Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
whoknew

The Russia Investigation: Judge Tells Flynn He Sold His Country Out; Sentencing Postponed

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, adonis said:

Not if it can be shown that he was colluding with Russia to win the presidential election.  Not if it can be shown that his various interests in Russia will cause him to have a conflict of interest with any dealings with Putin, regarding Ukraine/Crimea, regarding future aggressions, regarding sanctions being imposed/lifted, regarding what we do at the UN with respect to Russia.

This all matters, and if we have a president who can't be trusted to operate with a major foreign adversary without respect to a huge conflict of interest, that's a problem.  Like I said, there's so much smoke in this area, that it's certainly reasonable to be concerned about this playing a role.  

I would love to be able to just sit back and give Trump the benefit of the doubt here, and wait until he starts doing things, but these questions are only getting more numerous, as evidence comes out, strong evidence, to support more and more russian ties.  It's concerning, and there's really no reason to just sit and wait.  We should be aware of what's going on, what has gone on, and look to the future with this knowledge in mind as we see what he's doing as president.

Why?  So we can blog about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, adonis said:

Not if it can be shown that he was colluding with Russia to win the presidential election.  Not if it can be shown that his various interests in Russia will cause him to have a conflict of interest with any dealings with Putin, regarding Ukraine/Crimea, regarding future aggressions, regarding sanctions being imposed/lifted, regarding what we do at the UN with respect to Russia.

This all matters, and if we have a president who can't be trusted to operate with a major foreign adversary without respect to a huge conflict of interest, that's a problem.  Like I said, there's so much smoke in this area, that it's certainly reasonable to be concerned about this playing a role.  

I would love to be able to just sit back and give Trump the benefit of the doubt here, and wait until he starts doing things, but these questions are only getting more numerous, as evidence comes out, strong evidence, to support more and more russian ties.  It's concerning, and there's really no reason to just sit and wait.  We should be aware of what's going on, what has gone on, and look to the future with this knowledge in mind as we see what he's doing as president.

Regarding the bolded, it just seems so much like Hillary and the emails to me: you're never going to prove anything IMO. If you DO prove it, then sure it matters. But until then it doesn't. 

As for the rest of it, there's nothing there IMO until he actually does something in office that makes no sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, timschochet said:

At the time that he made his initial comments about NATO, I regarded them as disqualifying him for the Presidency, over and above everything else the man said during the campaign. 

But like so many other comments made by Trump, he quickly retracted them, and in various interviews has said many contradictory things. So here's the point: I think that in the end President Trump will stand by NATO, and I think that if he doesn't, there will be a revolt in Congress, led by Republicans. But I don't believe any of this will come about, because I don't think Putin will ever challenge NATO. He'll talk about it, and Trump will talk about it, but it won't happen. 

This is an optimistic view.  He is already challenging NATO using propaganda, cyber-warfare, and financial ties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Adonis, any comparison between you and I is a great compliment to me. 

Trump has troubling associations. More than any other guy we've had in the office in modern times, for sure. His background has all kinds of sleazy stuff to it. I didn't want him in there partly for that reason. I won't be surprised by anything we find out about him.

But- I also wrote on November 9, the majority of the voters who matter didn't care about this stuff. So be it. Donald Trump deserves a clean slate until he actually does stuff that negatively affects people. 

I feel like I'm reading someone talking to themselves. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Hi guys, I'm back (maybe only briefly) and I wanted to offer an opinion here.

:pickle:  Hope you can rejoin us on a regular basis again!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, adonis said:

This crap was asking Russia to do more of what they were already doing though.  We're expected to believe it's a coincidence that Trump was asking Russia to further intervene on his behalf.  Sure, it could be coincidence, but it also might be that he knew what they were doing and was asking them to do more of it.

Oh, and it's also perilously close to treason to encourage foreign acts of espionage against your political opponent for your own benefit.  But yeah, let's just dismiss it as though it happens all the time and give DJT the benefit of the doubt here because he so richly deserves it, based on other things we know about him and Russia, who was in his campaign and their ties to Russia, what came out from the IC about Russia influencing our election in his favor via hacking and propaganda, and his business ties, and his unfailingly positive comments about Putin...the list goes on.

At a certain point, one has to admit that there are a lot of threads, thin as some of them are, that are converging around something not being right around Trump and Russia and Putin.  

Yes because if I wanted to get a secret message out to my spy buddies from Russia, I'd just just blurt it out on international TV.  Good plan...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Quez said:

It's as if the hacking allegations aren't panning out, so they decided to go back to the drawing board.  I'm sure everyone of the conspiracy theorists peddling this is just as familiar with Hillary Clinton's ties to the Hot Springs Arkansas mob...  Where was the outrage about that?  One could piece together an extravagant, loosely based story on that as well.

They are panning out just fine.  It's just there is so much corruption and filth associated with Trump that we need to have multiple streams going at once.  Think of it as one of those giant trough urinals like they used to have at sports arenas.  Lots of streams going at once.  But they all end up in the same spot, the sewer.  In this example, think of Trump as the sewer.  

 

 

Edited by Sabertooth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, adonis said:

Many folks in our intelligence community consider Russia and Putin to be our number 1 global threat.  Trumps team wants to treat them with kid gloves.  They consider ISIS the biggest global threat.  

It matters whether the person we just elected has had improper relationships with Russia in the past that would make him unfit to control our foreign policy as it relates to them.

Your buddy Obama mocked that statement.

Edited by BassNBrew
bad grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BassNBrew said:
33 minutes ago, adonis said:

Many folks in our intelligence community consider Russia and Putin to be our number 1 global threat.  Trumps team wants to treat them with kid gloves.  They consider ISIS the biggest global threat.  

It matters whether the person we just elected has had improper relationships with Russia in the past that would make him unfit to control our foreign policy as it relates to them.

You're buddy Obama mocked that statement.

Adonis = Obama confirmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Slapdash said:

This is an optimistic view.  He is already challenging NATO using propaganda, cyber-warfare, and financial ties.

This is where we respectfully disagree. 

Sure, Putin is doing all that stuff, and he'd love to weaken NATO. But a true challenge to NATO means invading a NATO country, testing our willingness to live up to our pledge. And I don't think Putin will ever do that. 

But, that being said, it was unwise policy IMO of Presidents Clinton and Bush to extend NATO to several of the eastern European nations that border the former Soviet Union. I'm not sure why we did that, and hopefully we won't regret it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sabertooth said:

Facts are irrelevant.   

I recall a moment during the 2012 campaign where Romney said Russia was USA's top geopolitical foe, and Obama was dismissive of that claim.

I was making fun of BassNBrew failing the "your/you're" test.

Edited by Bruce Dickinson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

This is where we respectfully disagree. 

Sure, Putin is doing all that stuff, and he'd love to weaken NATO. But a true challenge to NATO means invading a NATO country, testing our willingness to live up to our pledge. And I don't think Putin will ever do that. 

But, that being said, it was unwise policy IMO of Presidents Clinton and Bush to extend NATO to several of the eastern European nations that border the former Soviet Union. I'm not sure why we did that, and hopefully we won't regret it. 

That is fine.  

A thread @Rich Conway started a while back had this article in it has a much darker take:  http://www.vox.com/2015/6/29/8845913/russia-war

Curious on your thoughts on it (can't find the thread right now).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bruce Dickinson said:

I recall a moment during the 2012 campaign where Romney said Russia was USA's top geopolitical foe, and Obama was dismissive of that claim.

I was making fun of BassNBrew failing the "your/you're" test.

Which Bruce Dickison are you?  Iron Maiden or Chris Walken? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, adonis said:

Not if it can be shown that his various interests in Russia will cause him to have a conflict of interest with any dealings with Putin

What would it "being shown" look like to you adonis?  What will you have to see?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sabertooth said:

Which Bruce Dickison are you?  Iron Maiden or Chris Walken? 

Username was intended to be a tribute to the Walken SNL sketch.  I'm a fan of both, but the concise answer to your question is "Walken".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bruce Dickinson said:

Username was intended to be a tribute to the Walken SNL sketch.  I'm a fan of both, but the concise answer to your question is "Walken".

:kicksrock: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Slapdash said:

That is fine.  

A thread @Rich Conway started a while back had this article in it has a much darker take:  http://www.vox.com/2015/6/29/8845913/russia-war

Curious on your thoughts on it (can't find the thread right now).

I'm familiar with Max Fisher. It's a very scary article. And it's not new- back in the 70s, Jonathan Schell argued that nuclear war is inevitable, that essentially mankind is living in a coda since 1945, and doomed to extinction. Even beyond the current specifics with Russia, the argument made by Schell is simple and terrifying:  we cannot ultimately prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Eventually there will be a misunderstanding between distrusting nations, and somebody will use nukes. Mankind will not survive. 

I have no good rebuttal to this argument in general, but specifically I don't believe that Putin is the man to start a nuclear war. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Off topic, but Bruce Dickinson didn't produce "Don't Fear The Reaper". He was just a record label executive whose name had appeared on the back cover of BOC's "Greatest Hits" album, which caused the SNL writers to assume that he produced the song.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Joe Summer said:

Off topic, but Bruce Dickinson didn't produce "Don't Fear The Reaper". He was just a record label executive whose name had appeared on the back cover of BOC's "Greatest Hits" album, which caused the SNL writers to assume that he produced the song.

1) I did not know that.  I'm glad I do now.

2) I can't decide if that makes the sketch more or less funny, or no change.

3) anyone who says no one learns anything in the political threads can suck on it

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Amused to Death said:

Haven't they been discussed (in some circles) for the past 8 years?  We're on to a new president now.  Let's discuss him.

What I meant was, is this bull#### made up by opposition or is it legitimate?  Was this reported by the liberal version of brietbart or is this a legitimate news source?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Kanil said:

What I meant was, is this bull#### made up by opposition or is it legitimate?  Was this reported by the liberal version of brietbart or is this a legitimate news source?

I don't think anyone knows yet.

Pretty sure Schindler isn't a liberal. And the FT is a legit news source. Having said that, there's no smoking gun. 

To me, this seems like something that is worth more investigation, but nothing more at this point. So I hope FT/NYT/WaPo are on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, whoknew said:

I don't think anyone knows yet.

Pretty sure Schindler isn't a liberal. And the FT is a legit news source. Having said that, there's no smoking gun. 

To me, this seems like something that is worth more investigation, but nothing more at this point. So I hope FT/NYT/WaPo are on it.

Schindler actually works for a site run by Trump's son in law...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-sanctions-top-putin-ally-alleged-litvinenko-killers-210301848.html

US blacklists Putin ally, alleged Litvinenko killers

ashington (AFP) - The United States on Monday blacklisted Russian President Vladimir Putin's reputed top enforcer and two more Russians alleged to have fatally poisoned ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko in London a decade ago.

The Treasury added the prosecutor and senior investigator Alexander Bastrykin and alleged assassins Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitri Kovtun to the Magnitsky Act sanctions list.

Announcing the decision, the State Department did not elaborate on the new targets or the timing, which comes at a time of heightened tension with Moscow.

President Barack Obama's outgoing administration has accused the Kremlin of using cyber espionage, leaking and propaganda in a bid to influence November's White House race.

Moscow has scornfully rejected the charges, over which Washington has already expelled 35 Russian diplomats allegedly involved in espionage.

Monday's decision zeroes in on a close Putin ally.

Bastrykin is one of the Russian president's most powerful allies and as head of an investigative agency that had led crack downs on domestic dissidents and targeted foreign NGOs and other groups accused of meddling in Russian politics.

British officials have identified Lugovoi and Kovtun as main suspects in the death of Litvinenko, who succumbed to radiation poisoning in London in 2006 after drinking polonium-laced tea.

The Magnitsky Act was originally passed to enable US officials to impose sanctions on Russians implicated in the 2009 prison death of Russian tax fraud whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky.

But more individuals have been blacklisted over the years.

The list now includes 44 names of those whose assets under US jurisdiction are frozen, and who are barred from doing business with Americans or receiving US visas.

The act allows for the designation of those implicated in the murder, torture or persecution of those who reveal corruption in Russia, State Department spokesman John Kirby said.

The US authorities also added two more less well-known Russian officials, Stanislav Gordievsky and Gennady Plaksin, to the list.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

I'm familiar with Max Fisher. It's a very scary article. And it's not new- back in the 70s, Jonathan Schell argued that nuclear war is inevitable, that essentially mankind is living in a coda since 1945, and doomed to extinction. Even beyond the current specifics with Russia, the argument made by Schell is simple and terrifying:  we cannot ultimately prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Eventually there will be a misunderstanding between distrusting nations, and somebody will use nukes. Mankind will not survive. 

I have no good rebuttal to this argument in general, but specifically I don't believe that Putin is the man to start a nuclear war. 

Thanks.  I find the idea (shared by Trump) that we need even greater nuclear capabilities very unnerving. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kind of related. As CEO of Exxon,Tillerson did business with Iran while it was under U.S. Sanctions.

 

The transactions included $53.2 million in sales to Iran over three years.

 

 

ExxonMobil did business with Iran, Syria and Sudan through a European subsidiary while President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of State was a top executive of the oil giant and those countries were under U.S. sanctions as state sponsors of terrorism, Securities and Exchange Commissionfilings show.

That business connection is likely to surface Wednesday at a confirmation hearing for ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The sales were conducted in 2003, 2004 and 2005 by Infineum, in which ExxonMobil owned a 50% share, according to SEC documents unearthed by American Bridge, a Democratic research group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WheelsUp said:

Just tried to look it up and have seen Milania's birth canal, but not her birth certificate.

Michelle was such a disgrace.  Oh wait we don't care about that anymore.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll post what I did in the last thread about what I think needs to happen:

Investigation and public hearings of the Trump campaign communications with Russia during the campaign. I don't expect there to be any smoking gun that they actively collaborated but the information needs to be publicly aired. This can't be something left to a Trump administration to lead for obvious reasons.

Disclose and divest from all business interests that have Russian connections. I share the Office of Gov't Ethics opinion that he should follow the example of every other modern president and do this for all his holdings, but given the Russian interference on his behalf I think it is especially critical he do this to avoid any potential appearance of conflict.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: And they just keep hitting their head against the wall.

Billy Bush crotch grab didn't work

Blatant disrespect for power beaten into the public's head but still no impact. 

Lets keep trying to cast Trump as the devil because eventually it will seep in with folks. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bucky86 said:

Kind of related. As CEO of Exxon,Tillerson did business with Iran while it was under U.S. Sanctions.

 

The transactions included $53.2 million in sales to Iran over three years.

 

 

ExxonMobil did business with Iran, Syria and Sudan through a European subsidiary while President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of State was a top executive of the oil giant and those countries were under U.S. sanctions as state sponsors of terrorism, Securities and Exchange Commissionfilings show.

That business connection is likely to surface Wednesday at a confirmation hearing for ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The sales were conducted in 2003, 2004 and 2005 by Infineum, in which ExxonMobil owned a 50% share, according to SEC documents unearthed by American Bridge, a Democratic research group.

Off Topic. This is about Russian conspiracies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

:lol: And they just keep hitting their head against the wall.

Billy Bush crotch grab didn't work

Blatant disrespect for power beaten into the public's head but still no impact. 

Lets keep trying to cast Trump as the devil because eventually it will seep in with folks. 

As I wrote, I don't think this is much of a story but I also don't understand how posts like this one contribute to the discussion. You seem to be gloating that Trump won and that his supporters aren't paying attention to his faults. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't read these threads anymore, but......

 

EMAILS!

 

BENGHAZI!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, timschochet said:

As I wrote, I don't think this is much of a story but I also don't understand how posts like this one contribute to the discussion. You seem to be gloating that Trump won and that his supporters aren't paying attention to his faults. 

I'm simply saying that the Left continues to run the same play book much like the GOP did for a long time until it was time to reset the table, apparently.

Also a growing trend by those on the Left or really just anti-Trump in general is a strong desire to cut down the poster which you did with great delight almost gloating about it in your post. 

I didn't direct the comment towards Tim in any way. Also was there not a thread 70 pages long going back to Summer that Bob Magaw had originally launched? Anyone know what happened? 

We have a lot of information already accumulated and then we get Johnny Come Lately who show up and want to own the story, Tim! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were widely known for a long time Trump has all these connections then why did everyone sell him so short in the media? And why didn't someone blow the lid off this? I guess the crotch grabber angle seemed at the time like it had more teeth and easier Knockout for the HRC Camp?

How did everyone miss this?

There should be a recall effort and full on Civil War, what are we waiting for?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

If it were widely known for a long time Trump has all these connections then why did everyone sell him so short in the media? And why didn't someone blow the lid off this? I guess the crotch grabber angle seemed at the time like it had more teeth and easier Knockout for the HRC Camp?

How did everyone miss this?

There should be a recall effort and full on Civil War, what are we waiting for?

Exactly my question.  He truly hasn't been vetted to be POTUS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Eephus said:

Trump's ties were made in China.  This Russia business is another lie from the failing lamestream media.  So sad.

See Eephus I'm afraid what is happening is anything the media wants to report on Trump true or untrue it's all gonna be put out there. A lot of folks will not listen but then you are going to have folks who live in urban sprawls come face to face with a fraction of those folks who doesn't buy into these media driven witch hunts...let me put it another way, give this a few more months as this is the tip of the iceberg...then we will send MoP into the field in a black or minority driven section of Dade or Palm Beach and let's see what happens when He sticks a mic in someone's face and act like he is anti-Trump and want to get their reaction...let the fireworks begin. 

Edited by Ministry of Pain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump talked about Wikileaks something like 160 times in the last month of the election in public appearances.

Now acts like it didn't matter.

This guy :lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The General said:

Trump talked about Wikileaks something like 160 times in the last month of the election in public appearances.

Now acts like it didn't matter.

This guy :lol:

You know what is even funnier, HRC had 3 Million more people in the country vote for her :yes: What other country elects a candidate that doesn't have the most votes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ministry of Pain said:

You know what is even funnier, HRC had 3 Million more people in the country vote for her :yes: What other country elects a candidate that doesn't have the most votes?

A separate issue but yeah that sucks. The system we have though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now