Author Topic: Russia and US politics  (Read 1475 times)

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Russia and US politics
« on: October 18, 2017, 11:50:41 AM »
The Russian investigation is generating blowback for thise that drove it. Multiple news outlets are reporting it, pick your favorite but here’s one:
Quote
Peter Schweizer got onto part of the scandal in his 2015 book, “Clinton Cash”: the gifts of $145 million to the Clinton Foundation, and the $500,000 fee to Bill for a single speech, by individuals involved in a deal that required Hillary Clinton’s approval.

The New York Times confirmed and followed up on Schweizer’s reporting — all of it denounced by Hillary as a partisan hit job.

But now The Hill reports that the FBI in 2009 had collected substantial evidence — eyewitnesses backed by documents — of money-laundering, blackmail and bribery by Russian nuclear officials, all aimed at growing “Vladimir Putin’s atomic-energy business inside the United States” in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

The bureau even flagged the routing of millions from Russian nuclear officials to cutouts and on to Clinton Inc.

Hillary Clinton, again, sat on a key government body that had to approve the deal — though she now claims she had no role in a deal with profound national security implications, and during the campaign called the payments a coincidence.

Eyewitnesses, documentation, cutouts, millions of dollars, deals made, proof found. Clinton and Obama (as well as Mueller) may wish this line of inquiry had been allowed to die.

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #1 on: October 18, 2017, 12:37:18 PM »
To be fair I think this information was available years ago and I've mentioned it obliquely from time to time. I read the report too and I'm not quite sure why it's being reported now. Is it just a rehash of old news, or is some new evidence apparent? If there is something I don't know what it is.

Lloyd Perna

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2017, 12:44:07 PM »
Apparently an FBI informant has come forward saying he was blocked from informing congress about what he witnessed by the Obama DOJ .

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/355937-fbi-informant-blocked-from-telling-congress-about-russia-nuclear

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #3 on: October 18, 2017, 12:49:55 PM »
I'm strongly tempted to ask whether or not we are taking anonymous sources at their word now.

Lloyd Perna

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2017, 12:58:05 PM »
I don't think this is what the media typically refers to as an anonymous source.

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #5 on: October 18, 2017, 01:09:45 PM »
So Russia is a threat and attempting to interfere, but only when it's not targeting, or being solicited by Trump and his administration?  I got that right?

If only we had standards instead of party loyalty.  I wonder what we could accomplish, and how trivial we would find attempts to influence us by foreign agents.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #6 on: October 18, 2017, 01:14:07 PM »
I don't think this is what the media typically refers to as an anonymous source.

Only that he's apparently got a lawyer and not actually working for the FBI. Other anonymous sources are still bound by an NDA.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #7 on: October 18, 2017, 01:41:25 PM »
Since the FBI is no longer under Obama's control, we should start hearing new information about this anytime now, if there was a cover-up.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #8 on: October 18, 2017, 02:04:47 PM »
To be fair I think this information was available years ago and I've mentioned it obliquely from time to time. I read the report too and I'm not quite sure why it's being reported now. Is it just a rehash of old news, or is some new evidence apparent? If there is something I don't know what it is.
What’s new is that there were eyewitnesses and supporting documentation in FBI hands. For the last few years, this was all dismissed as part of the “vast right wing conspiracy” but we now have hard evidence that the Clinton’s were really selling America out and that the Obama administration covered for them.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #9 on: October 18, 2017, 02:05:18 PM »
Since the FBI is no longer under Obama's control, we should start hearing new information about this anytime now, if there was a cover-up.
Who’s control is it under?

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #10 on: October 18, 2017, 02:06:29 PM »
So Russia is a threat and attempting to interfere, but only when it's not targeting, or being solicited by Trump and his administration?  I got that right?
Not quite. Russia a threat unless they’re funneling millions to the Clintons.

DonaldD

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #11 on: October 18, 2017, 02:17:39 PM »
Hmmm... it's beginning to sound like there is broadening agreement that Russian covert interference in USA politics needs to be actively investigated.

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #12 on: October 18, 2017, 03:29:36 PM »
Hmmm... it's beginning to sound like there is broadening agreement that Russian covert interference in USA politics needs to be actively investigated.

This has nothing to do with covert interference. It was a straight-up business deal benefiting Russia/Putin. The alleged malfeasance is that the Clintons made it happen to fatten their coffers. Careful mixing up your narratives.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #13 on: October 18, 2017, 04:36:00 PM »
Since the FBI is no longer under Obama's control, we should start hearing new information about this anytime now, if there was a cover-up.
Who’s control is it under?

Last I heard, it was Christopher A. Wray, a Trump appointee confirmed by the Senate, who reports to the Attorney General.  A man Trump characterized as "a fierce guardian of the law and model of integrity."  So if they have information of a serious crime, we should hear about it.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #14 on: October 18, 2017, 05:39:02 PM »
You mean just like we did under Comey? And maybe you’re not reading everything but we are, in fact, now hearing information about a serious crime, one that was buried by the FBI. Those that buried the evidence are still at the FBI, Trump didn’t replace the entire bureau or even its entire leadership. Clinton and the Obama administration fully corrupted the FBI and the entire justice department over the last 8 years, thst corruption didn’t magically disappear the moment Trump took office.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #15 on: October 18, 2017, 05:43:20 PM »
Oh lord, this gets even more entertaining:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/10/18/gregg-jarrett-clinton-cover-up-brought-to-by-same-guys-who-are-investigating-trump.html
Quote
It gets worse.  Robert Mueller was the FBI Director during the time of the Russian uranium probe, and so was his successor James Comey who took over in 2013 as the FBI was still developing the case.  Rod Rosenstein, then-U.S. Attorney, was supervising the case.  There is no indication that any of these men ever told Congress of all the incriminating evidence they had discovered and the connection to Clinton.  The entire matter was kept secret from the American public.

It may be no coincidence that Mueller (now special counsel) and Rosenstein (now Deputy Attorney General) are the two top people currently investigating whether the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians to influence the 2016 presidential election.  Mueller reports to Rosenstein, while Comey is a key witness in the case.

It is not unreasonable to conclude that Mueller, Rosenstein and Comey may have covered up potential crimes involving Clinton and Russia, but are now determined to find some evidence that Trump “colluded” with Russia.

So it may now come to pass that a new independant counsel will need to be brought in to investigate activities in which a currently active independent counsel are "persons of interest."

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #16 on: October 18, 2017, 06:27:03 PM »
You mean just like we did under Comey? And maybe you’re not reading everything but we are, in fact, now hearing information about a serious crime, one that was buried by the FBI. Those that buried the evidence are still at the FBI, Trump didn’t replace the entire bureau or even its entire leadership. Clinton and the Obama administration fully corrupted the FBI and the entire justice department over the last 8 years, thst corruption didn’t magically disappear the moment Trump took office.

So tell me, how is it that you know that "Clinton and the Obama administration fully corrupted the FBI and the entire justice department over the last 8 years?"  I look forward to reviewing the evidence.

I also look forward to seeing how they were corrupted, since the main instigators of the corruption are currently gone.  Was it pressure from above (which has now been relieved)?  Purging all conservatives and Republicans from the ranks (which still has some, like, IIRC, Mueller)?  Replacement of the FBI with Russian agents?  Mind-control?

I certainly hope it isn't the old "they aren't doing what we want, so they must be part of the Deep State" meme, since that is just circular reasoning.  "I know this is true, and since those who have the information aren't saying it is, then they must be lying!" :)

The Deep State meme is also very convenient for conspiracy theories.  If they release it, you're gold.  If they don't, it just proves how corrupt they are, for not releasing it.  Which kinda dismisses the possibility that there isn't any information to begin with...

But I'm sure that's not what you mean.  So I do look forward to the reasons why you think things are so bad at the FBI.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #17 on: October 18, 2017, 10:27:12 PM »
Since the FBI is no longer under Obama's control, we should start hearing new information about this anytime now, if there was a cover-up.
Who’s control is it under?

Last I heard, it was Christopher A. Wray, a Trump appointee confirmed by the Senate, who reports to the Attorney General.  A man Trump characterized as "a fierce guardian of the law and model of integrity."  So if they have information of a serious crime, we should hear about it.

35,000 permanent staff at the FBI.  How many political appointees?  Wray, even if he brings a large staff with him, will have no ability to overcome a culture at the FBI (assuming such exists) for several years.  Keep in mind too, that the FBI is an investigative agency, it has large numbers of active investigations where information flow is need to know, and even a director doesn't need the details.  Plenty of places to hide whatever they want.   Even if he ordered them to "produce" something, all they would have to do to completely frustrate the request is apply it literally and take no initiative.  It's not difficult for any "company" to hide specific details from a CEO, and when you're talking about government you have employees that can not be fired (protected by law), who have political patrons and political goals.

Now add in a special counsel who was a former director and mentored another former director and whose conduct is not reviewable by the current administration and you've created a shadow head whose an insider with both personal connections throughout the 35k (and personal loyalties as well) as well as experience in "how things get done."  It'd be a miracle if there isn't an active campaign to shield damaging facts, especially in light of the revelations that the Rosenstein, Comey and Mueller were actively involved in investigation of the last admin's questionable Russian deals and now essentially control all things "Russia" in the current admin.  If you consider even for one second the possibility that they are themselves guilty, think of the damage that has been allowed to occur to any evidence by effectively giving them the keys to the FBI and no real oversight.

Five years from now, if Wray is still there then maybe.  For time being?  You're not getting results from Trump.


Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #18 on: October 18, 2017, 10:35:18 PM »
So tell me, how is it that you know that "Clinton and the Obama administration fully corrupted the FBI and the entire justice department over the last 8 years?"  I look forward to reviewing the evidence.

That's an overstated claim, however, those sympathetic to the Dems are vastly overrepresented in the federal bureaucracy.  The Obama administration itself is notorious for its ability to convert political appointees into staff employees.  There are articles written on this topic, but there were exception good at adding their partisans into the deep state.  I mean honest to goodness, were almost a year into Trump's terms and some of the agencies are still resisting him, that doesn't happen without them playing politics.

Quote
I also look forward to seeing how they were corrupted, since the main instigators of the corruption are currently gone.


See above, it's a combination of moving political staff into permanent positions, promoting for political reasons and driving those who disagree out.

Quote
The Deep State meme is also very convenient for conspiracy theories.

What's your alternative theory?  Are you really asserting that the millions of federal employees who can't be fired, think they run the government and got their jobs, in no small part because of their political connections, have no dog in the fight and immediately switched their loyalties and efforts to the new administration?

Lol.  Yeah right.

Quote
But I'm sure that's not what you mean.  So I do look forward to the reasons why you think things are so bad at the FBI.

I don't know if things are bad at the FBI.  Things are bad at the top of the FBI.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #19 on: October 19, 2017, 12:41:00 PM »
Quote
...those sympathetic to the Dems are vastly overrepresented in the federal bureaucracy.

I'm not concerned about how sympathetic the members are to the Democrats or Republicans.  I'm concerned about how sympathetic they are to facts and truth, and uncovering those facts and truth.  And you should be, too.

Everything else you've talked about are unsupported assertions.  "[T]hey were exception[ally] good at adding their partisans into the deep state."  "Are you really asserting that the millions of federal employees who can't be fired, think they run the government and got their jobs, in no small part because of their political connections, have no dog in the fight and immediately switched their loyalties and efforts to the new administration?" "(I)t's a combination of moving political staff into permanent positions, promoting for political reasons and driving those who disagree out."  Where is the proof of all this?

Because many, if not most, of them vote Democratic?  Because they don't kiss an inexperienced President's ring and kowtow to his every whim?  Because they don't embrace every aspect of the Republican Party's platform?

In addition, it doesn't make sense.  Are you asserting that all those millions of government employees were hired in the last 8 years?  Because otherwise, a lot of those old-timers were hired during the Bush administration, which means (by your logic) they were originally loyal to Republicans.  You assume they must have agreed with everything that the Obama administration did or else got fired, but if their loyalties are so easily suborned, why wouldn't they embrace the new Republican administration?  It was their original loyalty, after all. ;)

You're also completely ignoring one other reason for their behavior--that they are professionals.  That they took the jobs to actually do a good job.  That they are primarily loyal to the ethics and standards of their field, and to doing it to the best of their ability, regardless of which Administration happens to be in charge at the time.

Yes, there are quite a few toadies, too.  But they usually rise to the top.  The actual workers, who do the day-to-day operations that keep the government functioning, they are too busy actually doing the job to be partisan.  There is just too many other things to worry about.  And criminal activity just makes their job harder, blemishes their chosen fields, and jeopardizes their jobs if the truth ever comes out.

So what makes you think that, with all the investigations and reports about this previous Russian dealings, that not one of these professionals won't come forward and give some damning information he or she happens to know, to a sympathetic Administration official?  It only takes one thread to start everything to unravel...

The "deep state" meme is mean to fool the rubes into undermining our faith in government.  It is to spread paranoia that everyone is out to stop Trump just because he is trying to "drain the swamp."  And to make the rubes ignore anyone with authority who disputes what Trump and his toadies say.

The scary part is that this is just the latest in a series of such moves.  As David Brin has been preaching for years now, the Conservatives and Republican Party have been slowly trying to undermine our faith in fact-based professionals.

Quote
Today's "Red Religion" (to borrow Greenhall's term) lumps together as hate-targets every profession in U.S. society that deals in facts and knowledge. Their narrative is that these professions -- maligned for decades in right wing media, from science, teaching, economics, skilled labor and journalism to the civil service, law professionals, medical doctors and judges -- have colluded to create a truth-bending, Orwellian cabal! Yes, all the people who know stuff ... those whom you trust to cure your cancer, teach your kids, keep the electricity running, investigate corruption, ask questions, explore the laws of nature, invent better phones, catch criminals, deliver honest justice, make or inspect your cars... they are all conniving haters of freedom and truth! They are all your enemies.

Try it yourself.  List all the fact-based professions you can think of.  Then mark off which ones have been attacked by the Right over the years.  You're going to be left with a very short list.

The FBI and the Justice Department are just the latest to be targeted.

And if you doubt it, ask yourself why a FBI appointee, who identifies as a Republican, and was appointed during a Republican administration by a Republican President, and worked for years in the FBI, gaining admiration from both sides of the aisle, must be part of the "Deep State" against Trump.  Ask yourself why.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #20 on: October 19, 2017, 06:10:23 PM »
Since the FBI is no longer under Obama's control, we should start hearing new information about this anytime now, if there was a cover-up.
Who’s control is it under?

Last I heard, it was Christopher A. Wray, a Trump appointee confirmed by the Senate, who reports to the Attorney General.  A man Trump characterized as "a fierce guardian of the law and model of integrity."  So if they have information of a serious crime, we should hear about it.

So.... what stops him from telling whatever he wants to Congress and then getting a Pardon?

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #21 on: October 25, 2017, 08:29:33 AM »
So I do look forward to the reasons why you think things are so bad at the FBI.

It’s now coming out that the dossier driving the meme of Russian influence was funded by the DNC and Clinton, manufacturing a story out of nothing. Read down the reporting far enough and you see this:
Quote
The Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie $5.6 million in legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, according to campaign-finance records, and the DNC paid the firm $3.6 million in “legal and compliance consulting’’ since Nov. 2015 — though it’s impossible to tell how much of that work was for other legal matters and how much of it related to Fusion GPS.

After the election, the FBI agreed to pay Steele to continue gathering intelligence, but the bureau pulled out of the arrangement after Steele was publicly identified.
The FBI also funded this, they are part of the Clinton and DNC machine.

yossarian22c

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #22 on: October 25, 2017, 08:57:43 AM »
I'm sure the whole Russia story has nothing to do with the fact that Trump's former campaign manager is likely to be indicted for money laundering involving Russia. Nor does it have anything to do with Trump's son, son-in-law, and campaign manager taking meetings with people they thought were connected to the Kremlin to get information about Clinton. It has nothing to do with Flynn having to retroactively register as a foreign agent. It has nothing to do with Russia buying ads on Facebook, Russian agents organizing protest events, or Russia attempting (unsuccessfully?) to hack election systems and election vendors.

But hey while we are at it, which parts of the dossier have proven to be false yet?

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #23 on: October 25, 2017, 10:32:13 AM »
I'm sure the whole Russia story has nothing to do with the fact that Trump's former campaign manager is likely to be indicted for money laundering involving Russia. Nor does it have anything to do with Trump's son, son-in-law, and campaign manager taking meetings with people they thought were connected to the Kremlin to get information about Clinton. It has nothing to do with Flynn having to retroactively register as a foreign agent. It has nothing to do with Russia buying ads on Facebook, Russian agents organizing protest events, or Russia attempting (unsuccessfully?) to hack election systems and election vendors.
FusionGPS is directly tied to Russia. If you're worried about Russian influence in elections, perhaps looking at the people that paid Russia to do it is a smarter starting place.

But hey while we are at it, which parts of the dossier have proven to be false yet?
Prove a negative? They haven't proven the allegation false so they must be true? Come on.

DonaldD

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #24 on: October 25, 2017, 11:46:50 AM »
Quote
FusionGPS is directly tied to Russia.
No, it's not.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/08/09/trump-russia-and-the-opposition-research-firm-run-by-ex-journalists/?utm_term=.e621e0b050b8

Taking Sarah Huckabee Sanders at her word is not the wisest decision.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #25 on: October 25, 2017, 11:51:32 AM »
So I do look forward to the reasons why you think things are so bad at the FBI.

It’s now coming out that the dossier driving the meme of Russian influence was funded by the DNC and Clinton, manufacturing a story out of nothing.


Per your article, it is not "out of nothing."

Quote
Officials have said that the FBI has confirmed some of the information in the dossier.

Quote
Read down the reporting far enough and you see this:
Quote
The Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie $5.6 million in legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, according to campaign-finance records, and the DNC paid the firm $3.6 million in “legal and compliance consulting’’ since Nov. 2015 — though it’s impossible to tell how much of that work was for other legal matters and how much of it related to Fusion GPS.

After the election, the FBI agreed to pay Steele to continue gathering intelligence, but the bureau pulled out of the arrangement after Steele was publicly identified.
The FBI also funded this, they are part of the Clinton and DNC machine.

You're making quite a few assumptions here.

Does the FBI fund private investigators to research certain areas?  Apparently they do.  According to your article:

Quote
Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said that Steele was respected by the FBI and the State Department for earlier work he performed on a global corruption probe.

So having him to the leg work has precedent.

It was also stated that some of the contents have been confirmed.

So it is an assumption that the FBI must be in the DNC's pocket if they funded the same investigation, especially since some of the information was confirmed.

I don't see that as a strong indication that the FBI is working for the DNC or against Trump.

You should also note that this article was based on unnamed sources, so you should treat it the same way you'd treat any other story based on anonymous sources. :)

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #26 on: October 25, 2017, 12:04:13 PM »
Quote
FusionGPS is directly tied to Russia.
No, it's not.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/08/09/trump-russia-and-the-opposition-research-firm-run-by-ex-journalists/?utm_term=.e621e0b050b8

Taking Sarah Huckabee Sanders at her word is not the wisest decision.
Your snark only makes this more enjoyable.  ;D

Quote
In 2013, the US Department of Justice, represented by the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara, sued Prevezon Holding, a Republic of Cyprus corporation registered in New York State as a foreign business corporation, under the Magnitsky Act for money-laundering. The lawsuit sought forfeiture of various assets and real estate holdings in the US. The sole shareholder of Prevezon is Russian citizen Denis Katsyv, whose father is Petr Katsyv, vice president of Russia's state-run rail monopoly and "reportedly a business associate of Vladimir Yakunin, a confidant of Vladimir Putin". Katsyv’s Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya is not licensed to practice in the US, and Katsyv hired the law firm of BakerHostetler to represent Prevezon; BakerHostetler hired Fusion GPS early in 2014 to provide research help...
That’s a pretty straight line, goes even to Putin.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #27 on: October 25, 2017, 12:09:28 PM »
Quote
So having him to the leg work has precedent.

The DNC and Clinton paid a firm to work with Russia to create a fake document that would launch an FBI investigation into a candidate and that funding was continued by the FBI. Please list at least one other time where the FBI funded a candidate’s opposition research targeting a presidential candidate.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #28 on: October 25, 2017, 12:27:08 PM »
I'd also like to remind you all, that you took pretty extreme positions on funding opposition research that has a foreign source when you discussed Donald Jr's interest in a certain meeting to gain Russian dirt on Hilary.  In this case, the conduct involved could be direct funding of what ended up being payments to non-US parties to provide, and in some cases, make up such research.

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #29 on: October 25, 2017, 12:29:22 PM »
Insider sources (within Clinton's campaign) have stated at various times that the moment her campaign tanked she initiated the Russia narrative as a sort of scorched Earth retaliation. I can't claim this was tied in to the DNC (although I'd be surprised if it wasn't, I just don't know that it was) but it seems that the Russia-hack meme was planned and prepped before Trump even took office. This doesn't, strictly speaking, mean it's false, just that any link of Russia collusion with Trump's people once he took office would have nothing to do with the fact that the Russia narrative was going to go forward regardless of who Trump put into important positions. However I will note that although I admit it's possible Clinton merely decided to make public some damning things she knew (as opposed to deciding to fabricate a false narrative) that would appear to be a questionable premise since the FBI currently insists there is zero link to suggest collusion between Trump and Russia. At 'best' Russia did some bad things all on its own, and even then I've seen no evidence to suggest much beyond the usual PR stuff Russia is always churning out through RT and online. People (for instance, Yossarian above) keep referencing some apocryphal 'hacking' that Russia 'probably' did except that I've also seen zero evidence of that. It's mostly a case of repeating a thing so often that it must be true, aka the Big Lie.

DonaldD

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #30 on: October 25, 2017, 12:43:04 PM »
Quote
That’s a pretty straight line, goes even to Putin.
Well, no - you only get where you want to go if you ignore the complete analysis, and stop at the preamble.
Quote
Moreover, there is no evidence Fusion took money from the Russian government. It worked on behalf of an American law firm, which was hired by a company owned by a Russian whose father is a government official. Even Browder, a fierce critic of Fusion, said in an interview the White House is “conflating two issues.”
Fusion GPS has worked for both Democrats and Republicans.  Your "pretty straight line" is basically a game of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon, where I am almost certainly as closely linked to Putin as this company is.

yossarian22c

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #31 on: October 25, 2017, 12:53:24 PM »
People (for instance, Yossarian above) keep referencing some apocryphal 'hacking' that Russia 'probably' did except that I've also seen zero evidence of that. It's mostly a case of repeating a thing so often that it must be true, aka the Big Lie.

http://www.npr.org/2017/09/22/552956517/ten-months-after-election-day-feds-tell-states-more-about-russian-hacking

Quote
The Department of Homeland Security said earlier this year that it had evidence of Russian activity in 21 states, but it failed to inform individual states whether they were among those targeted. Instead, DHS authorities say they told those who had "ownership" of the systems — which in some cases were private vendors or local election offices.

State election officials were finally contacted by federal authorities on Friday about whether their election systems were among those targeted for attack last year by Russian hackers.

But I guess DHS is just part of the conspiracy.

yossarian22c

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #32 on: October 25, 2017, 01:10:33 PM »
I'm sure the whole Russia story has nothing to do with the fact that Trump's former campaign manager is likely to be indicted for money laundering involving Russia. Nor does it have anything to do with Trump's son, son-in-law, and campaign manager taking meetings with people they thought were connected to the Kremlin to get information about Clinton. It has nothing to do with Flynn having to retroactively register as a foreign agent. It has nothing to do with Russia buying ads on Facebook, Russian agents organizing protest events, or Russia attempting (unsuccessfully?) to hack election systems and election vendors.
FusionGPS is directly tied to Russia. If you're worried about Russian influence in elections, perhaps looking at the people that paid Russia to do it is a smarter starting place.

I'm less worried about FusionGPS being tied to Russia than the Trump campaign. All of the points I put in there are facts that show ties between people in the Trump campaign and Russia. The Russia link for FusionGPS seems a lot weaker than many of Trump's connections with the Kremlin. Just think of the real estate deal where a Russian oligarch paid the highest price in US history for a home from Trump and then tore the house down without ever living there. Do you care to examine or talk about the verified links between Trump and Russia or are you happy having Trump jerk your chain around as to what you should pay attention to?

Quote
But hey while we are at it, which parts of the dossier have proven to be false yet?
Prove a negative? They haven't proven the allegation false so they must be true? Come on.

The fact that no part of the dossier has been shown to be false does not mean that it is all true but the claims you and others have been making is that the whole document is in essence a forgery. At this point in the game if no one has been able to falsify any part of the document while verifying other parts it seems really disingenuous to treat the whole thing as a fabrication. That being said I have doubts about many of the more wild claims the dossier makes but the lack of clearly falsifiable statements to this point from the dossier is surprising.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #33 on: October 25, 2017, 06:38:47 PM »
Quote
So having him to the leg work has precedent.

The DNC and Clinton paid a firm to work with Russia to create a fake document that would launch an FBI investigation into a candidate and that funding was continued by the FBI. Please list at least one other time where the FBI funded a candidate’s opposition research targeting a presidential candidate.

But once again, Crunch, it is not "a fake document."  As your own article said, parts have been shown to be true, and other parts are as of yet undetermined (and perhaps underterminable).  So your insistence that it was "fake" seems to be partisan wishful-thinking. :)

And while I cannot provide an example of opposition research starting an FBI investigation, can you provide an example of opposition research uncovering events that may have had national significance and the FBI ignoring the evidence? ;)

While it is unusual for the FBI to have an outside investigator continue his own investigation, they had used him before, so there was probably a certain level of trust in his abilities.  So it would make sense, if there was some substance to the dossier, for the original investigator to continue with his work rather than having someone new to start from scratch.

While you would like to spin this as a partisan hack job paid by the FBI, the pertinent question is how much of the original dossier was confirmed and whether it justified further investigation.  Until we know the details, you cannot dismiss the possibility that the FBI investigation was actually warranted.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #34 on: October 25, 2017, 07:25:10 PM »
Quote
So having him to the leg work has precedent.

The DNC and Clinton paid a firm to work with Russia to create a fake document that would launch an FBI investigation into a candidate and that funding was continued by the FBI. Please list at least one other time where the FBI funded a candidate’s opposition research targeting a presidential candidate.

But once again, Crunch, it is not "a fake document."

It's not a "fake document" or "forgery".  It's a discredited document.

Quote
As your own article said, parts have been shown to be true, and other parts are as of yet undetermined (and perhaps underterminable).  So your insistence that it was "fake" seems to be partisan wishful-thinking. :)

Not sure what you're getting at.  The dossier is widely acknowledged as having been unsupportable, unsupported and generally discredited.  In fact, it's almost famous for having been discredited.

Quote
And while I cannot provide an example of opposition research starting an FBI investigation, can you provide an example of opposition research uncovering events that may have had national significance and the FBI ignoring the evidence? ;)

Not sure why he'd have to.  Pretty sure that the FBI investigates potential crimes regardless of source.  Paying for informers?  Less common.  Picking up the continuing bill of something that started out as paid for political smears, probably not since Hoover was in charge.

Quote
While you would like to spin this as a partisan hack job paid by the FBI, the pertinent question is how much of the original dossier was confirmed and whether it justified further investigation.  Until we know the details, you cannot dismiss the possibility that the FBI investigation was actually warranted.

Or you know, you could just read some more articles about it.  The "report" was so discredited they took it to Trump to let him know that someone was making things up about him. 

Are you really trying to imply it might have substance?

yossarian22c

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #35 on: October 25, 2017, 09:19:51 PM »
Or you know, you could just read some more articles about it.  The "report" was so discredited they took it to Trump to let him know that someone was making things up about him. 

Are you really trying to imply it might have substance?

The report was taken to Trump because it implied there might be national security implications if Russia had blackmail material on Trump. That doesn't mean the allegations were true or false, it just means that much of the material in the dossier is what would be considered embarrassing, not illegal. So Comey made the decision that it was best to let Trump know that the FBI had already heard about the allegations.

Some of the meetings, dealings, and connections from the dossier have been verified. The more salacious aspects of the dossier are probably just a result of informants planting false information along with some true stuff in order to sow confusion. To my knowledge nothing from the report to this point has been shown to be false (much of it is unverified and unsubstantiated). That either implies that the document was really well researched and intentionally falsified in a way that people wouldn't be able to prove it was false or more of it is true than you are giving it credit for. I personally doubt that the whole dossier is factual, however, its track record so far shows that it isn't a complete work of fiction.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #36 on: October 26, 2017, 07:59:33 AM »
Or you know, you could just read some more articles about it.  The "report" was so discredited they took it to Trump to let him know that someone was making things up about him. 

Are you really trying to imply it might have substance?

The report was taken to Trump because it implied there might be national security implications if Russia had blackmail material on Trump. That doesn't mean the allegations were true or false, it just means that much of the material in the dossier is what would be considered embarrassing, not illegal. So Comey made the decision that it was best to let Trump know that the FBI had already heard about the allegations.

Some of the meetings, dealings, and connections from the dossier have been verified. The more salacious aspects of the dossier are probably just a result of informants planting false information along with some true stuff in order to sow confusion. To my knowledge nothing from the report to this point has been shown to be false (much of it is unverified and unsubstantiated). That either implies that the document was really well researched and intentionally falsified in a way that people wouldn't be able to prove it was false or more of it is true than you are giving it credit for. I personally doubt that the whole dossier is factual, however, its track record so far shows that it isn't a complete work of fiction.

Hey guys, I've heard about this really cool conspiracy theory with random demonstrably true facts sown throughout it interspersed with numerous exotic claims that nobody has been able to categorically disprove yet.

The best fiction has at least some basis in reality. Likewise, half-truths are often far more insidious than outright fabrications, because portions of it are likely to be able to be verified.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #37 on: October 26, 2017, 09:16:15 AM »
Except this isn't even like half truths.  It's more like:

Suspect ate breakfast.  Suspect stayed at hotel.  Suspect sacrificed small child to demon.  Suspect took a shower.

"Most" of these claims have been substantiated, and nothing has been disproven, so you never know.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #38 on: October 26, 2017, 04:11:41 PM »
Except this isn't even like half truths.  It's more like:

Suspect ate breakfast.  Suspect stayed at hotel.  Suspect sacrificed small child to demon.  Suspect took a shower.

"Most" of these claims have been substantiated, and nothing has been disproven, so you never know.

If I'm reading you right, Seriati, your argument is that the only portions of the dossier that have been confirmed are mundane details that have no criminal or national security implications, and the other accusations are so outrageous that they don't bear investigation.

If so, then why are you talking only in generalities?  Since you know the details of the dossier, why not spell out which portions are confirmed and which are not?  Wouldn't that be more productive?

Because Crunch's argument is that there is nothing in the dossier that is worth investigating and it is only a political smear campaign, full of lies.  And the fact that the FBI continued to investigate it (using the original investigator who worked for the DNC and the Republican Presidential candidates) proves that the FBI is partisan and working for the Democrats.

But that requires a detailed level of knowledge about this dossier, one that I admittedly don't have.  It means that you know that there was nothing worth investigating in it.  Not just that you suspect, or infer, or "it sure looks that way."  To say that this shows the FBI is a corrupt arm of the Democrats means that you know it is true.  Which means you must have intimate knowledge of the facts.

So, do you?

I don't know how much is factual in that dossier.  I don't know if there is anything damning or even damaging to Trump or anyone else in it.  All I know is that it has been reported that parts of it have been "confirmed" and that the FBI decided that it warranted further investigation by the person who compiled the dossier in the first place--a person they apparently have used for investigations in the past.  If there is something more to it than that, I expect the FBI to report it to the Justice Department and the Justice Department to us.

But what I do know is that it doesn't prove or show that the FBI is colluding with the Democrats.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #39 on: October 26, 2017, 04:16:16 PM »
Lol, the reports about who paid for the Trump dossier have been barely covered on CNN, one might almost say they were suppressed even though it was major news.   Until now, all the sudden BREAKING NEWS, CNN joins the boat?  High level expose?  Hard hitting analysis?

Nope.  CNN decided to "break" the news that top Dems deny knowledge of the payment.  Lol, could they be less interested in fair covegage.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/26/politics/john-podesta-debbie-wasserman-schultz-trump-dossier/index.html

Quote
Podesta was asked in his September interview whether the Clinton campaign had a contractual agreement with Fusion GPS, and he said he was not aware of one, according to one of the sources.

Sitting next to Podesta during the interview: his attorney Marc Elias, who worked for the law firm that hired Fusion GPS to continue research on Trump on behalf of the Clinton campaign and DNC, multiple sources said. Elias was only there in his capacity as Podesta's attorney and not as a witness.

Love this quote.  Demonstrates exactly how politicians tell you the "truth" while lying to your face.  Podesta denied hiring Fusion, oh wait, he actually didn't do that.  He denied that there was a contract with the campaign, which was true, while sitting next to his lawyer who had a contract with them in support of the campaign. 
« Last Edit: October 26, 2017, 04:20:19 PM by Seriati »

DonaldD

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #40 on: October 26, 2017, 05:31:12 PM »
I wouldn't suggest even slightly that CNN is not waaay biased against all things Trump, but CNN was reporting yesterday about the Clinton campaign and DNC funding for the dossier, and only today did they start reporting on the denials.

LetterRip

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #41 on: October 26, 2017, 05:43:53 PM »
Seriati,

politicians and lawyers answer like lawyers.  Deceptive answers that are literally true are pretty typical.  Reporters and interviewers should really expect this and ask better questions.  Whenever I hear a politician or lawyer answering a question - it is almost always obvious to me when they are answering with a deceptive answer.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #42 on: October 26, 2017, 07:26:27 PM »
Quote
A former FBI informant can now testify to Congress about the Russian nuclear industry's bribery and money laundering during the time of the Obama administration, after being released from a confidentiality agreement by the Justice Department on Wednesday.
Congressional committees have attempted to interview the unidentified informant, but were unable to because of a nondisclosure agreement he had signed with the FBI. In 2016, the Justice Department required him to withdraw a lawsuit that claimed he would raise the case during the 2016 election.

"As of tonight, the Department of Justice has authorized the informant to disclose to the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, as well as one member of each of their staffs, any information or documents he has concerning alleged corruption or bribery involving transactions in the uranium market, including but not limited to anything related to Vadim Mikerin, Rosatom, Tenex, Uranium One, or the Clinton Foundation," Ian Prior, principal deputy director of public affairs at the Justice Department, said in a statement sent to the Washington Examiner.

Quote
A former FBI informant who blew the whistle on a high-profile bribery case involving a Russian energy company was intimidated by Obama administration lawyers into dropping a civil suit against the government last year, his attorney says.

Victoria Toensing, the lawyer for the informant, told The Daily Caller's Vince Coglianese that Obama Justice Department lawyers told her client that"“his reputation and liberty [was] in jeopardy" if he did not drop a lawsuit against the government.

Shut up or go to jail. I guess we can understand Obama ‘s failure to close Gitmo now. They counted on Hillary's victory to get away with this.

LetterRip

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #43 on: October 26, 2017, 08:38:42 PM »
From what I can tell there were charges pressed against the individual who had engaged in the bribery,

Quote
The FBI criminal probe resulted in the sentencing of Vadim Mikerin, an executive at Tenex (a subsidiary of Rosatom), to a 48-month prison sentence for conspiracy to commit money laundering. Mikerin pleaded guilty for his role in a bribery scheme where Russian interests had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/24/politics/obama-era-uranium-deal/index.html

The lawsuit that was withdrawn, was the informants lawsuit to seek reimbursement from the government for the bribes that he paid out of his salary.  It would seem that either he isn't owed that money (he was being used to funnel bribes, and thus that part of his salary wasn't actually his salary) or the proper target of his lawsuit would be the trucking company that was pressuring him to use his salary to pay bribes.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #44 on: October 28, 2017, 10:19:04 AM »
Quick fact, the guy that heads up CNN’s coverage of FusionGPS is Evan Perez. Evan and the founders of FusionGPS are good friends. They used to work together, still take trips together, they’re tight. Perez’s reporting, which has relied largely on unnamed sources, is quite favorable on the dossier FusionGPS produced. CNN failed to disclose this close relationship.

You may recall that previously two CNN reporters and an editor were forced to leave the network after repeated mistakes in covering the Russia probe, including one report that CNN retracted entirely.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #45 on: October 28, 2017, 12:01:32 PM »
Brit Hume lays it out:
Quote
If we look at this Uranium One matter that is coming more and more to light, it appears that we have the Obama administration in its effort to seek a closer relationship with Russia acquiescing in a sale of materials that are strategic and that could certainly be argued placed American security interests at some risk and all of this going on of course while -- unlike what you've just reported, this has been known for some time, but it seems to be coming into sharper focus at the moment and will be the subject of Congressional investigations going forward. So Democrats can scream a lot and they no doubt will that all of that is a diversion, but I'm beginning to think that those claims will ring a little hollow in light of your reporting and what else is coming out even as we speak tonight...

It's striking because that dossier, even as it appeared at the time, was pretty widely recognized even among media unsympathetic to Donald Trump as scurrilous and a lot of it was demonstrably false. So this was a pretty shabby piece of business here and if it turns out that, as we now believe, that it was paid for in considerable measure by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic party and of course this contained within it, Tucker, were allegations about Trump collusion with the Russians. So that tends to soil that whole allegation even further. So, the tide may be now turning in all this in political terms, and one might also hope in journalistic terms...

It certainly reveals another side of this story that may be bigger and more important than these allegations, which have so far remained virtually without evidence. The allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign itself and the president, the man who is now president, and the Russians, is virtually nonexistent. After all these months. And now we hear about all this other stuff. As I suggest Tucker, the tide may now be turning on all of this and not in a way the Democrats are going to enjoy.


Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #46 on: October 28, 2017, 06:53:55 PM »
See I told my wife on Thursday night that with all that had come out, and the clear conflict of interest for Mueller that should require him to recuse himself, he'd have no choice but to do so or file charges.  What do you know, Friday he files charges. 

What really got me though, is the way that the story broke.  CNN labelled it as an exclusive, when it broke (later they downgraded it to a "first to report").  I saw that exclusive label though, and honestly, it makes me terribly suspicious that it was in fact an exclusive.  How does CNN get an exclusive on a public matter?  Yet another hint and the gross impropriety and intermingling of interests on this case.

DonaldD

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #47 on: October 30, 2017, 12:23:43 PM »
Ah, but was the Republican and Administration push to change the subject last week the cause of the indictments' timing, or were those attempts to inoculate the administration the result of knowing that the indictments were about to drop?

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #48 on: October 30, 2017, 03:32:00 PM »
Ah, but was the Republican and Administration push to change the subject last week the cause of the indictments' timing, or were those attempts to inoculate the administration the result of knowing that the indictments were about to drop?

Well, since CNN has run about 15 headline stories trying to sell the angle that the administration is trying to divert attention from the indictments, since CNN had an "exclusive" on it, and since this follows right on the heels of a rather explosive break on the dossier, the idea that these indictments (which, are not terrible ground breaking given the history of who Mueller has gone after) come right after legitimate questions about whether Mueller and Rosenstein should recuse themselves, I'm of the unsupported view that it's more likely CNN is the one trying to spin. 

I mean come on, most of CNN, including Acosta, has been openly hostile to Trump, it's no secret that they are tied to Trump having done something wrong.  What exactly would it mean for CNN's entire last year of coverage if the answer is:  Trump didn't collude.  CNN is absolutely vested in bringing down Trump at this point.

DonaldD

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Russia and US politics
« Reply #49 on: October 30, 2017, 03:47:48 PM »
Why would CNN attempting to spin preclude the administration also attempting spin? (hint - it doesn't)