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 (14 Viewers)

Ilov80s said:
Are they saying Dowd actually typed and tweeted it from DJT's account or that Down crafted it? 
Click to expand...
I think the WH claim is that Dowd helped write the tweet but Trump tweeted it. However like some of Trump's speeches it's possible one thing was written but what was stated was something different.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I think the WH claim is that Dowd helped write the tweet but Trump tweeted it. However like some of Trump's speeches it's possible one thing was written but what was stated was something different.
Click to expand...
If Dowd helped him write it and Trump tweeted it, that makes it part of attorney client privilege? I don't get that part. 

 
Holy crap. Donald is seriously having a breakdown. His Twitter sounds like a 5 year old bipolar child who has been told to sit in the corner for a temper tantrum. He just keeps screaming out trying to deflect and blame other people.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I guess Eichenwald is saying that Team Trump has interposed that to protect Trump from being asked about it by Mueller.
Click to expand...
I obviously just don't know how that privilege works. Even though Trump voluntarily put the statement out himself, he can say it was based on a conversation he had with his lawyer so he doesn't have to answer questions about it? 

 
JuniorNB said:
Holy crap. Donald is seriously having a breakdown. His Twitter sounds like a 5 year old bipolar child who has been told to sit in the corner for a temper tantrum. He just keeps screaming out trying to deflect and blame other people.
Click to expand...
You say “trying” like it isn’t working on his base.

 
Ilov80s said:
I obviously just don't know how that privilege works. Even though Trump voluntarily put the statement out himself, he can say it was based on a conversation he had with his lawyer so he doesn't have to answer questions about it? 
Click to expand...
No. I think Eichenwald's thinking is that Trump can be asked about what he said, just not how or why he formulated the wording. So Bob could ask about the statement and what it means, he just couldn't ask about any sort of thought process or the method of drafting the statement. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
You say “trying” like it isn’t working on his base.
Click to expand...
You would think that by now he would get a tiny bit smarter and understand that he's not losing his base no matter what. And that maybe, just maybe, he should start working on the nearly 70% of the country that hates his guts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Yes I think so. Can't protect from the effect of the actual public statement.
Click to expand...
Claim all they want about not asking as to the genesis of writing thst Tweet - the Tweet itself and any inference it makes or dots it may connect are certainly public and therefore can be explored and asked about.

I think the logical answer is that while it may be true that Trumps legal team is arguing that Trump is safe from those tweets due to priviledge, it's also probable that the AUDIENCE for that claim is not the courts (who'd likely laugh at a public statement being protected by priviledge), but one singular person that MUST be told the gold plated version of the truth whereby he is safe, protected and completely right, all the time.  

 
rockaction said:
This is bull####. I cite PBS, Taibbi, Law Library Journal, Forbes, Bloomberg, WaPo, all in non op-eds and get laughed at and asked if I'm drinking and all sorts of garbage. I admit I'm tired and go to bed. 

I wake up: ABC makes up news, gets suspended for a month, and Bozeman gets accused of not engaging. 

No wonder this forum tends to stink like fish. 
Click to expand...
Did you read his whole post?  Including citing Jack Posobiec?

People womder d not about your sources (andthat was about deflecting the tax reform with a bad comparison to ACA).

 
Dedfin said:
Cmon Henry, don't insult goldfish like that.
Click to expand...
Here’s a fun experiment to try with your friendly neighborhood Trump supporter: convince him of something he can’t prove himself. Real discussion, but then don’t mention it again for a month.  Check and see what he believes now.  

 
JuniorNB said:
There's a huge difference between the two that you're willfully ignoring. ABC is not promoting bad reporting and misinformation. They punish reporters who participate in such. Fox doesn't. And that's fine with you.
Click to expand...
CNN did the same

when they reported something that may have even been true...just not properly sourced.

 
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/03/us/politics/trump-putin-russia-nra-campaign.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytpolitics&smtyp=cur&_r=0

WASHINGTON — A conservative operative trumpeting his close ties to the National Rifle Association and Russia told a Trump campaign adviser last year that he could arrange a back-channel meeting between Donald J. Trump and Vladimir V. Putin, the Russian president, according to an email sent to the Trump campaign.

A May 2016 email to the campaign adviser, Rick Dearborn, bore the subject line “Kremlin Connection.” In it, the N.R.A. member said he wanted the advice of Mr. Dearborn and Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, then a foreign policy adviser to Mr. Trump and Mr. Dearborn’s longtime boss, about how to proceed in connecting the two leaders.

Russia, he wrote, was “quietly but actively seeking a dialogue with the U.S.” and would attempt to use the N.R.A.’s annual convention in Louisville, Ky., to make “‘first contact.’” The email, which was among a trove of campaign-related documents turned over to investigators on Capitol Hill, was described in detail to The New York Times.

Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the election and possible collusion with the Trump campaign, secured a guilty plea on Friday from President Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, for lying to the F.B.I. about contacts with Moscow’s former ambassador to the United States. But those contacts came after Mr. Trump’s improbable election victory.

The emailed outreach from the conservative operative to Mr. Dearborn came far earlier, around the same time that Russians were trying to make other connections to the Trump campaign. Another contact came through an American advocate for Christian and veterans causes, and together, the outreach shows how, as Mr. Trump closed in on the nomination, Russians were using three foundational pillars of the Republican Party — guns, veterans and Christian conservatives — to try to make contact with his unorthodox campaign.

Both efforts, made within days of each other, centered on the N.R.A.’s annual meeting and appear to involve Alexander Torshin, a deputy governor of the Russian central bank and key figure in Mr. Putin’s United Russia party, who was instructed to make contact with the campaign.

Continue reading the main story

Russian Hacking and Influence in the U.S. Election

Complete coverage of Russia’s campaign to disrupt the 2016 presidential election.

Trump, Defending Himself After Flynn Guilty Plea, Says F.B.I. Is in ‘Tatters’DEC 3

ABC Suspends Reporter Brian Ross Over Erroneous Report About TrumpDEC 2

Emails Dispute White House Claims That Flynn Acted Independently on RussiaDEC 2

Wrenched From Scandal to Success, Trump Looks Ahead, and Over His ShoulderDEC 2

Trump Says He Fired Michael Flynn ‘Because He Lied’ to F.B.I.DEC 2

See More »

RELATED COVERAGE

Top Russian Official Tried to Broker ‘Backdoor’ Meeting Between Trump and Putin NOV. 17, 2017

Trump Campaign Adviser Met With Russian to Discuss ‘Dirt’ on Clinton OCT. 30, 2017

Trump’s Son Met With Russian Lawyer After Being Promised Damaging Information on Clinton JULY 9, 2017

“Putin is deadly serious about building a good relationship with Mr. Trump,” the N.R.A. member and conservative activist, Paul Erickson, wrote. “He wants to extend an invitation to Mr. Trump to visit him in the Kremlin before the election. Let’s talk through what has transpired and Senator Sessions’s advice on how to proceed.”

It is not clear how Mr. Dearborn handled the outreach. He forwarded a similar proposal, made through Rick Clay, an advocate for conservative Christian causes, to Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and a top campaign aide. Mr. Kushner rebuffed the proposal at the time, according to two people who have seen Mr. Kushner’s email.

Mr. Sessions told investigators from the House Intelligence Committee that he did not recall the outreach, according to three people with knowledge of the exchange. Mr. Dearborn did not return requests for comment, and Ty Cobb, the White House lawyer dealing with matters related to the investigations, declined to comment. Repeated attempts to reach Mr. Erickson were not successful.

Intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia, on orders from the highest levels of its government, undertook a sophisticated campaign to hack Democratic computers, spread propaganda and undermine the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. The repeated outreach around the N.R.A. convention, where Mr. Trump accepted the group’s endorsement, came just weeks after a self-described intermediary for the Russian government told George Papadopoulos, a campaign aide, that the Russians had “dirt” on Mrs. Clinton. And just weeks later, the president’s eldest son arranged a meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer who promised damaging information about the would-be Democratic nominee.

“The Kremlin believes that the only possibility of a true reset in this relationship would be with a new Republican White House,” Mr. Erickson wrote to Mr. Dearborn, adding, “Ever since Hillary compared Putin to Hitler, all senior Russian leaders consider her beyond redemption.”

Congressional investigators obtained the email as part of their inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election and whether Mr. Trump’s campaign aided the efforts. It appears to have caught the attention of senators as well. Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, penned letters to several Trump campaign foreign policy advisers last week asking for all documents related to the N.R.A., Mr. Erickson, Mr. Torshin, Mr. Clay, Mr. Dearborn and others.

Mr. Erickson, a longtime conservative operative who has been involved in several presidential campaigns, presented himself in the email as a well-connected intermediary to the upper reaches of the Russian government. By “happenstance” and the reach of the N.R.A., Mr. Erickson wrote, he had been put in position to “slowly begin cultivating a back-channel to President Putin’s Kremlin” in recent years.

“Russia is quietly but actively seeking a dialogue with the U.S. that isn’t forthcoming under the current administration,” he wrote.

Indeed, evidence does appear to show deep ties between Mr. Erickson, the N.R.A. and the Russian gun rights community that were formed in the years when many American conservatives, put off by the Obama administration’s policies, were increasingly looking to Mr. Putin as an example of a strong leader opposing immigration, terrorism and gay rights.

The N.R.A. was one of Mr. Trump’s biggest backers during the campaign, spending tens of millions of dollars to help elect him.

Mr. Erickson has known Maria Butina, a former assistant to Mr. Torshin and the founder of the Right to Bear Arms, a Russian gun-rights group, for several years. Ms. Butina, who helped Mr. Torshin make the request through Mr. Clay, hosted Mr. Erickson at a September 2014 meeting of the group at its Moscow office. And in February 2016, the two incorporated a company, Bridges LLC, together in South Dakota. What the company does is unclear.

In December 2015, Mr. Erickson returned to Russia as part of an N.R.A. delegation that included David Keene, the group’s onetime president, top donors and David A. Clarke Jr., the former sheriff of Milwaukee County who became a popular Trump campaign surrogate. At one stop, the group met with Dmitry Rogozin, the deputy prime minister in charge of defense. A photograph from the meeting shows Mr. Torshin was also present.

In the United States, the hospitality was returned. Mr. Torshin and Ms. Butina attended the N.R.A.’s annual convention in 2014 and 2015. Ms. Butina told the conservative news site Townhall that she attended the N.R.A. Women’s Leadership Luncheon as a guest of Sandra S. Froman, a former president of the group. And in 2015, she was given a tour of the N.R.A.’s Virginia headquarters.

Attempts to contact Ms. Butina were unsuccessful.

Mr. Erickson does not explicitly name Mr. Torshin in the email to Mr. Dearborn, but the message appears to refer to him, the people familiar with the communication said. Instead, he describes “President Putin’s emissary on this front,” whose plans match those of Mr. Torshin.

Mr. Torshin, he wrote, was planning to attend a reception being planned by Mr. Clay honoring wounded veterans that he expected Mr. Trump would also attend. Mr. Torshin expected to use the reception to “make ‘first contact’” with the candidate and present Mr. Trump’s wife, Melania, with a gift from the Russian Orthodox Church.

According to Mr. Clay, neither Mr. Trump nor his campaign officials attended the veterans’ dinner. The president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., and Mr. Torshin did attend a separate N.R.A. dinner that night.

Mr. Torshin served in the upper house of the Russian Parliament and was a member of the country’s National Anti-Terrorism Committee, a government body that includes the ministers of defense, interior and foreign affairs and the director of the Federal Security Service, known as F.S.B., the K.G.B.’s successor. He has been a leading advocate of gun rights in Russia and of more closely linking the government and the Russian Orthodox Church.

Spanish investigators say that while he was in Parliament, Mr. Torshin laundered money for the Russian mafia through Spanish banks and properties. Mr. Torshin has denied those accusations.
Click to expand...

 
Ilov80s said:
Are they saying Dowd actually typed and tweeted it from DJT's account or that Down crafted it? 
Click to expand...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumps-lawyer-wrote-presidents-sloppy-tweet-flynns-dismissal/story?id=51541650

Trump's lawyer: I wrote the president's 'sloppy' tweet about Flynn's dismissal

President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, John Dowd, says he drafted the president's Saturday morning tweet that stated he fired former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn for lying not only to Vice President Mike Pence but also to the FBI. [...]

Dowd told ABC News he wrote those words and had done so in a "sloppy" manner. A second source familiar with the matter corroborated his account. [...]

It's unclear who actually tweeted out the message; it is unlikely Dowd has direct access to the president's official Twitter account and could have tweeted without his knowledge or involvement, sources said. [...]

 
Rirruto said:
My faith in the bolded is 0%. He lost by 3 million votes this time and still "won." I honestly can't wait to see what other enemy he sells the country to in the sequel. Maybe he'll give California to ISIS.
Click to expand...
My prediction that he won't win re-election was in the context of him firing Mueller and surviving impeachment. That may sound counterintuitive but him having a relatively free hand for a couple of years will lead to him doing a kazillion stupid things that will cause a massive reaction against him at the polls. Low Democratic turnout (and the results of voter suppression efforts) would be the only things that could save him but he's way too undisciplined and stupid to realize how many voters he is alienating along the way.

 
timschochet said:
HellToupee, GoBirds and rockaction all praised Bozeman’s absurd and insipid post. With HT it doesn’t matter, he’s all shtick, but the other two of you really embarrassed yourselves with this IMO. 
Click to expand...
Feel free to point out the parts of my post that were "absurd" or "insipid".

You ask why nobody engages here, I give you an answer without calling anyone names or trolling, my post and anyone who liked it gets mocked.

Is shaming other posters because they liked something being excellent?

 
The problem with this whole situation, is that most of the population doesn't know what/who to believe. Most people don't understand the legal workings of what is going on. They're questioning the reliability of sources they trusted before. At a certain point, it becomes white noise and just gets tuned out. What's left is people deciding how this effects them directly and vote accordingly. 

 
Bozeman Bruiser said:
Feel free to point out the parts of my post that were "absurd" or "insipid".

You ask why nobody engages here, I give you an answer without calling anyone names or trolling, my post and anyone who liked it gets mocked.

Is shaming other posters because they liked something being excellent?
Click to expand...
Citing Jack Posobiec.

 
KCitons said:
The problem with this whole situation, is that most of the population doesn't know what/who to believe. Most people don't understand the legal workings of what is going on. They're questioning the reliability of sources they trusted before. At a certain point, it becomes white noise and just gets tuned out. What's left is people deciding how this effects them directly and vote accordingly. 
Click to expand...
considering the trump base only watches Fox news....and they pretty much just bash the investigation as a democrat witch hunt and trump himself berates the FBI. 

Doesn't help when other MSM outlets make mistakes like ABC the other day. 

I'm hoping now that the republican congress did something (Tax cuts) that if the shoe really does drop on trump and the Russian collusion is proven out by Mueller and team that they act in the best interest of the country rather than Party, 

 
James Daulton said:
For you Trump supporters, what about the more serious allegations against Flynn and his kid?  Big nothing burgers?  Do you all actually believe that lying to the FBI was on the only charge that could be brought against him?

I'm trying not to be a #### just asking a simple question.
Click to expand...
Good question.

My guess is that Flynn pled guilty to lying so that all of the other more serious allegations against him and his son would be wiped away.

It is possible he pled guilty and flipped on Trump, but as of today there has yet to be any evidence of wrongdoing by Trump, just a bunch of speculation and anonymous sources.

Unless of course you still believe the fake Russian intel fed to the DNC, Hillary, and the FBI through the dossier is a real thing.

Based on known provable evidence, Flynn cutting a deal to save him and his son from more serious charges is the most logical conclusion.

What does Mueller get in return? Another scalp, even if it is a participation trophy scalp it still satisfies the media and Trump haters for a few days.

 
Bozeman Bruiser said:
So brave.
Click to expand...
To be fair, there are a lot of people who've been wrong for a year now, never admitted it, and keep showing up with crackpot theories and a willful misunderstanding of basic facts.

Just to pick a recent one, Brian Ross being wrong in his reporting is somehow worse than Trump lying every time he opens his mouth.

Can you believe that ####?

 
KCitons said:
The problem with this whole situation, is that most of the population doesn't know what/who to believe. Most people don't understand the legal workings of what is going on. They're questioning the reliability of sources they trusted before. At a certain point, it becomes white noise and just gets tuned out. What's left is people deciding how this effects them directly and vote accordingly. 
Click to expand...
It does not take an immense intellect to figure out the difference between bias and bull####.

 
Bozeman Bruiser said:
Good question.

My guess is that Flynn pled guilty to lying so that all of the other more serious allegations against him and his son would be wiped away.

It is possible he pled guilty and flipped on Trump, but as of today there has yet to be any evidence of wrongdoing by Trump, just a bunch of speculation and anonymous sources.

Unless of course you still believe the fake Russian intel fed to the DNC, Hillary, and the FBI through the dossier is a real thing.

Based on known provable evidence, Flynn cutting a deal to save him and his son from more serious charges is the most logical conclusion.

What does Mueller get in return? Another scalp, even if it is a participation trophy scalp it still satisfies the media and Trump haters for a few days.
Click to expand...
Outside of essentially admitting to obstruction of justice in a Tweet yesterday.

 
Bozeman Bruiser said:
Good question.

My guess is that Flynn pled guilty to lying so that all of the other more serious allegations against him and his son would be wiped away.

It is possible he pled guilty and flipped on Trump, but as of today there has yet to be any evidence of wrongdoing by Trump, just a bunch of speculation and anonymous sources.

Unless of course you still believe the fake Russian intel fed to the DNC, Hillary, and the FBI through the dossier is a real thing.

Based on known provable evidence, Flynn cutting a deal to save him and his son from more serious charges is the most logical conclusion.

What does Mueller get in return? Another scalp, even if it is a participation trophy scalp it still satisfies the media and Trump haters for a few days.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the response, and I agree.  And let's say it's not Trump, at what point does Trump's horrible judgement in those he surrounds himself with, and puts in positions of massive power, become so obvious that even his base recognizes it?  Never?

And there's the whole issue of how much Pence knew, Trump lying about why he fired Flynn, Trump trying to get Comey to drop the Flynn thing (based on Comey's notes), I mean when is enough enough?  Is the litmus test a video of Trump actively colluding with Putin?  For you as a supporter (which I'm assuming only), what would it take for you to stop supporting him over these kind of issues?

 
Rirruto said:
My faith in the bolded is 0%. He lost by 3 million votes this time and still "won." I honestly can't wait to see what other enemy he sells the country to in the sequel. Maybe he'll give California to ISIS.
Click to expand...
You should Google "electoral college". That is how we keep score in presidential elections.

As for selling out our country to the enemy. If I was a ruthless man I would dress you down so bad right now you would quit the internet. But I'm not. I'm a gentleman.

Google uranium 1 and Clinton foundation if you want to see what literally selling your country looks like.

I have faith in you pupper, a little more independent research and thought could change your world for the better.

 
bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
considering the trump base only watches Fox news....and they pretty much just bash the investigation as a democrat witch hunt and trump himself berates the FBI. 

Doesn't help when other MSM outlets make mistakes like ABC the other day. 

I'm hoping now that the republican congress did something (Tax cuts) that if the shoe really does drop on trump and the Russian collusion is proven out by Mueller and team that they act in the best interest of the country rather than Party, 
Click to expand...
I get the feeling none of you have watched Fox news in a long time.

Hannity is a Trump sucker.

Tucker just humiliates sjws daily, as for Trump he is 50/50.

Boling was a trump fan but they fired him.

The Greek chick was a trump fan but they fired her.

O'Reilly was 50/50 Trump but they fired him.

Their morning and day time shows are about 25/75 pro Trump.

Laura Ingram is a Trump fan.

Fox news has the same puppet masters and goals as CNN and MSNBC, status quo. Other than a few commentators most of them hate Trump.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth
dozer
Ret. Lt. Gen Mike Flynn
2 3
Replies
104
Views
3K
Genxersrule
G
G
Mueller Investigation - Common Misconceptions (1-10)
Replies
0
Views
197
Guest
G

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 15 (members: 0, guests: 15)
Top