The Robert Mueller Investigation

[henrygandorf 29,176]

so the mueller report confirms the russian govt attacked our elections, and they're still trying to peddle us the "complete fiction" narrative?

[troph 24,562]

Hannity is going off the rails tonight.  wrong thread I know.  barely a mention of the text of the report.  just deep state and BUT HILLARY!!! and his citing legal authority for Hillary's crimes?  Gregg Jarrett, on an infographic that makes it look like an indictment from a bonafide legal authority.  fuck these guys.  man, EVERYONE read the goddamned report.  EVERY FUCKING WORD. If you aren't reading it, you are a shitty American.  there I said it.

 

[BradInATX 9,208]

8 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

 

I’m not a lawyer. I’m not an expert on legal standards, but they’re there for a reason. You’re welcome to comment and speculate all you want about what you think happened, but the findings and conclusions are what counts.  

 

Fair enough, but the post of yours that I quoted was you trying to conflate the two. You tried to create a tale where Mueller passing on prosecuting somehow makes people who think he's probably guilty of crimes wrong, despite those two things having completely different burdens of proof. 

Mueller's findings don't even remotely prove anyone who believes Trump broke the law wrong. But as I said before, you already know that. 

 

This is basically your post:

Normal people: "Generally what we know makes me believe it's very very likely the world is round"

Some important dude: "I have never walked in a straight line around the globe and ended up back at my origin point, so I can't definitively say the world is round. It's probably round and it's definitely not flat, but I can't with 100% confidence say that it's round"

GRHorn: "Haha stupid idiot round-earthers!"

Edited April 19, 2019 by BradInATX

[Anastasis 23,395]

33 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

So what do we do about Russians interfering with our elections? I don’t see a reason why they wouldn’t ramp up that type of activity in the next election. At a minimum look at the social disruption it’s caused.

IMO that’s the bigger issue that needs to be addressed at this point.

Step 1. Turn off twitter and facebook.

Step 2. Engage an original political thought. 

 

A good number of people here, and Americans more generally, won't make it past step 1. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

 

In other words, focus on real shit people. [/trumpkin thoughts]

Come on brah, don’t you have some Glenn Greenwald tweets to post? 

[troph 24,562]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 Step 1. Turn off twitter and facebook.

Step 2. Engage an original political thought. 

 

A good number of people here, and Americans more generally, won't make it past step 1. 

I've been watching CSPAN some today to try and avoid commentary as much as I can, and frankly, just reading the goddamned thing.  original sources beget original thought. 

 

edit - tonight I've been on CNN and Fox to see what's being said.  Jay Sekulow was on Fox and now CNN.

Edited April 19, 2019 by troph

[Anastasis 23,395]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Come on brah, don’t you have some Glenn Greenwald tweets to post? 

No, but a scarecrow quote from Wizard of Oz.

 

People without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?

[Anastasis 23,395]

Just now, troph said:

I've been watching CSPAN some today to try and avoid commentary as much as I can, and frankly, just reading the goddamned thing.  original sources beget original thought.

A fucking men.

[bolverk 29,399]

5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

 

In other words, focus on real shit people. [/trumpkin thoughts]

Is this not real?

Separately, on August 2, 2016, Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort met in New York City with his long-time business associate Konstantin Kilimnik, who the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence. Kilimnik requested the meeting to deliver in person a peace plan for Ukraine that Manafort acknowledged to the Special Counsel's Office was a "backdoor” way for Russia to control part of eastern Ukraine; both men believed the plan would require candidate Trump's assent to succeed (were he to be elected President). They also discussed the status of the Trump Campaign and Manafort's strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states. Months before that meeting, Manafort had caused internal polling data to be shared with Kilimnik, and the sharing continued for some period of time after their August meeting.

[GRHorn 105]

7 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Page 2, Vol. 1.

The report describes actions and events that the Special Counsel's Office found to be supported by the evidence collected in our investigation. In some instances, the report points out the absence of evidence or conflicts in the evidence about a particular fact or event. In other instances, when substantial, credible evidence enabled the Office to reach a conclusion with confidence, the report states that the investigation established that certain actions or events occurred. A statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.

In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of "collusion.” In so doing, the Office recognized that the word "collud[e]" was used in communications with the Acting Attorney General confirming certain aspects of the investigation's scope and that the term has frequently been invoked in public reporting about the investigation. But collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. For those reasons, the Office's focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law. In connection with that analysis, we addressed the factual question whether members of the Trump Campaign “coordinat[ed]” — a term that appears in the appointment order — with Russian election interference activities. Like collusion, “coordination” does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law. We understood coordination to require an agreement — tacit or express — between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference. That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other's actions or interests. We applied the term coordination in that sense when stating in the report that the investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

Yeah I’ve learned in this thread that collusion is not an official crime in our legal code. Thus they looked at the issue defined by conspiracy or coordination. Again, they couldn’t establish it after a 22 month investigation and several million dollars spent.  I’m still missing Wtf your point is?

[troph 24,562]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

A fucking men.

it's a daming report on many levels.  we should be at war with Russia (we might be cyber wise) but we need to scream from the rooftops that your social media is infected.  the social media portion of the report is pretty eye opening.  like this gem:

 

The IRA organized and promoted political rallies inside the United States while posing as U.S . grassroots activists. First, the IRA used one of its preexisting social media personas (Facebook groups and Twitter accounts, for example) to announce and promote the event. The IRA then sent a large number of direct messages to followers of its social media account asking them to attend the event. From those who responded with interest in attending , the IRA then sought a U.S. person to serve as the event's coordinator. In most cases, the IRA account operator would tell the U.S . person that they personally could not attend the event due to some preexisting conflict or because they were somewhere else in the United States.82 The IRA then further promoted the event by contacting U.S. media about the event and directing them to speak with the coordinator. 83 After the event, the IRA posted videos and photographs of the event to the IRA 's social media accounts. 84

 

The report goes on to highlight a few.  the sophistication of the Russians is quite impressive and their ability to stir dissention and activate Trump support is outright alarming.

[TwiceHorn 31,274]

I would assume that the real response to Russian interference is going on behind closed doors in places like Fort Meade.

The social media interference I don't know how you handle.  That's more of a function of American stupidity than Russian cunning.

[bolverk 29,399]

40 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

No, we just understand the difference between "collusion" and the words in that quote.  Mueller pointed it out as well. 

 

20 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Where? I wanna see. 

 

2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Yeah I’ve learned in this thread that collusion is not an official crime in our legal code. Thus they looked at the issue defined by conspiracy or coordination. Again, they couldn’t establish it after a 22 month investigation and several million dollars spent.  I’m still missing Wtf your point is?

Wtf was your point?

[troph 24,562]

interesting question, text first:

On October 12, 2016, WikiLeaks wrote again that it was "great to see you and your dad talking about our publications. Strongly suggest your dad tweets this link if he mentions us wlsearch.tk." 257 WikiLeaks wrote that the link would help Trump in "digging through" leaked emails and stated, "we just released Podesta emails Part 4."258 Two days later, Trump Jr. publicly tweeted the wlsearch.tk link.259

 

how is the participation in the dissemination of stolen property not a crime?

[troph 24,562]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

I would assume that the real response to Russian interference is going on behind closed doors in places like Fort Meade.

The social media interference I don't know how you handle.  That's more of a function of American stupidity than Russian cunning.

I disagree.  we need to figure out how to keep foreign actors out of our politics.  there's also this:

 

In addition to targeting individuals involved in the Clinton Campaign, GRU officers also targeted individuals and entities involved in the administration of the elections. Victims included U.S. state and local entities, such as state boards of elections (SBOEs), secretaries of state, and county governments, as well as individuals who worked for those entities. 186 The GRU also targeted private technology firms responsible for manufacturing and administering election-related software and hardware, such as voter registration software and electronic polling stations. 187 The GRU continued to target these victims through the elections in November 2016. While the investigation identified evidence that the GRU targeted these individuals and entities, the Office did not investigate further. The Office did not, for instance, obtain or examine servers or other relevant items belonging to these victims. The Office understands that the FBI, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the states have separately investigated that activity.

[Anastasis 23,395]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

The social media interference I don't know how you handle.  That's more of a function of American stupidity than Russian cunning.

We obviously should start a war with foreign entities to fix our self made political dysfunction. 

[TwiceHorn 31,274]

1 minute ago, troph said:

interesting question, text first:

On October 12, 2016, WikiLeaks wrote again that it was "great to see you and your dad talking about our publications. Strongly suggest your dad tweets this link if he mentions us wlsearch.tk." 257 WikiLeaks wrote that the link would help Trump in "digging through" leaked emails and stated, "we just released Podesta emails Part 4."258 Two days later, Trump Jr. publicly tweeted the wlsearch.tk link.259

 

how is the participation in the dissemination of stolen property not a crime?

First Amendment.  Pentagon Papers.  If not complicit in the actual stealing, no criminal liability, or at least that's the tea leaf read.

I noticed that there was one section in the hacking/publication area redacted for HOM that seemed likely to be wikileaks.

[Anastasis 23,395]

5 minutes ago, troph said:

it's a daming report on many levels.  we should be at war with Russia (we might be cyber wise) but we need to scream from the rooftops that your social media is infected.  the social media portion of the report is pretty eye opening.  like this gem:

 

The IRA organized and promoted political rallies inside the United States while posing as U.S . grassroots activists. First, the IRA used one of its preexisting social media personas (Facebook groups and Twitter accounts, for example) to announce and promote the event. The IRA then sent a large number of direct messages to followers of its social media account asking them to attend the event. From those who responded with interest in attending , the IRA then sought a U.S. person to serve as the event's coordinator. In most cases, the IRA account operator would tell the U.S . person that they personally could not attend the event due to some preexisting conflict or because they were somewhere else in the United States.82 The IRA then further promoted the event by contacting U.S. media about the event and directing them to speak with the coordinator. 83 After the event, the IRA posted videos and photographs of the event to the IRA 's social media accounts. 84

 

The report goes on to highlight a few.  the sophistication of the Russians is quite impressive and their ability to stir dissention and activate Trump support is outright alarming.

I think that we have found the enemy. I am afraid that we are not going to like the finding. 

[bolverk 29,399]

7 minutes ago, troph said:

it's a daming report on many levels.  we should be at war with Russia (we might be cyber wise) but we need to scream from the rooftops that your social media is infected.  the social media portion of the report is pretty eye opening.  like this gem:

 

The IRA organized and promoted political rallies inside the United States while posing as U.S . grassroots activists. First, the IRA used one of its preexisting social media personas (Facebook groups and Twitter accounts, for example) to announce and promote the event. The IRA then sent a large number of direct messages to followers of its social media account asking them to attend the event. From those who responded with interest in attending , the IRA then sought a U.S. person to serve as the event's coordinator. In most cases, the IRA account operator would tell the U.S . person that they personally could not attend the event due to some preexisting conflict or because they were somewhere else in the United States.82 The IRA then further promoted the event by contacting U.S. media about the event and directing them to speak with the coordinator. 83 After the event, the IRA posted videos and photographs of the event to the IRA 's social media accounts. 84

 

The report goes on to highlight a few.  the sophistication of the Russians is quite impressive and their ability to stir dissention and activate Trump support is outright alarming.

 

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I would assume that the real response to Russian interference is going on behind closed doors in places like Fort Meade.

 The social media interference I don't know how you handle.  That's more of a function of American stupidity than Russian cunning.

Whether we know the general public realizes it or not, we are at war. From the report:

The IRA later used social media accounts and interest groups to sow discord in the U.S. political system through what it termed “information warfare." 

Edited April 19, 2019 by bolverk
better phrasing

[TwiceHorn 31,274]

Just now, bolverk said:

 

Whether we know it or not, we are at war. From the report:

The IRA later used social media accounts and interest groups to sow discord in the U.S. political system through what it termed “information warfare." 

That's not new.  There's probably more in the indictment. https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

[retread 2,951]

2 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Whether we know it or not, we are at war. From the report:

The IRA later used social media accounts and interest groups to sow discord in the U.S. political system through what it termed “information warfare." 

There is significant value in calling out aggressive rivals/enemies and putting them on notice. There's also value in sanctioning the hell out of them.

Edited April 19, 2019 by retread

[American Swindle 102]

I would assume that the real response to Russian interference is going on behind closed doors in places like Fort Meade.
The social media interference I don't know how you handle.  That's more of a function of American stupidity than Russian cunning.

Could it be possible that the US and Russia have been meddling in each other’s elections for decades?

Escalating war with Russia doesn’t sound like a good idea, but that’s just me. I don’t like war.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[atomheartbevo 89,430]

4 hours ago, horncyclist said:

4 hours ago, David Dennison said:

He cannot be removed by Democrats. They know that. They have no way to remove him from office.

Then put it on Republicans for standing by this traitor.

I'm hoping on the one hand, that Democrats in 2020 put this on every Republican in Congress who is up for election.

But I'm also shitting in the other.  We will see which fills up first although I'm suspicious about the outcome.

In a perfect world, there would be a large group of mid-tier Republican politicians (at the levels of state government, and larger cities) who come out swinging against incumbent Republicans in the primaries on this matter.  Next year would be a perfect storm for a lot of Republican incumbents to be taken down in their primaries.

[Michael Knight 12,897]

1 minute ago, American Swindle said:

 

Could it be possible that the US and Russia have been meddling in each other’s elections for decades?

Escalating war with Russia doesn’t sound like a good idea, but that’s just me. I don’t like war.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

What elections do you think Russia has?

[TwiceHorn 31,274]

4 minutes ago, retread said:

There is significant value in calling out aggressive rivals/enemies. There's also value in sanctioning the hell out of them.

Maybe some help from the social media outfits themselves.  I think there's a good bit of evidence that they pretty willfully ignored some foreign activity.  But there's some surveillance state aspects to that that are kind of gross.

Also, I see a new meme developing:  don't like what's being said on social media?  Declare it Russian interference.  Already happens here.  But if it becomes widespread, maybe it just neuters social media as a poltiical tool.  That would be pretty cool because it's a fucking shitheap of simpleminded debate.

Edited April 19, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[atomheartbevo 89,430]

2 minutes ago, retread said:

There is significant value in calling out aggressive rivals/enemies. There's also value in sanctioning the hell out of them.

We could cripple the Russian economy if we wanted to - put Russians out in the streets, something that scares the everliving fuck out of people like Putin.  Hell, we could funnel weapons to Russia's adversaries (something Russia has had no problem doing with our adversaries).  Start sending a lot more Russian troops home in body bags, see how the populace likes it.

Or even just work the internet to get stories into Russia, like how last year a bunch of US Army Special Forces, US Marines, and USAF Combat Controllers helped slaughter hundreds of "unofficial" Russian troops/mercenaries in Syria.  Bet that story never hit the Russian media.

[Enchubben 5,509]

1 minute ago, Michael Knight said:

What elections do you think Russia has?

Yea I was thinking the same thing. A country that is this invested in interfering a different country’s election, could do wonders in their own. I bet Putin gets over 100% of the vote in their “election”.

[elguapo 4,583]

5 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

What elections do you think Russia has?

The best elections

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

15 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Yeah I’ve learned in this thread that collusion is not an official crime in our legal code. Thus they looked at the issue defined by conspiracy or coordination. Again, they couldn’t establish it after a 22 month investigation and several million dollars spent.  I’m still missing Wtf your point is?

The point is that the U.S. president and his campaign were secretly aware of an illegal Russian intelligence operation to hurt his opponent and elect him, and instead of telling the FBI what they knew, Trump & Co. did whatever they could to encourage and aid Russia's effort.   That insufficient evidence of a direct agreement with Russia may kill criminal charges doesn't excuse the grave political misconduct, not to mention the obstruction. 

[bolverk 29,399]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Maybe some help from the social media outfits themselves.  I think there's a good bit of evidence that they pretty willfully ignored some foreign activity.  But there's some surveillance state aspects to that that are kind of gross.

Also, I see a new meme developing:  don't like what's being said on social media?  Declare it Russian interference.  Already happens here.  But if it becomes widespread, maybe it just neuters social media as a poltiical tool.  That would be pretty cool because it's a fucking shitheap of simpleminded debate.

We could also start by teaching online media literacy in public schools like a couple of Scandinavian countries and France are now doing.

[Satchel 6,908]

4 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It's looks like the flesh was willing, but his handlers kept him from going off the reservation.  

The investigations passed onto the states may be more incriminating.

And the report pretty much says no US officials or anyone associated with the Trump campaign knowingly aided Russia in meddling in our election process.

 

Looks like a shit load of redacted material. Somebody in Congress will be seeing the whole report right ?

The report says it could not be proved that the campaign "willfully" conspired with the Russians.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

 

[notre dame joe 172]

3 hours ago, Foosters said:

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a coward's response.

Edited April 19, 2019 by notre dame joe

[BrickHorn 18,191]

1 hour ago, American Swindle said:

Am I the only one that thinks the below sums up 65+% of the CR right now?

[\URL]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fuck off you gaslighting fuck.

[Anastasis 23,395]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Good to see that we have the origination of your request for tweets from Greenwald. Try to have an original thought from time to time Hugo. Maybe like one per 500 posts or something is a good place to start. 

[Anastasis 23,395]

1 minute ago, BrickHorn said:

Fuck off you gaslighting fuck.

Stick to your standard #bothsides quips.  Those have worked out well for you. 

[troph 24,562]

so far here is what really puzzles me...  and I'm still reading.

The breadth and depth of the inter-connection between the oligarchs and the Kremlin either directly or through proxies that weren't that hard to connect is - for lack of a better word - impressive.  the interactions between them about stolen emails, the offer to sell dirt, etc. and the opportunity to collaborate together - the Trump campaign and the Russians appears to have happened at an alarming frequency... yet it didn't happen?  okay, they are bumfucks.  I get it.  but wait....

then we have all of the individuals named as subjects of the investigation in the clarifying memo for the scope of the investigation either been caught lying or indicted for other crimes.  why?

then we have volume 2 which I'm not on yet but the highlights we've seen appear to suggest an (to use the word again) impressive attempt to obstruct? 

and to cap it all off Mueller acknowledges his investigation was limited by scope and by the evidence available - whether destroyed, witnesses not in the US, privilege or self-incriminating.

to be fair, he didn't say it, but there is an easy conclusion to draw - whether the Russians or Trump - organized crime knows how to keep that gap between nefarious dealings and criminal activity and this report smacks of that tell tale sign of organized crime through and through.

 

Edited April 19, 2019 by troph

[bolverk 29,399]

So, the NYTimes has a searchable form of the report up: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/18/us/politics/mueller-report-document.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

The word "Cambridge" does not appear a single time in the unredacted document. I find that a little strange to have not addressed their role at all given what's already known in the public record.

[Hornius Emeritus 12,419]

15 minutes ago, Satchel said:

The report says it could not be proved that the campaign "willfully" conspired with the Russians.

One of the things that I'm getting in my (slow) reading of the report is that Donald Jr. willfully conspired with the Russians but he was too stupid to know it was a crime.

[TwiceHorn 31,274]

17 minutes ago, bolverk said:

We could also start by teaching online media literacy in public schools like a couple of Scandinavian countries and France are now doing.

Yeah. I think it's more the olds, which might include some of us, than the youngsters.  In addition to low-quality debate, it or its users tend to form echo chambers. 

[TwiceHorn 31,274]

17 minutes ago, bolverk said:

We could also start by teaching online media literacy in public schools like a couple of Scandinavian countries and France are now doing.

Yeah. I think it's more the olds, which might include some of us, than the youngsters.  In addition to low-quality debate, it or its users tend to form echo chambers. 

[Larry T. Spider 1,740]

They have done studies that I’m to lazy to find that show it’s the olds. Their ability to detect BS in an online format is much lower than with people in their 20s. 

[Anastasis 23,395]

4 minutes ago, troph said:

organized crime knows how to keep that gap between nefarious dealings and criminal activity and it smacks of that through and through

Smarter politicians know how to run this stuff through their lawyer screens. 

 

Maybe later in the process they insert it into the surveillance apparatus. 

[BrickHorn 18,191]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Stick to your standard #bothsides quips.  Those have worked out well for you. 

Fuck off, you #bothsides fuck.  

[Anastasis 23,395]

1 minute ago, Larry T. Spider said:

They have done studies that I’m to lazy to find that show it’s the olds. Their ability to detect BS in an online format is much lower than with people in their 20s. 

Wonder what the age breakdown here was. 

[GHOSTUSER 361]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yep.  Gloves are starting to come off, which is nice.  Cooper basically told him to STFU.

You weren’t watching Martha MacCallum earlier. Our gloves are off. We’re defending our President. This isn’t your father’s GOP anymore.

 

Edited April 19, 2019 by Iconoclast Texan

[Anastasis 23,395]

2 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Fuck off, you #bothsides fuck.  

It’s never a pretty thing when willful delusions break down. Do the prague thing again bitch. 

Edited April 19, 2019 by Anastasis

[bolverk 29,399]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah. I think it's more the olds, which might include some of us, than the youngsters.  In addition to low-quality debate, it or its users tend to form echo chambers. 

I wish there were some way to initiate a nonpartisan public information campaign but, of course, it'd be shot down as "fake news."

As an aside and having grown up in a small town, the way that misinformation spreads on social media feels a whole lot like all the bullshit gossip that spreads so quickly and organically in those places.

[jimmyjazz 45,557]

37 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Yeah I’ve learned in this thread that collusion is not an official crime in our legal code. Thus they looked at the issue defined by conspiracy or coordination. 

Quote

The first item in Rosenstein's letter laying out the appointment of Mueller as SC authorizes investigation into:

(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump

 

Now, if you'd like to argue there is a specific legal definition of "link", I'm all ears.  Otherwise, you're wrong in insinuating the investigation was limited to conspiracy and coordination.

Your turn.

 

[Larry T. Spider 1,740]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Wonder what the age breakdown here was. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2019-01-09/study-older-people-are-more-susceptible-to-fake-news-more-likely-to-share-it%3fcontext=amp