|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess.
Your bar for dishonesty must be awfully low with Trump and Sarah Sanders on your team. But that hasn't ever stopped you from blindly accusing people of falsehoods, or willful disregard of facts when it suits you.
Trump lied 60(!) times in a couple hours the other night for his CPAC speech. Calling anybody else dishonest without calling Trump out for being the raving deluded grandpa he is really just shows how ignorant you are. But I think everybody already knew that.
|
No matter how it shakes down, he's getting effectively less than 5 months time per felony. My supervisor got 3 months for his second DUI.
|
On March 08 2019 17:56 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess. Your bar for dishonesty must be awfully low with Trump and Sarah Sanders on your team. But that hasn't ever stopped you from blindly accusing people of falsehoods, or willful disregard of facts when it suits you. Trump lied 60(!) times in a couple hours the other night for his CPAC speech. Calling anybody else dishonest without calling Trump out for being the raving deluded grandpa he is really just shows how ignorant you are. But I think everybody already knew that.
I’m just going to hazard a guess that the vast majority of those “lies” weren’t really lies, and probably weren’t even material omissions. It certainly couldn’t have been any more dishonest than any of Bernie’s speeches on his universal healthcare plans or AOC talking about the Green New Deal. Trump isn’t particularly more dishonest than any other politician.
|
|
|
5930 Posts
He's basically saying that "everyone does it, so why does it matter?" Which isn't remotely true unless you're the type of person who is willing to equate a politician spending public funds on a $5 meat pie with a politician spending public funds to fly a private helicopter to a private political fundraiser event.
|
On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess.
On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess.
You realize that what you said is factually untrue right? Parroting Trump talking points does not prove a point. In fact, it's part of the problem. I'm mildly irritated that people are allowed to lie with impunity and claim it as an "argument" or "rebuttal". The intelligence agencies and their employees (both former and current) are mortified at Trump's conduct and several suspect him of being an agent of Russia. But the fact that you said testimony and a lot of what I linked is not testimony means you're going to come at me on semantics as usual. I see it coming. There are more people/statements from agencies involved with handling of classified intelligence who agree with Schiff than those who don't. So you're full of it.
And this is just a fraction of what is out there. These people are trying to tell us without telling us. It's not rocket science. But people like you claim because it isn't specific enough, it's all made up.
EDIT: It's also worth noting that these are Republicans. Just in case you start with the "angry Democrat" lies. I'm starting to worry that you've consumed the Kool-Aid.
"BURR: So if you've got a 36-page document of specific claims that are out there, the FBI would have to for counter intelligence reasons, try to verify anything that might be claimed in there, one, and probably first and foremost, is the counterintelligence concerns that we have about blackmail. Would that be an accurate statement?
COMEY: Yes. If the FBI receives a credible allegation that there is some effort to co-opt, coerce, direct, employee covertly an American on behalf of the foreign power, that's the basis on which a counterintelligence investigation is opened."
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/08/full-text-james-comey-trump-russia-testimony-239295
Thus: "F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia"
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/us/politics/fbi-trump-russia-inquiry.html
"Do you still believe the President could be a Russian asset?" asked CNN's Anderson Cooper during an interview with McCabe on "Anderson Cooper 360."
"I think it's possible. I think that's why we started our investigation, and I'm really anxious to see where (special counsel Robert) Mueller concludes that," McCabe said.
“There is some kind of special rapport relationship between the two of them. And I think Mr. Putin, who is an exceptionally well-trained KGB officer, intelligence officer, I think has exploited and cultivated this relationship and is taking full advantage of it. He [Trump] acts like he has an ulterior motive that is not apparent and whether or not he is trying cover up something, whether he is fearful of what Mr. Putin might do.”
https://www.newsweek.com/putin-knows-lot-more-american-public-knows-about-trumps-dealings-russia-says-1301253
"...Mr Putin was directing a state-sponsored effort to interfere with the US election.
The FBI was already looking at ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, but the CIA memo seemed to confirm Russian efforts to throw the election Mr Trump's way."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42493918
"Trump’s handling of the matter has been a much greater source of dismay inside the intelligence community than widely understood. One official said CIA employees were staggered by Trump’s performance during a news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki this summer at which he treated denials by Putin as so “strong and powerful” that they offset the conclusions of the CIA.
“There was this gasp” among those watching at the CIA, the official said. “You literally had people in panic mode watching it at Langley. On all floors. Just shock.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/gap-continues-to-widen-between-trump-and-intelligence-community-on-key-issues/2018/12/11/23a02cb0-f8db-11e8-863c-9e2f864d47e7_story.html?utm_term=.d55020196b51
|
On March 08 2019 23:16 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 17:56 Amui wrote:On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess. Your bar for dishonesty must be awfully low with Trump and Sarah Sanders on your team. But that hasn't ever stopped you from blindly accusing people of falsehoods, or willful disregard of facts when it suits you. Trump lied 60(!) times in a couple hours the other night for his CPAC speech. Calling anybody else dishonest without calling Trump out for being the raving deluded grandpa he is really just shows how ignorant you are. But I think everybody already knew that. I’m just going to hazard a guess that the vast majority of those “lies” weren’t really lies, and probably weren’t even material omissions. It certainly couldn’t have been any more dishonest than any of Bernie’s speeches on his universal healthcare plans or AOC talking about the Green New Deal. Trump isn’t particularly more dishonest than any other politician.
Alternative facts, lies that are not "real" lies and everybody else is just as bad (which they aren't by a longshot, please don't go there, you know it is bullshit.)
Trump has already successufully corrupted the minds and standards of his supporters to a very scary level. Is there anything at all that Trump can say that will make his fans shake their heads and say: "no, man, you went to far with this one." History has shown several times how terribly wrong it can go when you stop questioning the motives of your leaders.
|
On March 08 2019 23:16 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 17:56 Amui wrote:On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess. Your bar for dishonesty must be awfully low with Trump and Sarah Sanders on your team. But that hasn't ever stopped you from blindly accusing people of falsehoods, or willful disregard of facts when it suits you. Trump lied 60(!) times in a couple hours the other night for his CPAC speech. Calling anybody else dishonest without calling Trump out for being the raving deluded grandpa he is really just shows how ignorant you are. But I think everybody already knew that. I’m just going to hazard a guess that the vast majority of those “lies” weren’t really lies, and probably weren’t even material omissions. It certainly couldn’t have been any more dishonest than any of Bernie’s speeches on his universal healthcare plans or AOC talking about the Green New Deal. Trump isn’t particularly more dishonest than any other politician.
Trump has lowered the standards enough that when he says things that are untrue we have to wonder if it's because he's lying or if it's because he doesn't know anything about anything. We're talking about the speech where he went off on the female senator from Ohio that's been criticizing him right?
|
On March 08 2019 23:16 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 17:56 Amui wrote:On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess. Your bar for dishonesty must be awfully low with Trump and Sarah Sanders on your team. But that hasn't ever stopped you from blindly accusing people of falsehoods, or willful disregard of facts when it suits you. Trump lied 60(!) times in a couple hours the other night for his CPAC speech. Calling anybody else dishonest without calling Trump out for being the raving deluded grandpa he is really just shows how ignorant you are. But I think everybody already knew that. I’m just going to hazard a guess that the vast majority of those “lies” weren’t really lies, and probably weren’t even material omissions. It certainly couldn’t have been any more dishonest than any of Bernie’s speeches on his universal healthcare plans or AOC talking about the Green New Deal. Trump isn’t particularly more dishonest than any other politician.
Weren't really lies. Wow. You sound like Rudy. "Truth isn't truth" or "Alternative facts". A significant number of his lies are dangerous or detrimental to domestic tranquility and foreign policy. Don't try to downplay his disgusting behavior. Please. I'll bet you believe the nonsense about the Green New Deal and farting cows right (https://thinkprogress.org/republicans-hamburgers-green-new-deal-3060d1b0cac5/)? It's ironic that you (probably based on the way you post) believe lies about someone while claiming that said person is lying. It's dripping with irony.
A lie is a lie is a lie. And yes he does it far more than anyone else who has held that office.
He lied 60 times alone during his raving Fox News Grandpa speech at CPAC.
"President Trump has made 9,014 false or misleading claims over 773 days"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/04/president-trump-has-made-false-or-misleading-claims-over-days/?utm_term=.221d7eea3d0f
|
Are we being gas lit right now? The man lied about it not raining during inauguration. There are god damn photos of people in the rain behind him during inauguration. The man lies about the weather. He lies about everything.
|
On March 09 2019 00:19 Plansix wrote:
Are we being gas lit right now? The man lied about it not raining during inauguration. There are god damn photos of people in the rain behind him during inauguration. The man lies about the weather. He lies about everything.
Yes. In my experience there are three tactics:
1. Gaslight ("What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening" - actual quote from Trump)
2. B-b-but Hillary and Obummer (whataboutism)
3. Fake news (brainwashed by Fox or just woefully uninformed about how factchecking and sourcing work)
|
On March 08 2019 23:16 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 17:56 Amui wrote:On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess. Your bar for dishonesty must be awfully low with Trump and Sarah Sanders on your team. But that hasn't ever stopped you from blindly accusing people of falsehoods, or willful disregard of facts when it suits you. Trump lied 60(!) times in a couple hours the other night for his CPAC speech. Calling anybody else dishonest without calling Trump out for being the raving deluded grandpa he is really just shows how ignorant you are. But I think everybody already knew that. I’m just going to hazard a guess that the vast majority of those “lies” weren’t really lies, and probably weren’t even material omissions. It certainly couldn’t have been any more dishonest than any of Bernie’s speeches on his universal healthcare plans or AOC talking about the Green New Deal. Trump isn’t particularly more dishonest than any other politician.
You are comparing people making plans for the future that might not come true, to outright lies on factual issues of current day events. It's a world of difference. Yes politicians often make empty promises that will never get realized. But politicians usually don't lie directly since they get called out for it in a functioning democracy. Trump however lies about factual things, straight up, easily verifiable falsehoods. Your statement about his honesty is either a troll or a sign you have lost all connection to what is actually happening.
|
On March 08 2019 23:35 Womwomwom wrote:
He's basically saying that "everyone does it, so why does it matter?" Which isn't remotely true unless you're the type of person who is willing to equate a politician spending public funds on a $5 meat pie with a politician spending public funds to fly a private helicopter to a private political fundraiser event.
No, I’m not excusing anything. I’m just pointing out that there is an obvious material difference between lies about substantive policy issues and mere puffery. Trump talking about crowd sizes or having the greatest people or any of his other self-promotional spiels falls into the latter category and is not something that I’m particularly excited about. Bernie saying something obviously dishonest like “under my healthcare system, you will get to keep your doctor, you will only lose your insurance plan” is a dangerous misrepresentation of an important policy issue.
|
Why are yall reprimanding xDaunt like he cares that the literal majority of the statements Trump makes are verifiable lies? He has already made clear that Trump is a means to an end. How much damage Trump does to the institution/democracy is irrelevant.
|
On March 09 2019 00:43 On_Slaught wrote:
Why are yall reprimanding xDaunt like he cares that the literal majority of the statements Trump makes are verifiable lies? He has already made clear that Trump is a means to an end. How much damage Trump does to the institution/democracy is irrelevant.
Gotta pack those courts with more T.S. Ellis type folks (yeah, I'm salty)... That's sad and frightening. I read somewhere that it's possible for Trump to have filled 20% of appointments in just over 2 years. We will be grappling with the awful consequences of that for decades.
|
On March 09 2019 00:22 Ayaz2810 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2019 00:19 Plansix wrote:
Are we being gas lit right now? The man lied about it not raining during inauguration. There are god damn photos of people in the rain behind him during inauguration. The man lies about the weather. He lies about everything. Yes. In my experience there are three tactics: 1. Gaslight ("What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening" - actual quote from Trump) 2. B-b-but Hillary and Obummer (whataboutism) 3. Fake news (brainwashed by Fox or just woefully uninformed about how factchecking and sourcing work)
1 and 3 is the same. What Fox is doing is gaslighting: Spreading so much false information that people are themselves unable to separate out facts from the lies. It works especially well on people who have no other point of reference.
|
|
|
On March 08 2019 23:56 Ayaz2810 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess. Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 13:40 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 13:07 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 12:31 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 12:00 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 11:49 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 11:24 Ayaz2810 wrote:On March 08 2019 10:46 xDaunt wrote:On March 08 2019 09:04 Ayaz2810 wrote:
4 years for Manafort?! My fucking brother in law got 5 for holding up a gas station to buy heroin after he got hooked on Oxy in the Army. And Manafort gets fucking 4 years for treason?
What the hell is going on? Judge Berman-Jackson better drop the hammer on this piece of shit. He wasn’t convicted of treason. THAT'S what you focus on in my diatribe? Fine, he was convicted of a bunch of white collar crimes and many of them were related to the treason he committed but has not yet been charged with. Does that help? And we all know he's a traitor. We don't have to hold him to the same standard as a court of law. I know for a fact he helped Trump get elected with the help of Russia. I don't need 4,000 pages of documents and a bullet point timeline made by prosecutors to tell me what I see in front of my face already. There's enough public reporting on the issue for all of us to be certain it happened. If there was any doubt left, the sharing of secret polling data with Russian intel put a nail in that fuckin' coffin. EDIT: Fun speculation time. The data transmitted from the Trump server to Alfa Bank was likely the polling data and the info Manafort shared was the information to make sense of it. Calling it now. There is no basis for any of this. None of what Manafort was even charged with, much less convicted of, had anything to do with Trump. Hell, we still don’t have any evidence of Trump/Russia collusion according to the House and Senate committees, and it is obvious that Mueller’s report won’t have it either, which is why Democrats are twisting themselves in pretzels to move onto to an obstruction narrative. But that charge is just as baseless due to testimony that McCabe, Comey, and Baker have given. No basis? What universe do you live in? Existing ties to Russia through Ukraine Republican platform change Ties to Russian oligarchs (even in debt to them) Sharing of polling data Trump tower meeting Konstantin Kilimnik Ties to Roger Stone > Wikileaks > Russia Many more things that you can get just from reading for an hour. "On February 14, 2017, The New York Times reported that Paul Manafort had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials during 2016. Manafort said he did not knowingly meet any Russian intelligence officials.[32] Intercepted communications during the campaign show that Russian officials believed they could use Manafort to influence Trump.[79] On June 2, 2017, special counsel Robert Mueller assumed the criminal probe into Manafort,[80] which predates the 2016 election and the counterintelligence probe that in July 2016 began investigating possible collusion between Moscow and associates of Trump. Manafort was forced to resign as Trump campaign chairman in August 2016 amid questions over his business dealings in Ukraine years earlier.[80] On September 18, 2017, CNN reported that the FBI wiretapped Manafort from 2014 until an unspecified date in 2016 and again from the fall of 2016 until early 2017, pursuant to two separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders. It has not been confirmed that Trump's conversations with Manafort were intercepted as part of this surveillance. CNN also confirmed that "Mueller's team ... has been provided details of these communications."[81] In October 2017, Manafort was indicted by a federal grand jury and arrested on twelve criminal charges including conspiracy, money laundering, failure to register as an agent of a foreign power, and false statements.[82] The charges arose from his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and are unrelated to the Trump campaign.[83] Manafort pleaded not guilty and was placed under house arrest.[84] On February 22, 2018, Manafort was indicted on 32 federal charges including tax evasion, money laundering and fraud relating to their foreign lobbying before, during and after the 2016 campaign.[85] The following day, after Rick Gates plead guilty to some charges, he was indicted on two additional charges relating to pro-Russian lobbying in the United States.[86]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials First of all, you are citing a Wikileaks article that is inaccurate and clearly out of date. Second, the article still doesn’t support what you are arguing. You are badly overciting it. EDIT: Just to put an exclamation point on this, here's the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman talking to CBS last month: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said Thursday that his committee's Russia investigation has yet to find evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and the Kremlin but will soon release a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian interference in the last presidential election.
In an interview with CBS published Thursday, Burr (R-N.C.) gave glimpses into the dynamics and scope of his committee's probe, which was launched shortly before Trump's 2017 inauguration and has now stretched into its third year. Burr told CBS that the committee staff has interviewed more than 200 witnesses from multiple countries and reviewed over 300,000 pages.
"Based on the evidence to date," Burr said, the committee could not definitively say there was collusion between Trump and the Russians.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," Burr told CBS.
Still, the senator said some questions raised over the investigation could occupy the committee "for the next decade," and that portions of the final report could be so classified that they are never revealed to the public. Burr said his committee is "close to pushing out the door" a report on the Obama administration's response to Russian election interference, a release that the chairman said could come within a "matter of weeks." Source. Let's just be clear that this guy knows exactly what's out there. In fact, he has more than Mueller does because he gets access to intelligence assets. He's a Republican and thus a party hack. Did you not see the circlejerk that was Cohen's testimony? Also: "What we do know, and it's part of the public record, there's never been a campaign in American history that during the campaign and its aftermath that the campaign folks affiliated with the campaign had as many ties with Russia as the Trump campaign did," Warner said." And: "In an interview on CNN, Schiff rejected Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr’s statements from earlier this month, in which Burr said evidence shows no collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia. “Chairman Burr must have a different word for it,” Schiff told host Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” pointing to communications between Russia and Donald Trump Jr. and former Trump aides George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn. “You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence,” Schiff said, adding, “ There is a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/17/trump-russia-collusion-adam-schiff-1173434Considering the Dems are the only ones attempting any kind of oversight and transparency, I'm gonna go ahead and say conspiracy to defraud the United States is on the table for everyone involved. Bonus points for Schiff taking the words out of my mouth. You realize that all of the testimony from every member of the FBI and DOJ who was involved in the investigation rebuts Schiff, right? Other than McCabe, Schiff may be the most dishonest player in this whole mess. You realize that what you said is factually untrue right? Parroting Trump talking points does not prove a point. In fact, it's part of the problem. I'm mildly irritated that people are allowed to lie with impunity and claim it as an "argument" or "rebuttal". The intelligence agencies and their employees (both former and current) are mortified at Trump's conduct and several suspect him of being an agent of Russia. But the fact that you said testimony and a lot of what I linked is not testimony means you're going to come at me on semantics as usual. I see it coming. There are more people/statements from agencies involved with handling of classified intelligence who agree with Schiff than those who don't. So you're full of it. And this is just a fraction of what is out there. These people are trying to tell us without telling us. It's not rocket science. But people like you claim because it isn't specific enough, it's all made up. EDIT: It's also worth noting that these are Republicans. Just in case you start with the "angry Democrat" lies. I'm starting to worry that you've consumed the Kool-Aid. "BURR: So if you've got a 36-page document of specific claims that are out there, the FBI would have to for counter intelligence reasons, try to verify anything that might be claimed in there, one, and probably first and foremost, is the counterintelligence concerns that we have about blackmail. Would that be an accurate statement? COMEY: Yes. If the FBI receives a credible allegation that there is some effort to co-opt, coerce, direct, employee covertly an American on behalf of the foreign power, that's the basis on which a counterintelligence investigation is opened." https://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/08/full-text-james-comey-trump-russia-testimony-239295Thus: "F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia" https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/us/politics/fbi-trump-russia-inquiry.html" Do you still believe the President could be a Russian asset?" asked CNN's Anderson Cooper during an interview with McCabe on "Anderson Cooper 360." " I think it's possible. I think that's why we started our investigation, and I'm really anxious to see where (special counsel Robert) Mueller concludes that," McCabe said. “There is some kind of special rapport relationship between the two of them. And I think Mr. Putin, who is an exceptionally well-trained KGB officer, intelligence officer, I think has exploited and cultivated this relationship and is taking full advantage of it. He [Trump] acts like he has an ulterior motive that is not apparent and whether or not he is trying cover up something, whether he is fearful of what Mr. Putin might do.” https://www.newsweek.com/putin-knows-lot-more-american-public-knows-about-trumps-dealings-russia-says-1301253"...Mr Putin was directing a state-sponsored effort to interfere with the US election. The FBI was already looking at ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, but the CIA memo seemed to confirm Russian efforts to throw the election Mr Trump's way." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42493918"Trump’s handling of the matter has been a much greater source of dismay inside the intelligence community than widely understood. One official said CIA employees were staggered by Trump’s performance during a news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki this summer at which he treated denials by Putin as so “strong and powerful” that they offset the conclusions of the CIA.“There was this gasp” among those watching at the CIA, the official said. “You literally had people in panic mode watching it at Langley. On all floors. Just shock.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/gap-continues-to-widen-between-trump-and-intelligence-community-on-key-issues/2018/12/11/23a02cb0-f8db-11e8-863c-9e2f864d47e7_story.html?utm_term=.d55020196b51
I hate to break it to you, but statements in the media (especially anonymous statements) aren't even remotely compelling in light of all of the testimony (UNDER OATH) that is now out there. Doug Collins was kind enough to release Bruce Ohr's testimony transcript today, and is planning on releasing more. It's a good place to start. Many of the other key transcripts were reported on over at The Epoch Times. The point is that there is ample information out there showing not only that the Trump/Russia collusion narrative is a hoax, but that it was likely generated through illegal activity, including abuse of the NSA database and FISA court.
|
On March 09 2019 00:42 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2019 23:35 Womwomwom wrote:
He's basically saying that "everyone does it, so why does it matter?" Which isn't remotely true unless you're the type of person who is willing to equate a politician spending public funds on a $5 meat pie with a politician spending public funds to fly a private helicopter to a private political fundraiser event. No, I’m not excusing anything. I’m just pointing out that there is an obvious material difference between lies about substantive policy issues and mere puffery. Trump talking about crowd sizes or having the greatest people or any of his other self-promotional spiels falls into the latter category and is not something that I’m particularly excited about. Bernie saying something obviously dishonest like “under my healthcare system, you will get to keep your doctor, you will only lose your insurance plan” is a dangerous misrepresentation of an important policy issue.
I'm glad you agree Trump's consistent lying about his own nonexistent healthcare plans and infrastructure plans was dangerous and inappropriate! Or perhaps his lying about a tax plan being passed right before the November midterms is more your speed?
(seriously, picking healthcare as a topic has some intense genre blindness here-at least Bernie has a policy instead of fantasy nonsense that never materialized)
|
Its a hoax, except for the part where Trump admitted that Jr met with the Russian government to discuss obtaining information on Hillary.
You know, except for the parts that happened, its totally a hoax...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
