The Robert Mueller Investigation

[David Dennison 19534]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

So you recognize that Trump's campaign manager is a dirty operator, and yet you're confident that any conspiracy allegations are "shit".

Gotcha.

You're WAY smarter than that.  It's almost as if you're . . . nah . . .

It's all just a coincidence. 

[triplehorn 2664]

28 minutes ago, suddenly shaggy said:

Bullshit. You've minimized the Russian interference, belittling it at every turn. You have an agenda and are completely predictable in repeating it. 

 

that, and

 

Spoiler

 

 

[Anastasis 23717]

I think that I have been pretty clear, but I will reiterate since you guys appear to have a hard time with my perspective. I don’t think that the trump campaign was capable of colluding with themselves much less with a multinational ring of Putin linked oligarchs and Russian intelligence agents. I think it was fucking amateur hour. Perkins cole vs. Michael Cohen, beavis and butthead. Lol. I think that manafort was a fucking opportunistic operator, in massive amounts of debt to bad people and trying to posture his insider status and influence peddle to keep the lions at bay. Stone is a buffoon. And Trump was the narcissistic clown at the center of the entire three ring circus. If mueller demonstrates that the trump campaign contributed to crafting of content or targeting, line up the guilty parties and let’s get it on. What is clear either way is that the Russians exploited divisions that we created over the last 40 years of political decline. I don’t think that they required any inside information to craft the content or effectively target their operation. We fucking created the hashtags for them. And that fundamental defect is not going to go away. I think that we as Americans are responsible for creating the political environment susceptible to that external interference, and it will in fact only get worse. Death spiral. And yep, the history that has brought us to this point is a #bothsides proposition.

[David Dennison 19534]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that I have been pretty clear, but I will reiterate since you guys appear to have a hard time with my perspective. I don’t think that the trump campaign was capable of colluding with themselves much less with a multinational ring of Putin linked oligarchs and Russian intelligence agents. I think it was fucking amateur hour. Perkins cole vs. Michael Cohen, beavis and butthead. Lol. I think that manafort was a fucking opportunistic operator, in massive amounts of debt to bad people and trying to posture his insider status and influence peddle to keep the lions at bay. Stone is a buffoon. And Trump was the narcissistic clown at the center of the entire three ring circus. If mueller demonstrates that the trump campaign contributed to crafting of content or targeting, line up the guilty parties and let’s get it on. What is clear either way is that the Russians exploited divisions that we created over the last 40 years of political decline. I don’t think that they required any inside information to craft the content or effectively target their operation. We fucking created the hashtags for them. And that fundamental defect is not going to go away. I think that we as Americans are responsible for creating the political environment susceptible to that external interference, and it will in fact only get worse. Death spiral. And yep, the history that has brought us to this point is a #bothsides proposition.

Over 100 contacts.

All a coincidence.

[triplehorn 2664]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that I have been pretty clear, but I will reiterate since you guys appear to have a hard time with my perspective. I don’t think that the trump campaign was capable of colluding with themselves much less with a multinational ring of Putin linked oligarchs and Russian intelligence agents. I think it was fucking amateur hour. Perkins cole vs. Michael Cohen, beavis and butthead. Lol. I think that manafort was a fucking opportunistic operator, in massive amounts of debt to bad people and trying to posture his insider status and influence peddle to keep the lions at bay. Stone is a buffoon. And Trump was the narcissistic clown at the center of the entire three ring circus. If mueller demonstrates that the trump campaign contributed to crafting of content or targeting, line up the guilty parties and let’s get it on. What is clear either way is that the Russians exploited divisions that we created over the last 40 years of political decline. I don’t think that they required any inside information to craft the content or effectively target their operation. We fucking created the hashtags for them. And that fundamental defect is not going to go away. I think that we as Americans are responsible for creating the political environment susceptible to that external interference, and it will in fact only get worse. Death spiral. And yep, the history that has brought us to this point is a #bothsides proposition.

They are capable of every bit of criminality, both charged and dangling in plain view.

Heaping silly names and descriptors doesn't exonerate them

It's not a fundamental defect, it's a common vulnerability.  Just like our skin can't resist being pierced by a bullet, our minds are subject to weaponized psychological tools.

Now it's become an ongoing coordinated attack for survival

[Anastasis 23717]

19 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Just like our skin can't resist being pierced by a bullet, our minds are subject to weaponized psychological tools.

The actions of the director of the fbi had a greater influence on the outcome of the election than Bernie coloring books and satan arm wrestling memes.#mistakesweremade 

Edited February 15, 2019 by Anastasis

[jimmyjazz 47153]

So Anastasis, do you think the Obama campaign and his administration worked as closely with the Russians as Trump's has?

It's your own silly anarchist tear-it-all-down perspective that keeps you from seeing the extreme differences between Trump and every administration prior. 

Every.  Single.  One.  Even Nixon just fucked with our own, he didn't repeatedly (or ever) align with our sworn enemy.

You're like the engineer who takes a heat map that runs from 0 - 10, limits the range to 0 - 1, and then screams "look, it's all red!!!"

[Anastasis 23717]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

So Anastasis, do you think the Obama campaign and his administration worked as closely with the Russians as Trump's has?

Well, he didn’t do anything as disgraceful as Helsinki, but let’s not act like we haven’t attempted to court a relationship with Putin and Russia for decades.

 

 

[jimmyjazz 47153]

You left out the #bothsides

[Anastasis 23717]

I thought that “decades” and the fishing pic was covering the bases sufficiently. Maybe I should I have posted one of bill and Boris yucking it up too. Speaking of election interference and the rise of Putin....

Edited February 15, 2019 by Anastasis

[jimmyjazz 47153]

Wait, you're alleging election interference in Bill Clinton's campaign and denying it in Trump's?  That's your play?

[Anastasis 23717]

5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Wait, you're alleging election interference in Bill Clinton's campaign and denying it in Trump's?  That's your play?

The other direction my friend. We intervened in effort to influence the outcome of the Russian elections cause the communist candidate was going to beat Boris. Clinton admin greased IMF resources that yeltsin needed to shore up his campaign footing and sent American advisors to Russia and then turned the other way while election fraud played out. Then Boris called Clinton and introduced his successor. 

[jimmyjazz 47153]

OK, I didn't understand what angle you were playing.

I couldn't begin to tell you how vast I think the differences are, as I root for one side, not both.  You might think we've earned everything we're getting, and I completely disagree, but even still that still doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye towards what is a clear conspiracy to turn our election.  Trump is a traitor, and you know it.

[Atx71 146]

4 hours ago, Thetexashammer said:

The Republican Party hates Trump. Did you hit your head on something?

They sure have a lip lock on his scrotum. I would hate that.  Cruz and company.....not so much. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21551]

6 hours ago, Thetexashammer said:

This is an easy one. I challenge you to find a scintilla of evidence that there is even one person on the planet who actually likes the guy. Not tolerates, but genuinely likes him.

Thanks for admitting the Republican party is full of cowards who put the needs of their own re-elections over their duty to the country and constitution.  

GOP=Giant Ole Pussies

[Goredho 17652]

I still want to know more about this:

Fact 1: Cambridge Analytica data of potential voters and their motivations wound up in Russian hands.  Fact 2:  The Russian’s engaged in social media campaigns in the lead up to the election to motivate Trump voters and demotivate Hillary voters.  Fact 3:  The 2016 election was decided by 107,000 votes in 3 states.  Seemingly unexplored question by Mueller/others:  Were voters in those 3 states specifically targeted by Russian social media campaigns in such a way that could have resulted in a 107,000 vote swing in their absence?

You might have to force FB and Twitter to hand over some data,, but that is an answerable question.  If the answer is yes, then that is a smoking gun — anyone involved with getting Russia that Cambridge Analytica data are guilty of conspiring with Russia to defraud the US and hand the election to Trump/keep Hillary out of the White House.

But fuck, Cambridge Analytica is like 53773674774 news cycles ago.  Ancient history.  Being a mindful citizen is fucking exhausting.

Edited February 15, 2019 by Goredho

[hayden_horn 11402]

Last night was a bad night for both sides

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Tomorrow will be worse.

It always is.

[TornACL 7792]

5 hours ago, Anastasis said:

The other direction my friend. We intervened in effort to influence the outcome of the Russian elections cause the communist candidate was going to beat Boris. Clinton admin greased IMF resources that yeltsin needed to shore up his campaign footing and sent American advisors to Russia and then turned the other way while election fraud played out. Then Boris called Clinton and introduced his successor. 

Ahh the "you think we're so innocent?" angle

[WhatTheBuck 28929]

9 minutes ago, TornACL said:

Ahh the "you think we're so innocent?" angle

We've assassinated other countries' leaders, therefore it should be okay for them to assassinate our leader. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

We've assassinated other countries' leaders, therefore it should be okay for them to assassinate our leader. 

Also, we’ve bombed other countries, therefore it should be okay for them to bomb us.

It’s really one of the most pathetic arguments so it’s no surprise it’s the one Anastasis keeps going back to the well on.

Edited February 15, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Anastasis 23717]

17 minutes ago, TornACL said:

Ahh the "you think we're so innocent?" angle

More like an “American foreign policy creating blowback and unintended consequences, shocking!” angle. 

[Anastasis 23717]

7 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

We've assassinated other countries' leaders, therefore it should be okay for them to assassinate our leader. 

The reality on this one is much more ironic. Clinton influenced the outcome of a Russian election to aid yeltsin, who elevates Putin, who would go on to influence the outcome of an American election to suppress a Clinton. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The false equivalencies never stop.

[wildcat09 29579]

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

More like an “American foreign policy creating blowback and unintended consequences, shocking!” angle. 

You know, it's actually possible to acknowledge that our foreign policy has frequently been a clusterfuck that leads to blowback, and still be fucking pissed when terrorists crash planes into the World Trade Center in response.

Would you be playing this same game if we were talking about an American politician who had helped Al Qaeda?

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20913]

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The reality on this one is much more ironic. Clinton influenced the outcome of a Russian election to aid yeltsin, who elevates Putin, who would go on to influence the outcome of an American election to suppress a Clinton, which makes Russian interference in our affairs totally okay.

 

FIFY

[Anastasis 23717]

I’ve never said that that makes it “okay”, or that we should lay back and enjoy it. I was asked about our governments recent history of engagement with Putin and Russia. That episode  is a part of that history. One that is kinda relevant to the current discussion related to election influence. We can and should harden our election systems. We should harden our social media platforms. We should harden our political parties. We should rethink our foreign policy broadly. But most importantly we should harden our electorate. The last one is the most crucial, hardest to implement, and least likely to succeed. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The reality on this one is much more ironic. Clinton influenced the outcome of a Russian election to aid yeltsin, who elevates Putin, who would go on to influence the outcome of an American election to suppress a Clinton. 

Just like to set the record straight on this, I know I’m taking the troll bait.

Yeltsin was running against a hardcore communist when Russia’s democracy was extraordinarily weak.  It would have been criminally negligent for Clinton to not help Yeltsin preserve their struggling democracy. 

Comparing that to Putin’s assault on western democracy and intentionally radicalizing our populations is like comparing someone that brings medicine versus someone that brings poison. 

[Anastasis 23717]

Propping up Putin and the oligarchs to own the socialists!

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Trolololol

[Anastasis 23717]

Spend a bit of time reading up about the coalition that supported Zyuganov, why they did so, and the people who organized to oppose him. Yeltsin as a tool of western economic interests was at risk, not democracy. And we know what wins out when those two things are put into opposition. 

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

The premise that all the bad things happening is because previous American policy is a ridiculous take. One could argue that our world has been more stable in the past 50 years than most any era in history, because of our policies. There are bad actors out there that want to corrupt the "free" systems. You can bomb them down, regime change them, sanction them, whatever. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I don't necessarily agree that certain tools in certain situations were the right choice, but maybe they were based on all our intel but others subverted our strategies. That's global politics. We'll never get it right 100% of the time. 

So let's throw the baby out with the bathwater and give up on being a global player. I'm sure that'll work out real well for us in the long run. 

[Pig Bellmont 8885]

this is fine. I mean who cares if Putin runs US foreign policy? What’s the big deal if the trump campaign definitively coordinated and directed cooperation with Russian intelligence operations intended to sway our election?

[WhatTheBuck 28929]

50 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The reality on this one is much more ironic. Clinton influenced the outcome of a Russian election to aid yeltsin, who elevates Putin, who would go on to influence the outcome of an American election to suppress a Clinton. 

What did Clinton do to influence the outcome of the Russian election in Yeltsin's favor? Which American intelligence agencies were involved? What Russian laws were broken?

[jimmyjazz 47153]

53 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

More like an “American foreign policy creating blowback and unintended consequences, shocking!” angle. 

So?  We're supposed to just take it?  "Take the consequence, pussy" is your answer?

[Lurch 5949]

You really need to go back and retake a high school civics class.  Circumstantial evidence is normally not allowed as presentable evidence in a court of law.  This board is more out of touch with reality than the Flat Earth Society.

Bump.

[Jack Straw 2955]

9 hours ago, Thetexashammer said:

The Republican Party hates Trump. Did you hit your head on something?

Why does anyone post a serious response to anything this guy says?  

[Atx71 146]

42 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The reality on this one is much more ironic. Clinton influenced the outcome of a Russian election to aid yeltsin, who elevates Putin, who would go on to influence the outcome of an American election to suppress a Clinton. 

Did Billy and Hillary hack Russian interwebz to aid Comrade (formerly) Yeltsin? I bet they flooded Facebook, Instagram and Twitter with pics of Zyuganov and a Ukranian prostitute. Right???

[Pig Bellmont 8885]

3 minutes ago, Lurch said:

 

Bump.

 

As a joke, right? Because that person knows literally nothing about standards of proof and admissible evidence 

[hayden_horn 11402]

Just now, Pig Bellmont said:

As a joke, right? Because that person knows literally nothing about standards of proof and admissible evidence 

I think it is just as a reminder that @EMAWesome is a complete dumbass partisan hack. 

[Goredho 17652]

Some 400,000 Americans died in WWII in the pre-atomic weapon era.  That’s the cost of isolationism, leaving the rest of the world to their own devices and to be 100% certain we should be doing what we are doing.  I don’t like being up in everyone else’s business and involved in ambiguous causes, but it’s a steep fucking price to pay otherwise.

[jimmyjazz 47153]

Just now, hayden_horn said:

I think it is just as a reminder that @EMAWesome is a complete dumbass partisan hack. 

I don't have it in me to dig, but I'm quite sure one of the boys -- Sean, Tucker, Rush, Ann -- pushed that "circumstantial evidence is inadmissable" angle in the last couple of days and so here we go.

The level of ignorance and blind willingness of the right to accept whatever is shoveled their way is stunning.

[Red Five 41735]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

We've assassinated other countries' leaders, therefore it should be okay for them to assassinate our leader. 

Well...

[Fozzz 152]

On 2/13/2019 at 9:51 AM, RomaVicta said:

Do you believe that the "adoption" meeting with Russians which all American participants have lied about is not evidence of collusion? The president dictated a press release for his son that was also a lie about this meeting.

Do you believe the numerous stories emerging from the Mueller investigation are not evidence of collusion?'

What is your opinion of the President of the United States insisting on meetings with Putin where no American is allowed to be present to hear what is discussed? What is your opinion of Trump lying about the South American meeting?

This all seem normal to you? No evidence here to raise even suspicion?

Please don't answer that all you know is what the GOP senator or the senate committee tell you.

I take the same stance as the NYT as to whether the Trump tower meeting and the meeting with Putin amount to evidence of collusion:

Quote

Mr. Trump’s frustration with the Russian investigation is not surprising. He is right that no public evidence has emerged showing that his campaign conspired with Russia in the election interference or accepted Russian money. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/09/20/us/politics/russia-interference-election-trump-clinton.html

If Trump did collude with the Russians then why did the US leave the INF treaty?  Why is the US backing regime change in Venezuela?  Those actions are inconsistent with collusion as they are directly adverse to Russia's interests and you would assume they have compromising material on Trump if Trump if there was collusion.

[Fozzz 152]

People think I'm trolling in this thread but the thread below illustrates why I hate this stupid Russiagate bullshit - it's all the "progressive" media ever fucking talks about anymore, leaving no time for discussing substantive issues.  This is embarrassing.

 

 

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

5 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

If Trump did collude with the Russians then why did the US leave the INF treaty?  Why is the US backing regime change in Venezuela?  Those actions are inconsistent with collusion as they are directly adverse to Russia's interests and you would assume they have compromising material on Trump if Trump if there was collusion.

There is too much machinery around Trump to be able to do whatever he wants (to assist himself or others). Those protections are starting to strip away but the checks/balances of our government are doing their job in limiting Trumps whims. Its possible we got out of the INF due to other issues like China. Maybe someone convinced Trump that the Venezuela thing is better for him than what Putin sold him. 

If Trump didn't collude, why has he dogged everyone on Earth other than Putin? 

Edited February 15, 2019 by SmokeyTheBear

[Fozzz 152]

Just now, SmokeyTheBear said:

There is too much machinery around Trump to be able to do whatever he wants (to assist himself or others). Those protections are starting to strip away but with the checks/balances of our government are doing their job in limiting Trumps whims. Its possible we got out of the INF due to other issues like China. Maybe someone convinced Trump that the Venezuela thing is better for him than what Putin sold him. 

If Trump didn't collude, why has he dogged everyone on Earth other than Putin? 

lol what checks/balances are involved with leaving the INF treaty?  No one forced that on Trump.  I'm sure Pompeo and Bolton were the ones driving it but cheeto dick and cheeto dick alone was the one who made that decision.  If there was collusion, somewhere in his reptilian brain he would have thought "Putie Pute ain't gonna like this at all...what if he tries to come at me??"  Trump is in this only for himself after all, it's not like he would be willing to take personal risks in furtherance of some larger ideological project...like serving the military-industrial complex and maximizing American hard power, which is why Pompeo and Bolton wanted out of the treaty.  They want an arms race to funnel more money to defense contractors to develop new nuclear weapons for enhancing US' power projection capabilities abroad.  

[Biff Tannen 46163]

Leaving the INF treaty is a good thing for Putin.  He's now free to build whatever missiles he wants.  He was probably doing that anyway, but now if it is discovered, there's no treaty holding him accountable.

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

You asked about 2 very specific instances within an ocean of decisions that Trump has touched. There is no possible way, that even with Trump being a proven Putin asset, that he could totally reinforce Putin's vision within our system. Trump is a useful idiot for a lot of people it seems. Putin will get what he wants, and others within our system will try to get what they want. 

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

Leaving the INF treaty is a good thing for Putin.  He's now free to build whatever missiles he wants.  He was probably doing that anyway, but now if it is discovered, there's no treaty holding him accountable.

Lulz at Putin be held accountable by any treaty.