Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
whoknew

The Russia Investigation: Mueller - "Over the course of my career, I've seen a number of challenges to our democracy.The Russian govt's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious."

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, ShamrockPride said:

Another swing and a miss for the Russiagaters here and everywhere

Federal analysis finds no evidence of cyberattack on Durham County election in 2016

Yep- this whole thing was largely overblown.  DHS undersec Chris Krebs said as much, that the ‘21 state cyberattack’ was “simple scanning,” and that he “wouldn’t characterize it as an attack.”  

But I’m not sure there’s much point trying to convince people otherwise.  The amount of fear and pandemonium that took root over some embarrassing email leaks and social media posts is really disproportionate to the actual threat posed by them- nevermind all of the literal fake news like the Vermont electrical grid story.  The fear campaign worked.  


Here is the thread where people argued the “Russian interference” was worse than 9/11 & Pearl Harbor: https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/767952-did-2016-russian-meddling-or-911-do-greater-long-term-damage-to-the-us/

Edited by ren hoek
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2019 at 7:30 AM, ren hoek said:

https://i.imgur.com/MXTBiZf.jpg

Look, Comey said the FBI did some sloppiness but overall it’s a noble institution.  Yeah they tried to blackmail MLK and entrapped mentally ill people to rack up terror stats, but they’re just spooks trying to protect us. It would have been derelict not to lie to the courts and mislead the country for years- Steele said they were Russian agents!  

They are in denial.  The FBI has never been a noble institution.  It’s not like they are doing charity work out there.  It’s run by people who are flawed, selfish, and power-hungry, like most any other large, authoritarian organization.  They need to be constantly monitored and kept in check.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, jonessed said:

They are in denial.  The FBI has never been a noble institution.  It’s not like they are doing charity work out there.  It’s run by people who are flawed, selfish, and power-hungry, like most any other large, authoritarian organization.  They need to be constantly monitored and kept in check.

 

This really bothers me, and shows how susceptible we can be to disinformation. 

Let’s be clear. The FBI is an important institution that in total has kept Americans safe and enforced our laws. You and your family are safer for it.

Like any bureaucracy, it will have flaws. But the tactics on display here, which is to discredit the entirety of a thing based on outliers is the stuff that allows states like Russia to open fissures and systematically weaken us as a nation. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ren hoek said:

Yep- this whole thing was largely overblown.  DHS undersec Chris Krebs said as much, that the ‘21 state cyberattack’ was “simple scanning,” and that he “wouldn’t characterize it as an attack.”

It's terrifying that people don't understand cyber security.  The above is akin to "oh, it's just a concrete pad with a fuel supply.  I'd hardly consider it as the beginnings of a military launch facility".

Scans are always the prelude to something more.  It's a GOOD thing they were found and recognized.  They were evidence of things to come if we don't take the necessary steps to address them.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mr. Ham said:

This really bothers me, and shows how susceptible we can be to disinformation. 

Let’s be clear. The FBI is an important institution that in total has kept Americans safe and enforced our laws. You and your family are safer for it.

Like any bureaucracy, it will have flaws. But the tactics on display here, which is to discredit the entirety of a thing based on outliers is the stuff that allows states like Russia to open fissures and systematically weaken us as a nation. 

They are an important institution and me and my family are safer for it.  This and my previous comments are not mutually exclusive.

You are being too myopic.

Edited by jonessed

Share this post


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

They are an important institution and me and my family are safer for it.  This and my previous comments are not mutually exclusive.

Your response in context of Ren’s criticism reads otherwise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mr. Ham said:

Your response in context of Ren’s criticism reads otherwise. 

No.  You just can’t look past your bias on current events.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jonessed said:

No.  You just can’t look past your bias on current events.

Context of Ren’s post is textbook FSB. Take the most vile historical acts and hold them up as norm, and use them as a straw man to discredit something else. You gladly layered on, saying the FBI isn’t noble painting those who run the FBI as power hungry. I’m pointing out that that’s not a fair portrayal, and glad you clarified a more reasonable view that the FBI is an important institution that has benefited you and your family. I think that’s more proper context, and glad we corrected it together. 

Edited by Mr. Ham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mr. Ham said:

Context of Ren’s post is textbook FSB. Take the most vile historical acts and hold them up as norm, and use them as a straw man to discredit something else. You gladly layered on, painting those who run the FBI as power hungry. I’m pointing out that that’s not a fair portrayal, and glad you clarified a more reasonable view that the FBI is an important institution that has benefited you and your family. I think that’s more proper context, and glad we corrected it together. 

I think I was pretty clear that it wasn’t a correction.  It was simply a statement added for your clarity.  Those two opinions are not mutually exclusive.

Share this post


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

I think I was pretty clear that it wasn’t a correction.  It was simply a statement added for your clarity.  Those two opinions are not mutually exclusive.

I get what you’re saying. They aren’t noble, but have kept you and your family safe. 

Edited by Mr. Ham
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Mr. Ham said:

Context of Ren’s post is textbook FSB. Take the most vile historical acts and hold them up as norm, and use them as a straw man to discredit something else.

Really?  My post is textbook fsb?  This is mental.  

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Shimon Prokupecz

@ShimonPro

In interview with FBI, Paul Manafort said he used Fox News host Sean Hannity as a “back channel” to President Trump in the period between the FBI raid of his apartment and his indictment months later, in October 2017. Details from newly released FBI documents.

4:46 PM · Jan 2, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

 

Shimon Prokupecz

@ShimonPro

Hannity would send supportive messages to Manafort,telling him to hang in there and that Trump had his back. Manafort said he didn’t recall any direct or indirect communication with the White House in the period, but that Hannity,a personal friend,was “certainly a back channel.”

4:47 PM · Jan 2, 2020

 

Edited by Bucky86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bucky86 said:

Shimon Prokupecz

@ShimonPro

In interview with FBI, Paul Manafort said he used Fox News host Sean Hannity as a “back channel” to President Trump in the period between the FBI raid of his apartment and his indictment months later, in October 2017. Details from newly released FBI documents.

4:46 PM · Jan 2, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

 

Shimon Prokupecz

@ShimonPro

Hannity would send supportive messages to Manafort,telling him to hang in there and that Trump had his back. Manafort said he didn’t recall any direct or indirect communication with the White House in the period, but that Hannity,a personal friend,was “certainly a back channel.”

4:47 PM · Jan 2, 2020

 

Totally a conspiracy theory here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert J. DeNault

@robertjdenault

BREAKING: A Whistleblower told the FBI that Trump’s Deutsche Bank loans were backed by Russian state-owned bank, VTB Bank. VTB was proposed lender for Trump Tower Moscow and allegedly funded the Rosneft Deal. New docs show deep ties between Deutsche + VTB.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Thinking 3

Share this post


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

Robert J. DeNault

@robertjdenault

BREAKING: A Whistleblower told the FBI that Trump’s Deutsche Bank loans were backed by Russian state-owned bank, VTB Bank. VTB was proposed lender for Trump Tower Moscow and allegedly funded the Rosneft Deal. New docs show deep ties between Deutsche + VTB.

Huge if true, but not exactly surprising.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, wow. I never would have suspected that Trump Inc. would be funded by Eastern European (especially Russian) money.

  • Like 3
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


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

Robert J. DeNault

@robertjdenault

BREAKING: A Whistleblower told the FBI that Trump’s Deutsche Bank loans were backed by Russian state-owned bank, VTB Bank. VTB was proposed lender for Trump Tower Moscow and allegedly funded the Rosneft Deal. New docs show deep ties between Deutsche + VTB.

This is what Lawrence O’Donnell got lambasted for reporting, and later retracted. Though he was explicit that the loans were backed by a specific oligarch... perhaps the one that runs VTB?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea of a Deep State plot to undermine Donald Trump is popular in Republican circles, but all this lunacy at least somewhat undermines that analysis. Russiagate turns out to be impossible to understand minus the element of sincere, if misguided or insane, belief. Investigators and then press figures reasoned themselves into one proposition, only to end up on a years-long roller-coaster embracing pee tapes and acoustic brain attacks and killer Putin-dolphins (trained for the inevitable trans-polar Russian assault). 

A section of the recently-released report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz exemplifies how key players became captive to their own mind loops. 

Horowitz found out key assertions about Trump-Russia collusion appeared to come from Russian oligarch and metals baron Oleg Deripaska, who in 2016 employed ex-spy Christopher Steele to help him in a lawsuit against Trump aide Paul Manafort. This was the same Deripaska whose ostensible ties to Russian intelligence would end up being central to Trump-Russia collusion theories, as he reportedly received polling data from the Trump campaign through a middleman.  

In other words: when information was going to OlegDeripaska, he was an FSB villain. When it came from Deripaska, it was trusted. Why? Horowitz quoted counterintelligence chief Bill Priestap:

Quote

Why the Russians, and [Deripaska] is supposed to be close, very close to the Kremlin, why the Russians would try to denigrate an opponent that the intel community later said they were in favor of who didn’t really have a chance at winning, I’m struggling with… I know from my Intelligence Community work: they favored Trump, they’re trying to denigrate Clinton, and they wanted to sow chaos. I don’t know why you’d run a disinformation campaign to denigrate Trump on the side. 

To dig into one of the most serious investigative questions the country had ever faced – the possibility that a presidential candidate was in league with foreign intelligence – the FBI turned to an ex-spy with a reputation for “poor judgment” and a “lack of self-awareness” who happened to be on the payroll of both the rival presidential campaign and a Russian plutocrat pal of Vladimir Putin. Asked why they had confidence in this person and his sources, the sincere answer was, “Why would they lie?”

Intelligence officials launched an investigation based on a series of assumptions, then used those assumptions as a reason not to question the assumptions. As one congressional investigator put it to me, “You can’t make this #### up.”

On the Great Russia Caper

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Worked last time, why not try again?

After the cost they paid last time?  They'd have to be crazy to mess with us again.

  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“It is a task made even more difficult by new threats to the election from other American rivals, such as Iran, which has more motive than ever to interfere in 2020 after a drone strike killed its top security and intelligence commander last week in Iraq.”

Watch out guys, the Russians, Iranians, North Koreans and perhaps some 4th official bad guy are going to hack corporate sellout candidate emails and expose how ####ty they are, also they’re going to post some dank memes on facebook and peddle disinformation, unlike the false narrative we here at the nyt and our anonymous spook sources just got done shilling for 3 years with zero evidence, Bill Kristol’s neocon think tank just said so!  Be afraid!  

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Trump flips out when the DNI briefs Congress on Russia’s attempts to interfere on Trump’s behalf in 2020 election...

Um...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And he names a lackey as DNI?  Holy ####### hell. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, zoonation said:

Richard Grenell seems qualified.  

Grenell is acting director. Trump is apparently looking at Doug Collins. No idea if he’s qualified or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, zoonation said:

Richard Grenell seems qualified.  

“Qualified” apparently means not telling Congress about what the Russians are up to because Trump doesn’t want them to know. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More bad news for the country. Once again the President is more concerned about his own perceptions and power than potential election interference. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ilov80s said:

More bad news for the country. Once again the President is more concerned about his own perceptions and power than potential election interference. 

It could be that the two are intertwined, a scarier thought. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

It could be that the two are intertwined, a scarier thought. 

Yeah i think everything mentioned is intertwined. Power, perception and interference. There’s just no legitimate justification for the intelligence community to continually say, “our elections are being interfered with” and the President to not only ignore it but actively combat efforts to prevent it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, mr roboto said:

So Trump flips out when the DNI briefs Congress on Russia’s attempts to interfere on Trump’s behalf in 2020 election...

Um...

Nothing to see here, move along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ilov80s said:

More bad news for the country. Once again the President is more concerned about his own perceptions and power than potential election interference. 

You mean this? 

Trump angry after House briefed on 2020 Russia election meddling on his behalf

 

Once again I won't post what I really think as I enjoy interacting with you fine people. 

I will ask this though, does Trump appear to be on the side of the United States or Russia? 

Edited by Sheriff Bart

Share this post


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

You mean this? 

Trump angry after House briefed on 2020 Russia election meddling on his behalf

 

Once again I won't post what I really think as I enjoy interacting with you fine people. 

I will ask this though, does Trump appear to be on the side of the United States or Russia? 

Yes that. I think he’s on the side of himself and he will defend anyone or thing that he thinks helps him regardless of just about anything else.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

Yes that. I think he’s on the side of himself and he will defend anyone or thing that he thinks helps him regardless of just about anything else.

Right.  In blatant disregard to the American people, his oath of office and the constitution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like the media got it slightly wrong again.  At least from what Jake Tapper tweeted.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Sheriff Bart said:

You mean this? 

Trump angry after House briefed on 2020 Russia election meddling on his behalf

 

Once again I won't post what I really think as I enjoy interacting with you fine people. 

I will ask this though, does Trump appear to be on the side of the United States or Russia? 

He is on the side of "real" Americans. Who only constitute a minority of American voters but, hey, why dwell on details like that?

Share this post


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

Seems like the media got it slightly wrong again.  At least from what Jake Tapper tweeted.  

What’s the tweet?  I’m not a twitteratti. 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


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

What’s the tweet?  I’m not a twitteratti. 

1/ A national security official I know and trust pushes back on the way the briefing/ODNI story is being told, and others with firsthand knowledge agree with his assessment.

2/ "What's been articulated in the news is that the intelligence community has concluded that the Russians are trying to help Trump again. But the intelligence doesn't say that,” the official says…

3/ “The problem is Shelby" — Pierson, the elections threats executive in the intelligence community — "said they developed a preference for Trump. A more reasonable interpretation of the intelligence is not that they have a preference, it's a step short of that….

4/ “It's more that they understand the president is someone they can work with, he's a dealmaker. But not that they prefer him over Sanders or Buttigieg or anyone else. So it may have been mischaracterized by Shelby" at the House Intel briefing last week…

5/ "And by the way,” the official says, “both Democrats and Republicans were challenging this at the briefing."

6/ “The President was upset that he had to hear about an intelligence conclusion from a Member of the House Republicans rather than from the intelligence community. So he was out of joint with Maguire on that process."

7/ None of this disputes that Trump desires to replace those who have Intel expertise with partisan loyalists, or dismisses the larger issues and concerns about Russia and how the president seeks help from abroad.

8/ ALSO none of this disputes that the Russians (and others) are attempting to interfere in the US election again.

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) February 21, 2020

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @Max Power  that is a bit different. Still confirms the Russians are active in the campaign and that Trump isn’t happy that it was briefed. I wonder if Maguire didn’t tell him first because the intelligence community is concerned about his reaction to it. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 So a few weeks ago, Adam Schiff asserts that if we let the American people decide if Trump stays in office, then the results won’t be fair. 

The Senate refuses to do Schiff’s bidding, and now here comes more Russian interference talk.

Maybe there’s fire to the smoke, but I’m 100% believed that these reports were coming. I thought they’d wait a little bit longer than two weeks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mr roboto said:

Thanks @Max Power  that is a bit different. Still confirms the Russians are active in the campaign and that Trump isn’t happy that it was briefed. I wonder if Maguire didn’t tell him first because the intelligence community is concerned about his reaction to it. 

No idea, but I can understanding letting McGuire go now.  Part of his job is to keep the president informed and it appears he passed an intelligence assessment to someone other than the President first.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Max Power said:

No idea, but I can understanding letting McGuire go now.  Part of his job is to keep the president informed and it appears he passed an intelligence assessment to someone other than the President first.  

Perhaps because he knew if he spoke to the president directly it would go nowhere and he actually wants the information in the public sphere?

Share this post


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

Perhaps because he knew if he spoke to the president directly it would go nowhere and he actually wants the information in the public sphere?

What information? That Russia is ok with Trump because they know he is someone they can work with.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   1 member