Russia probes kick into high gear

[+DieChecker]

On 3/18/2018 at 11:30 AM, ExpandMyMind said:

Because I have a fully functioning brain.

Ah, so saying pushing a former CIA director is possibly deadly is to be considered.

But, saying the same about a Clinton is a Conspiracy Theory?

[+DieChecker]

On 3/19/2018 at 2:05 AM, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Innocent people panic and say stupid things. It’s the guilty who shut up.

Or possibly just repeat over and over that they can't remember a single thing. (-> Granny Clinton)

[Farmer77]

12 minutes ago, Kismit said:

 

Here is another video I think people should watch. 

I feel for those who didn't realise they where being divided. I want very much for the people of America, who have been divided by those who would use you to make money for themselves by using algorythims to drag you down the rabbit hole, to undestand that you are dragged down the rabbit hole for someone elses profit.

This video is satiracle but it holds sime very real, true, and good advice.

 

 

Impotent rage...this is absolutely horrifying. 

[+DieChecker]

On 3/20/2018 at 6:55 PM, Tiggs said:

19 indictments. 3 guilty pleas. 4 cooperating witnesses. Still ongoing.
 

Ha! That is like saying your local police have got 20 arrests for burglary, so there is an uptick in gang activity. The one doesn't necessarily mean the other is true.

[+DieChecker]

5 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

This would be the absolute worse case scenario for America.  Have we really fallen so far that 30% of our nation is now actively rooting for a dictatorship?

 

Seriously Farmer? You are going to toss everyone into a "Basket of Deplorables"? I do hope you are just being colorful in your statement here. 

[+DieChecker]

2 hours ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

So the Russiagate Conspiracy has been a complete waste of everybody's time and millions and millions of dollars ever since it was devised, then? Well, glad to see people are finally beginning to realize. 

I don't know... So far it has been more entertainment then many movies that have cost about the same...  So I'd not call the money wasted. 

[Farmer77]

Just now, DieChecker said:

Seriously Farmer? You are going to toss everyone into a "Basket of Deplorables"? I do hope you are just being colorful in your statement here. 

IDK I think thus far Preacherman's views while maybe a day or two ahead of the group have generally stayed with the majority. The chorus of folks crying for Sessions and Mueller to be fired seems to be growing by the day so maybe its not at the full 30% point yet but its got to be close.

For what its worth the last time I looked at the poll on drudgereport.com the other day it was something like 74% in favor of firing Mueller. 

[Kismit]

22 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Impotent rage...this is absolutely horrifying. 

Maybe not impotent.

I have seen so much internet influence from a simple post. 

Before  l left  Moderating.last time I fought VERY strongly against the invasion of Iraq. I see now most of the members I debated agsinst ,post that America should not have invaded Iraq. I see posters still posting the idea that empathy is a psychic skill, when before it was considered a psychic woo thing I asked sarcastically if Empathy should be considered woo. I see the God gene posts I know I originally posted still being debated.

From this, I have learned, people read, more than they post, and question more than they blindly believe, but they rarely realy research what they read, and often do not go further than a headline or rhetoerc.

Might does equal right for these people. People who can not see past the brainwashed name calling or the biased money making or who 100% believe something because someone they know posted a link or someone else they "trust" did the research for them.

If my time on the internet has taught me anything, it is do your own  research, and do not let the internet research you.

Pay attention, the answers may be hiding where you did not think you would find them.

[+DieChecker]

8 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

IDK I think thus far Preacherman's views while maybe a day or two ahead of the group have generally stayed with the majority. The chorus of folks crying for Sessions and Mueller to be fired seems to be growing by the day so maybe its not at the full 30% point yet but its got to be close.

For what its worth the last time I looked at the poll on drudgereport.com the other day it was something like 74% in favor of firing Mueller. 

I'll wait till I see a well taken poll. Myself, I would find it hard to believe that so many are willing to side with Trump on something that obviously would cause a super hairy sh@tstorm.

Back in January, the number who wanted Mueller fired was 15%. I think a Drudge backed poll (depending on how it was taken) would be like 90%+ right leaning Republicans. And usually politically active ones at that. 

EDIT: Oh yeah. It was an online poll. No way to skew one of those with mass voting by the same people over and over....

Edited March 22, 2018 by DieChecker

[Farmer77]

Just now, DieChecker said:

Back in January, the number who wanted Mueller fired was 15%. I think a Drudge backed poll (depending on how it was taken) would be like 90%+ right leaning Republicans. And usually politically active ones at that. 

Of course. My point for mentioning him is that Drudge has become an opinion maker as well as a news monger and those who are paying attention will be going there. 

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I'll wait till I see a well taken poll. Myself, I would find it hard to believe that so many are willing to side with Trump on something that obviously would cause a super hairy sh@tstorm.

You could very well be right. I hope that you are right.

Maybe I'm allowing my own personal experiences to cast too large a projection onto others but I think If it does happen it will be viewed more as siding against the democrats  or the "deep state" than siding with Trump. 

17 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I don't know... So far it has been more entertainment then many movies that have cost about the same...  So I'd not call the money wasted. 

As serious as I can take the whole thing I have truly enjoyed the hell out of the entertainment. 

We've got espionage, public insults, political intrigue, a reality TV star, a pornstar who's allegedly been physically threatened to stay quiet, family drama, a mercenary , now all we need is for a long lost relative to turn up alive and this sucker surely gets an emmy right? 

[Kismit]

36 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Ha! That is like saying your local police have got 20 arrests for burglary, so there is an uptick in gang activity. The one doesn't necessarily mean the other is true.

It does, if all the burglaries are in a similar area and the people involved know each other. 

That would indicate the uptick in gang activity was connected to the same gang.

[RAyMO]

I think the one thing that is possibly already clear or if not will become clear, is that during certain elections in recent times that parties with vested interests adopted dubious and possibly illegitimate methods to directly influence said elections by attempting to influence strategically pinpointed members of the electorate. This is something that imo cannot be tolerated in an open and free society and must be investigated and eliminated going forward. Everyone taking part in elections most work within the country's election laws. 

One could argue that no-one was influenced to vote in a certain way - but this then calls into question the impact and value of advertising for example - why would you bother if you can't actually influence decisions of at least some of your target audience. Either way the attempt to influence allegedly via illegitimate means remains.

However, it could be argued that those who benefited from attempted influence were unaware of activities being done in their name. The only way to find out is to follow the leads.

[Tiggs]

7 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

I think the one thing that is possibly already clear or if not will become clear, is that during certain elections in recent times that parties with vested interests adopted dubious and possibly illegitimate methods to directly influence said elections by attempting to influence strategically pinpointed members of the electorate. This is something that imo cannot be tolerated in an open and free society and must be investigated and eliminated going forward. Everyone taking part in elections most work within the country's election laws. 

I don't believe micro-targeting itself is illegal.

It's probably illegal to do it with stolen data from Facebook.

It's definitely illegal to pass micro-targeting information on to Russia, for Russia to use to buy ads, to influence a Presidential election.

Not sure how much of that chain can be evidenced, currently.
 

7 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

However, it could be argued that those who benefited from attempted influence were unaware of activities being done in their name. The only way to find out is to follow the leads.

Bannon's on the chair of CA, so it would be as high as Trump's campaign manager, at least.

[+DieChecker]

2 hours ago, Kismit said:

It does, if all the burglaries are in a similar area and the people involved know each other. 

That would indicate the uptick in gang activity was connected to the same gang.

That could be true, if one read all the reports and cross referenced all those involved with known gang members. But posting the numbers alone doesn't prove anything. 

So then say we read about those burglaries and sure enough they show no signs of gang activity (or collusion). Then is that actually a win in fighting gangs? Really?

[preacherman76]

4 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Yeah man if he were to fire Sessions , Rosenstein and Mueller he would be making himself a dictator who is above the law. That would effectively end America. 

So it doesn't matter that everyone of them are corrupted scum? Keeping them around effectively keeps the swamp whole.

[Merc14]

48 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

I think the one thing that is possibly already clear or if not will become clear, is that during certain elections in recent times that parties with vested interests adopted dubious and possibly illegitimate methods to directly influence said elections by attempting to influence strategically pinpointed members of the electorate. This is something that imo cannot be tolerated in an open and free society and must be investigated and eliminated going forward. Everyone taking part in elections most work within the country's election laws. 

One could argue that no-one was influenced to vote in a certain way - but this then calls into question the impact and value of advertising for example - why would you bother if you can't actually influence decisions of at least some of your target audience. Either way the attempt to influence allegedly via illegitimate means remains.

However, it could be argued that those who benefited from attempted influence were unaware of activities being done in their name. The only way to find out is to follow the leads.

I believe Hillary spent roughly twice teh amount on the 2016 campaign than Trump yet no one is losing their minds over that.  Why?

[preacherman76]

13 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

I believe Hillary spent roughly twice teh amount on the 2016 campaign than Trump yet no one is losing their minds over that.  Why?

Its entirely plausible that millions of illegals voted, but they don't care about that either. Go figure.

[Tiggs]

3 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Ha! That is like saying your local police have got 20 arrests for burglary, so there is an uptick in gang activity. The one doesn't necessarily mean the other is true.

Mueller's investigation isn't primarily focused on the Trump campaign (gangs). It's focused on Russian interference (burglaries).

If those two intersect -- then it is what it is.

But Mueller's investigation would still be happening, (albeit, probably led by Comey) regardless of whether the evidence led to the Trump campaign, or otherwise.

[preacherman76]

16 minutes ago, Tiggs said:

Mueller's investigation isn't primarily focused on the Trump campaign (gangs). It's focused on Russian interference (burglaries).

If those two intersect -- then it is what it is.

But Mueller's investigation would still be happening, (albeit, probably led by Comey) regardless of whether the evidence led to the Trump campaign, or otherwise.

If it was just about Russian influence and had nothing to do with Trump, a special prosecutor probably wouldn't have been hired at all. They would have just investigated it normally.  

[Tiggs]

Just now, preacherman76 said:

If it was just about Russian influence and had nothing to do with Trump, a special prosecutor probably wouldn't have been hired at all. They would have just investigated it normally.  

They were. And then the President fired the guy who was doing it, and then told everyone on national television two days later that he'd fired him because of the Russia investigation.

...and that's why we now have Mueller.

[preacherman76]

41 minutes ago, Tiggs said:

They were. And then the President fired the guy who was doing it, and then told everyone on national television two days later that he'd fired him because of the Russia investigation.

...and that's why we now have Mueller.

Comey was using the dossier to spy on Trump, long before he himself called the dossier out as BS. That was before Trump was his boss. The man wrote a exoneration letter for Hillary before the investigation was even half way over. He absolutely needed to be fired. He is a lying back stabbing weasel.

I don't recall Trump ever saying that. Though if its true Im certain he didn't mean that he didn't want Russia investigated. Im certain it had more to do with Comey's illegal activities trying to tie his administration to the investigation. And all the shenanigans that went with that.  

[Tiggs]

Just now, preacherman76 said:

Comey was using the dossier to spy on Trump, long before he himself called the dossier out as BS.

Carter Page had left the Trump campaign when the FBI got the FISA warrant to surveil him.

He'd hardly be their first choice candidate, either, given Manafort was on their naughty list.
 

Just now, preacherman76 said:

The man wrote a exoneration letter for Hillary before the investigation was even half way over.

But after the emails had been assessed.
 

Just now, preacherman76 said:

I don't recall Trump ever saying that. Though if its true Im certain he didn't mean that he didn't want Russia investigated. Im certain it had more to do with Comey's illegal activities trying to tie his administration to the investigation. And all the shenanigans that went with that.  

The evil Comey story didn't come until much later.

Back then, the claim was that it was all just sour grapes because Clinton had lost.

“And, in fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said: ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story, it’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should’ve won.’”

Source: The Guardian

[.ZZ.]

12 minutes ago, Tiggs said:

But after the emails had been assessed.

Did the FBI assess the "deleted 33,000 personal emails"?

[Tiggs]

12 minutes ago, .ZZ. said:

Did the FBI assess the "deleted 33,000 personal emails"?

I believe Putin said they're clean.

[Tiggs]

WASHINGTON — The president’s lead lawyer for the special counsel investigation, John Dowd, resigned on Thursday, according to two people briefed on the matter, days after the president called for an end to the inquiry.

Mr. Dowd, who took over the president’s legal team last summer, had considered leaving several times in recent months and ultimately concluded that Mr. Trump was increasingly ignoring his advice, one of the people said. Under Mr. Dowd’s leadership, Mr. Trump’s lawyers had advised him to cooperate with the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who is investigating Russia’s election interference and possible ties to Trump associates as well as whether the president obstructed the inquiry.

Source: New York Times