wikileaks show team hillary discussing known hacks coming from Russia, Iran, and China.

As Trump put in your posted video. This was normal.

http://nypost.com/2017/01/11/trump-acknowledges-russia-was-behind-dnc-hack/?ref=patrick.net

This is the video you are referring to wherein Trump supposedly acknowledges Russia hacking. I suggest you watch your own source. Then go back and rewatch the Priebus response.

Then go back and rethink your logic -Or- keep sticking your head in the sand. Up to you

rando says

Actually with a silver/gold ratio of 69/1, Silver is the better bet right now.

What has the historical ratio been?

Regardless of historical ratio, silver will be going up faster than gold in the next move. The ratio has been between 67 and 73 forever(last two years approx). It will go down to somewhere in the area of 30/1, and that's when you buy gold, or swap for it. I've been doing this for years, and have significantly increased my investment by trading/buying at the top and bottom of the ratio.

CL says

most of the public debt is held by American citizens and corporations, right?

Do you mean debtors, or purchasers? If purchasers, then it's banks... Actually it doesn't matter, it's banks either way. And what do banks deal in..?

hanera says

Treasuries

- Index fund

- Housing

- Stocks

Values almost entirely tied to fiat currency
fiat currency
fiat currency...

I assume you're aware of diversification.

rando says

Wow, that was really coin porn!

Only on Patnet!

"Everyone, including TRUMP," does NOT think Russia was the source. FACT"

Why don't you quote me correctly instead of trying to twist my words. That's pathetic.

"This is the video you are referring to wherein Trump supposedly acknowledges Russia hacking"

Supposedly? The source to which I refer is Priebus saying that Trump accepts the intelligence community findings.

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/313214-priebus-says-he-thinks-trump-accepts-the-findings-of-the-intelligence

There's another source for you. Notice, even Priebus calls it the "intelligence community findings" because everyone is in agreement. Priebus goes on to say that Trump is not denying that Russia was behind the hacks of the DNC.

I'm tired of this nonsense. You're as bad as TLL Lips.

joeyjojojunior says

I'm tired of this nonsense. You're as bad as TLL Lips.

That's not possible.

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams

joeyjojojunior says

The source to which I refer is Priebus saying that Trump accepts the intelligence community findings.

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/313214-priebus-says-he-thinks-trump-accepts-the-findings-of-the-intelligence

"“I think he accepts the finding,” Priebus said. “He’s not denying entities in Russia are behind these particular hackings.” And here we are again. They agree entities in Russia are involved in these hacks. This doesnt mean Russia worked with wikileaks. It also doesnt mean this was DNC's only hack. The wikileaks discussed 3 acknowledged hacks from supposedly russia, iran, and china.

So Wikileaks could have been sourced via any hacker w a server in russia, iran, or china, OR any insider with access. The Russia theory is all confirmation bias. Its neither proven nor universally agreed to be the best current theory.

"The Russia theory is all confirmation bias. Its neither proven nor universally agreed to be the best current theory."

wtf? All intelligence services in the US AGREE it was Russia. How is that not universally agreed?

In any event. You win. I'm done.

The video is the OP is so racist. Why does it have to be a white woman? Patriarchy beauty standards. </sarcasm>

Can't they rename her to Markie 1? I don't want to tell my parents I'm dating someone named Mark.

This thread is also for Rin.

Realize, when sex robots go mainstream, I'll be the among the early adopters, since I'd stopped dating, nearly 6 years ago, to only poke hoes.

Also, the female 'Mark' is Marcie. So Dan, you introduce her as Marcie.

It's like Samuel vs Samantha, James vs Jane, Michael vs Michelle, Jesse vs Jessica, Steven vs Stephanie, and so on.

WARNING!!!!!

Watch out for those teeth.

Rin says

This thread is also for Rin.

Realize, when sex robots go mainstream, I'll be the among the early adopters, since I'd stopped dating, nearly 6 years ago, to only poke hoes.

Having sex with a robot would be the same as masturbating. How about a sexually aroused female, with a wet pussy that won't let go.

Strategist says

How about a sexually aroused female, with a wet pussy that won't let go.

Do you remember Kobe Bryant, a dozen years ago, when that Colorado "wet pussy" turned into a faux rape charge, followed by a $2M+ settlement plus the loss of circa $20M+ in endorsements?

Sorry, but I have better ways of spending my retirement money than that!

Rashomon says

I'd hazard a guess and say no chance.

Factor in VR.

Heraclitusstudent says

Factor in VR.

VR is one thing, but life-like Ex Machina type robots are a long way off.

Strategist says

Might cut down the rate of rapes, as desperate men will have an alternative.

Imagine Syrian refugees plugged in 10 hours a day - and hating us for it...

Heraclitusstudent says

Rashomon says

I'd hazard a guess and say no chance.

Factor in VR.

Ha ha. Imagine a dozen hot female celebrities, all begging to get fucked, and you are the only male in the room.

Why not? They haven't minded up to now.
Dan8267 says

Can't they rename her to Markie 1? I don't want to tell my parents I'm dating someone named Mark.

You should be an early adopter or even a prototype testor. This will save you decades of suffering aids ridden oozing pus sores.
Rin says

Realize, when sex robots go mainstream, I'll be the among the early adopters, since I'd stopped dating, nearly 6 years ago, to only poke hoes.

is that a human mouth or a fish mouth? made in China?

Well, he did become President by trolling the country. I want one.

http://mashable.com/2017/02/22/trump-troll-doll-nsfw-kickstarter/#tYXvydI23kqk

joeyjojojunior says

it

There's the hacking done by multiple hackers... then there's the leaks. The "IT" that they AGREE on is that 1 of the many hacks came from a russian source.

No one AGREES that the leaks came from russia. Wikileaks has never lied and says it was not russia.

joeyjojojunior says

You win.

I'm glad you are starting to think logically.

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

Iran has banned 18-year-old chess grandmaster Dorsa Derakhshani from competing for the national chess team for not wearing a hijab obligatory dress for women under Iranian law

Thank You, Dorsa. The Islamic world needs people like you, and not the fanatical Mullahs.
Next time wear a bikini.

Smart, hot, and willing to defy Islamic fanatics?

Bring her to America!

If Trump deported all the Mullahs, and replaced them with people like Dorsa, he would not get accused of being a racist.

Does this hottie look familiar?

Sarah Shahi