What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Russia Investigation: Trump Pardons Flynn (7 Viewers)

I mean, I care about the wellbeing of citizens in that country just like any other.  People were making the claim based on a Louise Mensch tier fantasy that I'm loyal to Russia, I'm 'desperately' defending Russia.  I think nationalism is actually pretty weird when you think about it.  I want diplomacy and durable peace everywhere on earth.  

I don't think I need to sit here and explain why keeping an open line of communication with a nuclear power (keeping the summit) is preferable to shutting down diplomacy (canceling the summit because of a prosecutor's allegations) over emails from 2 years ago, that have absolutely no bearing or relevance to Syria/US/Russia in 2018.  

 
Big fan of that guy. 


:lol:  Rick Wilson is great.

Rick Wilson

You look like the end-product of a family that took to generational incest with enormous vigor and determination.


Rick Wilson‏Verified account @TheRickWilson 47s47 seconds ago

The Nunes memo to Watergate as Ishtar is to Lawrence of Arabia.


Love Wilson

Rick Wilson‏Verified account @TheRickWilson 2h2 hours ago

Nunes and his little friends Vowed to bring the pain But Devin's memo whiffed today Like a fart in a hurricane


And that Rick Wilson quote about everyone/one that Trump touches, dies.


To quote Rick Wilson, “Everything Trump touches dies.”


He's been doing it since the primaries. Let's face it, these folks live in politics and it's all about picking the winning horse. Guys like Rick Wilson, Charlie Sykes and Bill Kristol stuck to their principles and they're on the outside. Guys like Hugh Hewitt get to be debate moderators and be on tv.


“I don’t care about Japan at all.  Yeah, some news outlets say they bombed Pearl Harbor, but where’s the evidence?”
https://twitter.com/yashalevine/status/1017925951353774081

Oh look, it's everyone's favorite #nevertrump neocon suggesting a NATO war with Russia.  Who's with him?  

 
I mean, I care about the wellbeing of citizens in that country just like any other.  People were making the claim based on a Louise Mensch tier fantasy that I'm loyal to Russia, I'm 'desperately' defending Russia.  I think nationalism is actually pretty weird when you think about it.  I want diplomacy and durable peace everywhere on earth.  

I don't think I need to sit here and explain why keeping an open line of communication with a nuclear power (keeping the summit) is preferable to shutting down diplomacy (canceling the summit because of a prosecutor's allegations) over emails from 2 years ago, that have absolutely no bearing or relevance to Syria/US/Russia in 2018.  
This doesn't answer any of those questions I asked :shrug:  If you don't want to answer, that's fine.  I'll move on.

I'd like to understand why you think it's important to keep communications open with a regime that is allegedly trying to meddle in the most important process of our democracy.  I am not even going to address the fact that "postponing the summit" <> shutting down diplomacy....which aren't even in the same ballpark and how absurdly hyperbolic that suggestion is.  

 
It would have been nice if FP published the logs for context.  Why were they only given partial logs to begin with?

Pretty cut and dry.  

Okay.  Where was it published?  Why didn't FP bother linking to it?  I'd like to see it.  

No one of import actually believes Wikileaks is a Russian outfit.  Just deluded McCarthyists.  
The current Secretary of State, the Inited States intel community...yeah, definitely less important than ren.

 
:(

Kyle Griffin‏Verified account @kylegriffin1 6m6 minutes ago

Rand Paul sought to justify Russia's interference, claiming all countries meddle in foreign elections.

"I think really we mistake our response if we think it's about accountability from the Russians. They're another country, they're going to spy on us."

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/15/rand-paul-election-meddling-russia-722205
####### collaborators one and all.

You will forever be associated with - and as part of - the enemy. 

Worse yet, the enemy abroad acts to support the sucurity of her country, her people, her ideals.

You Traitors among us - including the enablers and collaborators here in this board - erode the security of our nation, our people, our ideals. 

We will never forget you, Traitors among us.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
#### this traitor too. 
I honestly don't understand how so many are willing to just sell out all ideals, morality, responsibility, patriotism and caring for their own damn community.

Maybe it's me who is the fool, as we've seen power corrupt, and absolute power corrupt, absolutely, since the dawn of civilisation.

Just so blatant here - in partnership with our greatest historical enemy, at that.

I alternate between so damn angry, so ####### upset, and abjectly sad at that which we've already publicly seen and know as fact. 

This is an indictment of a generation, to have let our great nation fall to this. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
They'd need 2/3 of the Senate to remove Rosenstein. The "impeachment" is nothing more than a chance for the Treason Caucus to fundraise. An impeachment trial would also an include a defense put on by Rosenstein, which makes it a non-starter anyway. There's no way anybody actually wants to give Rosenstein a chance to defend himself and smear #### on them.

 
What evidence satisfies your bar of "evidence" exactly coming from an open investigation?  I have no problem asking for evidence.  I'm with you there.  The problem is moving forward without the evidence being provided, which is your position.  Freeze it all until it's figured out.  I'm fine with that too.  But moving forward without the information seems like a really stupid idea.
The summit has been planned for months.  I don't think the president should abandon a diplomatic meet at the drop of a hat because a prosecutor typed some allegations on a piece of paper.  How long is the executive branch supposed to wait before it can engage in diplomacy again?  Months?  Years? 

For evidence, I expect to see proof, methodology for proving the identity of people at the other end of an ip address, anything really.  In the troll farm suit for example, Mueller's team pushed to delay the trial, called for a protective order that would have blocked defendants from the evidence being used against them, exposed defense strategy to the plaintiffs they were litigating against, and then dumped the case off to DOJ.  I don't think the government should be able to string the country along based on secret evidence.  

 
Mueller's team pushed to delay the trial, called for a protective order that would have blocked defendants from the evidence being used against them, exposed defense strategy to the plaintiffs they were litigating against, and then dumped the case off to DOJ.
You should get an update on this. The judge denied Concord access to requested classified discovery because of the closeness of Prigozhin as CEO, and the delay was granted because it was Concord who was not willing to go to trial. And the DOJ attorneys were *added, OSC still has the case. For example. - Eta - Also.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You should get an update on this. The judge denied Concord access to requested classified discovery because of the closeness of Prigozhin as CEO, and the delay was granted because it was Concord who was not willing to go to trial. And the DOJ attorneys were *added, OSC still has the case. For example. - Eta - Also.
I'm referring to unclassified discovery.  

"Having produced not one iota of discovery in this criminal case, the unlawfully appointed Special Counsel requests a special and unprecedented blanket protective order covering tens of millions of pages of unclassified discovery. Having made this special request based on a secret submission to the Court and a hysterical dithyramb about the future of American elections, one would think that the Special Counsel would cite to case holdings that support this remarkable request."

Whew. As an initial analytical point, referring to Mueller as unlawfully-appointed is an out-of-character own-goal here by Concord Management’s attorneys. Mueller’s appointment is certainly lawful in and of itself and that’s not really a serious point of contention.

The memo continues, “But no, instead, the Special Counsel seeks to equate this make-believe electioneering case to others involving international terrorism and major drug trafficking, and relies only on irrelevant dicta from inapposite, primarily out-of-circuit cases. In short, fake law, which is much more dangerous than fake news.”

While making their case for why Mueller’s blanket protective order should not be granted, Concord Management cites the wide-ranging nature of the request itself. Noting, “The Special Counsel seeks the unprecedented process of prohibiting defense counsel from sharing or discussing any discovery with any co-defendant—including the only person affiliated with Concord named in the Indictment—unless those individuals come to the United States to become hostages in this political game of ###-for-tat.”

Concord’s description here is essentially correct. Mueller’s protective order would be unprecedented in the district. As noted later in the filing, no published court opinion in the D.C. Circuit has ever allowed such a blanket protective order for unclassified discovery materials–the case law just isn’t there.
https://lawandcrime.com/legal-analysis/muellers-attempt-to-hide-evidence-just-got-torn-apart-by-attorneys-for-alleged-russian-troll-farm/

The judge rejected Mueller's request for a delay: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627

Where are you seeing that Concord was unwilling to go to trial?  

 
I'm referring to unclassified discovery.  

https://lawandcrime.com/legal-analysis/muellers-attempt-to-hide-evidence-just-got-torn-apart-by-attorneys-for-alleged-russian-troll-farm/

The judge rejected Mueller's request for a delay: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627

Where are you seeing that Concord was unwilling to go to trial?  
This was in May. In June or July the USG turned over something like 5+ TB of data, and Concord themselves said they could not review it in time. See the protective order I linked to, Concord also cannot let the Data or documents leave its attorneys’ offices so whoever it is actually in that company, whether Prigozhin or whoever, will have to show up in the US if they plan on preparing much less testifying. Concord also lost its motion to see the jury instructions. And Mueller is already 2-0 on motions to dismiss elsewhere. This thing isn’t going anywhere.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The summit has been planned for months.  I don't think the president should abandon a diplomatic meet at the drop of a hat because a prosecutor typed some allegations on a piece of paper.  How long is the executive branch supposed to wait before it can engage in diplomacy again?  Months?  Years? 

For evidence, I expect to see proof, methodology for proving the identity of people at the other end of an ip address, anything really.  In the troll farm suit for example, Mueller's team pushed to delay the trial, called for a protective order that would have blocked defendants from the evidence being used against them, exposed defense strategy to the plaintiffs they were litigating against, and then dumped the case off to DOJ.  I don't think the government should be able to string the country along based on secret evidence.  
This isn't difficult....you wait until it's resolved.  It's not like we're making any sort of progress with Russia in any meaningful way with this "president" at the wheel.  The summit was planned while the investigation was going on, which should have never happened in the first place.  I see no reason why it can't also be postponed while the investigation is going on.  That seems logically inconsistent.  

This is an ongoing investigation.  I think it's completely unreasonable to demand Mueller play his hand of Texas Hold 'Em with his cards on the table for all to see.  You've essentially set up a set of requirements that are completely illogical as well.  Then you get bent out of shape as if there's a problem with those you're judging instead of looking at the expectations you set in the first place.

 
Mueller’s protective order would be unprecedented in the district. As noted later in the filing, no published court opinion in the D.C. Circuit has ever allowed such a blanket protective order for unclassified discovery materials–the case law just isn’t there.
This was in the link I provided.

You can see it's signed by the judge. It doesn't say anything about classified vs unclassified but it does refer to "Sensitive materials" and those must stay at the lawyer's actual offices and they cannot be transmitted or copied. It was interim only but I'm guessing Concord and OSC came up with a joint order like they were told to. The last thing I see happening was July 6th when the OSC asked permission to update the court that the Russian government has still not served Concord. There is no indication of a trial date from what I see.

 
Where are you seeing that Concord was unwilling to go to trial?  
Ok maybe this is what I was thinking of, albeit also from May:
 

Special Counsel Robert Mueller asked a federal judge Tuesday to reject the four-decade-old speedy trial law in the case against 13 Russians and three Russian companies and has asked for a 90-day delay in his Russian collusion case. The defendant, Concord Management and Consulting, joined in his request, filing a joint motion.

Judge Dabney L. Friedrich, a Trump appointee, accepted the request, granting “that the period of period May 23, 2018 to August 28, 2018 is excluded for purposes of Speedy Trial Act calculations.”

...In response, Mueller informed the court on May 16 his office was prepared to enter two terabytes of Russian social media into the record, thereby flooding the docket with a huge amount of evidence, all of it in Russian. The volume could fill 3,000 CD-ROM discs.
- DC, late May.

I don't think you need me to dig into this any further but obviously 2TB is a ton of info for anyone to go through, and now they must do it with the most sensitive data having to looked at in the US, at the actual lawyer's office. And whoever the hell actually works at Concord will have to show up to testify anyway. Doesn't seem likely to happen to me, it just looks like the trollers just kept trolling in court.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ecuador in talks to evict Julian Assange, its ‘stone in the shoe’

The South American state and UK ministers are trying to find a way to evict the WikiLeaks founder from its London embassy

Britain is in high-level talks with Ecuador in an attempt to remove Julian Assange from its London embassy, where he has been sheltering for more than six years.

Ministers and senior Foreign Office officials are locked in discussions over the fate of Assange, the founder and editor of WikiLeaks, who claimed political asylum from Ecuador in 2012 and who believes he will be extradited to the United States if he leaves the embassy in Knightsbridge, central London.

Sir Alan Duncan, the Foreign Office minister, is understood to be involved in the diplomatic effort, which comes weeks before a visit to the UK by Lenin Moreno, the new Ecuadorean president, who has called Assange a “hacker”, an “inherited problem” and a “stone in the shoe”.

Sources close to the Australian-born Assange said he was not aware of the talks but believed that America was exerting “significant pressure” on Ecuador, including threatening to block a loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) if the Latin American state did not evict him from the embassy.

The news comes after 12 Russian spies were charged with hacking the emails of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in America during her campaign to become president in 2016.

According to the US Department of Justice, the embarrassing emails were then passed to WikiLeaks, which published them “to heighten their impact” during the electoral race, which was ultimately won by Donald Trump.

Under Moreno’s predecessor, Rafael Correa, Ecuador granted Assange political asylum when he fled to its London embassy soon after being accused of sexual assault and rape in Sweden.

Assange managed to convince Ecuador that it was an elaborate plot orchestrated by the US government, which has been embarrassed by the disclosures on WikiLeaks.

Since then, however, Assange has fallen out with the new Moreno administration, which has cut off his internet access, installed jammers and banned visitors to the embassy apart from his lawyers.

Last month two officials from the Australian High Commission paid a first visit in six years to the Ecuadorean embassy in London in a signal that there may be a breakthrough in the stalemate. Assange’s lawyer, Jennifer Robinson, said she could not reveal details about the meeting “given the delicate diplomatic situation”.

She has recently lobbied the United Nations about the “severe” impact the confinement has had on Assange’s physical and mental health and claims he is being denied proper medical attention.

Sources close to Assange believe his right to political asylum cannot be revoked under international law.

The news could not come at a more awkward time for Assange, whose lawyers are understood to be studying the indictments filed last week by Robert Mueller, the US special counsel who is investigating alleged Russian support for Trump during the 2016 US presidential election.

The charges filed by Mueller allege that members of Russia’s GRU foreign military intelligence agency started hacking Clinton’s personal email server on the very day that Trump urged the Russian government to find emails that his rival had deleted.

At an event in Florida on July 27, 2016, Trump had invited the Russian state to search for about 30,000 emails that Clinton had erased from her private server. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump had said.

The indictment says that some of the stolen documents, which disclosed the machinations of the DNC against Clinton’s rival, Bernie Sanders, were then passed to a group it referred to as Organisation 1, which is known to be WikiLeaks.

“If you have anything Hillary-related we want it in the next two days preferably because the DNC is approaching and she will solidify Bernie supporters behind her after,” Organisation 1 wrote.

“We think Trump has only a 25% chance of winning against Hillary so conflict between Bernie and Hillary is interesting.”

Roger Stone, a long-time adviser to Trump, has previously acknowledged exchanging messages with one of the online contacts accused by Mueller of being a front for Russian intelligence, although he denied knowing their true identity.

Trump, who has repeatedly downplayed the consensus among US intelligence agencies that Russia had meddled in the election, is due to meet Vladimir Putin in Helsinki tomorrow.

Yesterday he tweeted from his Scottish golf course: “The stories you heard about the 12 Russians yesterday took place during the Obama administration, not the Trump administration. Why didn’t they do something about it, especially when it was reported that President Obama was informed by the FBI in September, before the election?”

 
The summit has been planned for months.  I don't think the president should abandon a diplomatic meet at the drop of a hat because a prosecutor typed some allegations on a piece of paper. 
Attorneys have professional and ethical guidelines in their conduct. Mueller couldn't just flippantly charge people with a crime. Even putting aside the level of detail which shows the cause. Filing an indictment isn't the same thing as posting on Twitter.

 
Last edited:
Attorneys have professional and ethical guidelines in their conduct. Mueller couldn't just flippantly charge people with a crime. Even putting aside the level of detail which shows the cause. Filing an indictment isn't the same thing as posting on Twitter.
I hate to break it to you but there are plenty that don’t follow these guidelines. Frivolous lawsuits thrown out all the time to get a certain reaction from those charged. No reason to abandon this meeting planned well in advance. 

 
Let's also remember this "summit" was finalized less than a month ago, so let's not pretend there's been in the works for months and months.  It was described by the administration as "early stages" in early June and all wrapped up by the end of June.

 
Let's also remember this "summit" was finalized less than a month ago, so let's not pretend there's been in the works for months and months.  It was described by the administration as "early stages" in early June and all wrapped up by the end of June.
When it's SO clear of Russia's efforts to harm our democracy and Trumps CLEAR refusal to do literally even the smallest meaningful step to hold them accountable it's just beyond me how folks who used to pride themselves on being proud, hawkish  Americans just roll over on this issue.

Its a summit. They happen all the time. And they are broken off for far less reason than what we've seen, punctuated by the recent 12 indictments.

An arguement as weak as "frivolous happens all the time" in this context demonstrates that folks will go to ridiculous lengths, ones they have to know reek of BS and flimsiness, to continue supporting a man who is acting at every turn in Russia's interests and not ours. 

Again, it's sad to see a third of the nation so willing to let Russia slide and to not look at Trump with any suspicion when his  allegencies are so questionable at literally just about every turn.

 
I hate to break it to you but there are plenty that don’t follow these guidelines. Frivolous lawsuits thrown out all the time to get a certain reaction from those charged. No reason to abandon this meeting planned well in advance. 
Percentage of unethical lawyers is a lot smaller than you think.

The indictment is very specific.  In no way is it frivolous.  You’re just desperate to blindly support criminal activity that harms our country.  It’s shocking how unamerican Trump supporters are.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let's also remember this "summit" was finalized less than a month ago, so let's not pretend there's been in the works for months and months.  It was described by the administration as "early stages" in early June and all wrapped up by the end of June.
When it's SO clear of Russia's efforts to harm our democracy and Trumps CLEAR refusal to do literally even the smallest meaningful step to hold them accountable it's just beyond me how folks who used to pride themselves on being proud, hawkish  Americans just roll over on this issue.

Its a summit. They happen all the time. And they are broken off for far less reason than what we've seen, punctuated by the recent 12 indictments.

An arguement as weak as "frivolous happens all the time" in this context demonstrates that folks will go to ridiculous lengths, ones they have to know reek of BS and flimsiness, to continue supporting a man who is acting at every turn in Russia's interests and not ours. 

Again, it's sad to see a third of the nation so willing to let Russia slide and to not look at Trump with any suspicion when his  allegencies are so questionable at literally just about every turn.
There was less "thought and preparation" put into this than there was the NK "summit".  We see how that went and that was just Kim.

 
Percentage of unethical lawyers is a lot smaller than you think.

The indictment is very specific.  In no way is it frivolous.  You’re just desperate to blindly support criminal activity that harms our country.  It’s shocking how unamerican Trump supporters are.
In business we have come across a few, just because there’s guidelines doesn’t mean they are followed. Let’s see how it plays out and who is convicted of what. Regardless, don’t think it’s worth walking away from the meeting that’s been planned for awhile. If nothing else try to gain more info. 

Also the lame jab about being unamerican is pretty childish, try to be better than that. Very common of the extreme left and doesn’t fool anyone and isn’t productive. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
In business we have come across a few, just because there’s guidelines doesn’t mean they are followed. Let’s see how it plays out and who is convicted of what. Regardless, don’t think it’s worth walking away from the meeting that’s been planned for awhile. If nothing else try to gain more info. 

Also the lame jab about being unamerican is pretty childish, try to be better than that. Very common of the extreme left and doesn’t fool anyone and isn’t productive. 
Respect as always Birds, but I'm scratching my chin wondering what is conservative (or say 'pro-American') about attacking an indictment by a Republican DOJ of Russian military intelligence (aka spies) who hacked data of both American political parties. I'm all ears to the affirmative explanation of this, I'm sure there's a good one.

 
In business we have come across a few, just because there’s guidelines doesn’t mean they are followed. Let’s see how it plays out and who is convicted of what. Regardless, don’t think it’s worth walking away from the meeting that’s been planned for awhile. If nothing else try to gain more info. 

Also the lame jab about being unamerican is pretty childish, try to be better than that. Very common of the extreme left and doesn’t fool anyone and isn’t productive. 
You ask for more respect, but then continue to blame "the extreme left" - I'm hardly that, you know it.  At least I'm trying to portray what I see as the truth.

Do you want me to pull punches, or be honest? I do believe such actions are unamerican. I do believe it, giving Trump a pass for what must now be dozens of serious and questionable comments, decisions, actions, policies and directives regarding Trump and Russia - all the while we have mounting evidence, and piling indictments and convictions, on a large range of charges, regarding Russia on one hand, and some perhaps at this point tangential, but still the Presidents closest men, indicted/jailed/guilty.  

Some call out players who kneel during the national anthem as unamerican.  I think continuing to cover for Trump with such significant ramifications to doing so, when he's acted SO questionably toward the nation that has been most hostile to us and the biggest threat to our security for 50+ years, is indeed, unamerican. Im not using the word lightly, nor am I throwing it around to insult nor enflame, but it's my (sadly) honest assessment. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Respect as always Birds, but I'm scratching my chin wondering what is conservative (or say 'pro-American') about attacking an indictment by a Republican DOJ of Russian military intelligence (aka spies) who hacked data of both American political parties. I'm all ears to the affirmative explanation of this, I'm sure there's a good one.
My original comment was more in regards to not calling off the planned meeting with  Vlad based on the recent news. I’m fine with letting the indictments play out and those found guilty need to pay their price. 

But to pass up these planned shirtless photo opps with Vlad....not necessary. 

 
You ask for more respect, but then continue to blame "the extreme left" - I'm hardly that, you know it.  At least I'm trying to portray what I see as the truth.

Do you want me to pull punches, or be honest? I do believe such actions are unamerican. I do believe it, giving Trump a pass for what must now be dozens of serious and questionable comments, decisions, actions, policies and directives regarding Trump and Russia - all the while we have mounting evidence, and piling indictments and convictions, on a large range of charges, regarding Russia on one hand, and some perhaps at this point tangential, but still the Presidents closest men, indicted/jailed/guilty.  

Some call out players who kneel during the national anthem as unamerican.  I think continuing to cover for Trump with such significant ramifications to doing so, when he's acted SO questionably toward the nation that has been most hostile to us and the biggest threat to our security for 50+ years, is indeed, unamerican. Im not using the word lightly, nor am I throwing it around to insult nor enflame, but it's my (sadly) honest assessment. 
I’m fine with you all doing as you wish and probably prefer the extreme outlashes as those are common with the extreme left in these times and make many of your everyday people very uncomfortable and less likely to vote liberal. While it’s a storyline you all cling to I don’t know anyone covering for Trump, personally I’m fine with Pence if Trump is convicted of working with Vlad to take over the world. Pence would be preferable actually. 

 
My original comment was more in regards to not calling off the planned meeting with  Vlad based on the recent news. I’m fine with letting the indictments play out and those found guilty need to pay their price. 

But to pass up these planned shirtless photo opps with Vlad....not necessary. 
Yeah I wasn’t talking about the conference, though I’ve said I agree it shouldn’t be cancelled.

The original comment was about Ren IIRC suggesting the lawyers who filed the indictments as being crooked. I cannot see a decent angle there, by which I mean one based in decency. Have a good one.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top