Mueller indicts Russians

[brandonbull]

so....which of Trump's many known investments and relationships with Russian oligarchs and businessfolks do you consider fake news? Are all of them just, completely non-compromising?

It's interesting that you remain stuck on irrelevant, unactionable, and rather acceptable practices from the dems by declaring them somehow scandalous. It tells me that the building stench in your pants is just becoming too unbearable.

I don't remember saying Trump's business dealing with Russian business folks was fake news. Everyone knows that Trump has done business with Russian business folks. The only thing you produce that ties Trump to Russian "collusion" is your assertion that there is collusion. Having business dealing with Russians is one thing, but to deny Clinton, the DNC, and the DOJ's involvement with the dossier, it's ties to foreign sources, it's intended use around the 2016 election, and to disregard Clinton allies with ties to Kremlin back individuals is another.

 

[realibrad]

You entertain the possibility that she might have in some way for which there is literally no evidence. Tha's the intro to conspiracy theory.

No, I entertain nothing. I lack belief in either direction. Do you believe that lack of belief on a subject is buying into a conspiracy?

 

[brandonbull]

/facepalm

I didn't question you, I gave a reason why other people thought you were dealing in innuendo. I've already agreed with your point and I realize people keep missing your point which is why I tried explaining to you why that may be.

dimfamous and his trollers don't get it.

 

[soundforbjt]

I don't remember saying Trump's business dealing with Russian business folks was fake news. Everyone knows that Trump has done business with Russian business folks. The only thing you produce that ties Trump to Russian "collusion" is your assertion that there is collusion. Having business dealing with Russians is one thing, but to deny Clinton, the DNC, and the DOJ's involvement with the dossier, it's ties to foreign sources, it's intended use around the 2016 election, and to disregard Clinton allies with ties to Kremlin back individuals is another.

Please link us to the claim about its intended use around the 2016 election, this should be good.

 

[vi edit]

I just want to say that Chuck Rosenberg is my favorite contributor to MSNBC. He's just such a dry, snarky and knowledgeable resource. He's a great balance to the anchors that are spazzing out on stories.

 

[brandonbull]

The problem with all this BS is that in time the truth will come out. You and your ilk seem so obsessed with winning the day, and so enthralled in your conspiracy therories you're not fully seeing anything else. I suspect a month ago you were saying that all the Russian meddling was a nothing burger and a hoax. How far we have come since then, No.

You should feel embarrassed that Trump's campaign, Fox News and properly yourself parroted fake information from Russians designed to sow discord in our country.

Next time skip the cutesy insults and bring facts to refute what I'm saying.

 

[UNCjigga]

If anything, Putin and his Russian buddies wasn't going to get the ROI on their investment into Clinton like they did with Obama so they wanted to poison her presidency.

Wait...now you're saying Russians have been meddling in elections since Obama? Evidence? Dude, get help, or just stop reading shyte news sources.

As for DNC and Clinton "hiding their funding of the dossier"--not true. It is very common for opposition research to be contracted and paid through a 3rd-party law firm, in order to mask the identity of the buyer so as not to bias or influence the investigation.

Example: Assume a political research firm was founded by Republican staffers, and most of their clients are Republicans. Said firm starts research on one Republican candidate, commissioned by another Republican candidates or donors. Other candidates/donors decide to stop paying for the research file. Now assume Democrats (through their law firm) is calling the known list of research firms looking for research on this candidate. Well, this political research firm already started a file, and why wouldn't they want to keep working on the research? Well, if they knew it was a Democrat whom they don't like buying the research, that might affect how well they do their jobs, no? It works both ways--oppo research firm can focus on finding the facts and not worrying about which facts they uncover may lead to blowback against them.

 

[zinfamous]

I don't remember saying Trump's business dealing with Russian business folks was fake news. Everyone knows that Trump has done business with Russian business folks. The only thing you produce that ties Trump to Russian "collusion" is your assertion that there is collusion. Having business dealing with Russians is one thing, but to deny Clinton, the DNC, and the DOJ's involvement with the dossier, it's ties to foreign sources, it's intended use around the 2016 election, and to disregard Clinton allies with ties to Kremlin back individuals is another.

the point is that "collusion" has only ever been a very wide catchall term that is used to refer to a litany of crimes and abuses: money laundering, extortion, quid pro quo, intelligence exchange, shared compromising information...etc. Many, many things.

There isn't a specific crime of "collusion," but there are a great many that fall under the umbrella and are certainly actionable crimes. It's just easier to say "collusion" instead of repeating all of the other problems that you already seem to agree are true. So, it seems like you are there now, you just weren't on the same page as everyone wrg to dialogue.

There still isn't any argument that Clinton and DNC relation to the steele dossier, and how it was handled, is actually a crime. The acceptance of the facts related to that are already determined as being typical, above board...basically opo research. Hey, guess what? Sometimes opo research turns up real crimes! Holy shit, imagine that.

Page had already had what, 2 FISA warrants issued against him? To think that the steele dossier was instrumental in renewing surveilance of a then-known Russian agent is outright lunacy.

 

[brandonbull]

Please link us to the claim about its intended use around the 2016 election, this should be good.

We do know that is was "opposition research", Steele carried after on because he hated Trump and is politically motivated, and it was used in a FISA warrant request, and stated that it had some political motivation. What part is "fake news"?

 

[ivwshane]

dimfamous and his trollers don't get it.

Lol. You are the dim one and the troll. Make no mistake about it.

 

[brandonbull]

Wait...now you're saying Russians have been meddling in elections since Obama? Evidence? Dude, get help, or just stop reading shyte news sources.

As for DNC and Clinton "hiding their funding of the dossier"--not true. It is very common for opposition research to be contracted and paid through a 3rd-party law firm, in order to mask the identity of the buyer so as not to bias or influence the investigation.

Example: Assume a political research firm was founded by Republican staffers, and most of their clients are Republicans. Said firm starts research on one Republican candidate, commissioned by another Republican candidates or donors. Other candidates/donors decide to stop paying for the research file. Now assume Democrats (through their law firm) is calling the known list of research firms looking for research on this candidate. Well, this political research firm already started a file, and why wouldn't they want to keep working on the research? Well, if they knew it was a Democrat whom they don't like buying the research, that might affect how well they do their jobs, no? It works both ways--oppo research firm can focus on finding the facts and not worrying about which facts they uncover may lead to blowback against them.

Clinton and the DNC denied any knowledge of the dossier.

Bruce Ohr tried to hid payments.
http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/14/e...es-fusion-gps-payments-from-ethics-officials/

 

[Fanatical Meat]

And what exactly is "collusion" and the law(s) that "collusion" would violate?

I’ll make it simpler. What would you find as inappropriate in regards to Trump working with Russia. What actions would Trump or family or very close associates have to have done or agreed to do would you find inappropriate.

IMPORTANT THIS IS PURELY OPINION THIS IS NOT SAYING TRUMP WORKED WITH RUSSIA

 

[soundforbjt]

We do know that is was "opposition research", Steele carried after on because he hated Trump and is politically motivated, and it was used in a FISA warrant request, and stated that it had some political motivation. What part is "fake news"?

But where was the intended use in the election? The FISA warrant? That started in 2013. Fake news is that Steele was politically motivated, he was concerned about what he was finding and first talked to the FBI and John McCain, who’s hardly a Dem.

 

[brandonbull]

"Like they did with Obama" explains sanctions against Russia in the wake of their aggression in Ukraine & the expulsion of Russian diplomats from this country...

What about the flexibility to Putin? Releasing money to Iran? Uranium deal? Iran getting advanced AA missile systems? Iran Nuke deal?

 

[Thump553]

I view this indictment as the real Chapter 1 in the true history as to what happened. It's pretty amazing to me how deep the FBI and Mueller's team investigated. The GOP minions should be absolutely mortified at the slander they have personaly directed at the FBI for the past year.

I'm really looking forward to the next few chapters. The one that will really blow the doors off will be the indictment that shows how financially intertwined with and dependent upon Russian grafted monies the Trump financial empire is. They bailed him out when all major bankers cut him off and used him to launder their ill-gotten gains.Putin and his ilk are Trump's role models and he seeks to replicate their financial success in his own bumbling way.

 

[Jhhnn]

No, I entertain nothing. I lack belief in either direction. Do you believe that lack of belief on a subject is buying into a conspiracy?

It's just lame "Well, but Hillary could have... something, something for which I have no proof whatsoever." It's whataboutism.

 

[fskimospy]

I love how seamlessly conservatives have been able to go from 'Russians didn't interfere in the election' to 'even if they did it didn't work' to 'they were secretly helping KILLARY'.

Total, complete divorce from reality.

 

[UNCjigga]

What about the flexibility to Putin? Releasing money to Iran? Uranium deal? Iran getting advanced AA missile systems? Iran Nuke deal?

WTF does Iran have to do with Putin??? Dude, start making sense.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Footnote,
Remember Trump suggesting a joint cyber security force with Russia

 

[Greenman]

I'm not sure why we're doing a happy dance here. Russians were putting out propaganda on social media with the intent of swaying the election, I thought that was established already? Weren't we all waiting for the Trump connection?

 

[Jhhnn]

What about the flexibility to Putin? Releasing money to Iran? Uranium deal? Iran getting advanced AA missile systems? Iran Nuke deal?

What about whataboutism?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

I love how seamlessly conservatives have been able to go from 'Russians didn't interfere in the election' to 'even if they did it didn't work' to 'they were secretly helping KILLARY'.

Total, complete divorce from reality.

You want divorced from reality go to a site like freerepublic right now and read their thread about this. I just made that mistake and holy shit are they in complete denial.

I read the entire indictment. Plus a US person just unsealed plead guilty months ago to aiding this. This is a big deal especially since Trump refused to enforce the Russian sanctions and publicly has done nothing to assure Americans they take the meddling seriously.

To anyone I say read the entire indictment on your own. Don’t let anyone summarize it. You simply can’t appreciate going e elaborate this was without reading it.

 

[vi edit]

I'm not sure why we're doing a happy dance here. Russians were putting out propaganda on social media with the intent of swaying the election, I thought that was established already? Weren't we all waiting for the Trump connection?

Because it's a public slap in the face that this actually happened and our President who has done nothing but blabber affection towards Putin/Russia may actually have to put on his big boy pants and do something to help the country he promised to make great again.

 

[Puffnstuff]

After what Reagan did to Russia during the 80's I'm pretty sure that they are quite pleased with their accomplishments.

 

[nickqt]

I'm not sure why we're doing a happy dance here. Russians were putting out propaganda on social media with the intent of swaying the election, I thought that was established already? Weren't we all waiting for the Trump connection?

Oh, the investigation is over then?