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 (2 Viewers)

Soon after midnight on election night, Dmitriev messaged ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ who was traveling to New York to attend the 2016 World Chess Championship. ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Dmitry Peskov, the Russian Federation’s press secretary, who was also attending the World Chess Championship. ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■At approximately 2:40 a.m. on November 9, 2016, news reports stated that candidate Clinton had called President-Elect Trump to concede. At ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ wrote to Dmitriev, “Putin has won."
Dmitriev, Kirill

Head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF); met with Erik Prince in the Seychelles in January 2017 and, separately, drafted a U.S.-Russia reconciliation plan with Rick Gerson.

Peskov, Dmitry

Deputy chief of staff of and press secretary for the Russian presidential administration.
Redactions are for investigative technique, which likely means classified intel eavesdropping.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess I'm perplexed by this comment. Mueller cements the finding that the Russians interfered.
No impact on the outcome.
Is this Mueller’s conclusion, or your own speculation?

(I haven’t read the entire report yet, but I’m extremely confident that Mueller never concluded anything about whether the Russian interference impacted the outcome.)

 
With Watergate, Nixon asked his associates to commit unscrupulous deeds on his behalf, which turned out to be criminal acts. Although he may not have coordinated the crimes himself (and may not have known that they took place), Nixon nevertheless participated in a cover-up to protect himself and people close to him.

With the Russia investigation, Trump asked his associates to commit unscrupulous deeds on his behalf, which turned out to be criminal acts. Although he may not have coordinated the crimes himself (and may not have known that they took place), Trump nevertheless participated in a cover-up to protect himself and people close to him.
There was no cover up.  No executive priveliges exercised, no documents withheld, no underlying crime to hide.  Trump didn’t ask anybody to commit a crime.  At best he asked them to make a legal argument and they didn’t.

 
There was no cover up.  
Just one example - he told Rosenstein to go out in front of the American people and tell them that Comey was fired because of him.

That night, the White House Press Office called the Department of Justice and said the White House wanted to put out a statement saying that it was Rosenstein’s idea to fire Comey. Rosenstein told other DOJ officials that he would not participate in putting out a “false story.” The President then called Rosenstein directly and said he was watching Fox News, that the coverage had been great, and that he wanted Rosenstein to do a press conference. Rosenstein responded that this was not a good idea because if the press asked him, he would tell the truth that Comey’s firing was not his idea.
- Pointing the finger at someone else is literally what a cover story is.

- There are other examples.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Hes' not pro-Trump, but he is compromised by his history with Assange and he is frequently wrong and incorrectly framing things on this specific issue.
What does this even mean.  How is Glenn Greenwald compromised by Assange? 

 
Trump will run on this if Dems just let this go.  He is going to do it in either case.

The minutia of the case is all bad for Trump.  Spending the next year digesting it will not be a win for Trump if the Senate does not impeach.

If the dems let this go it will make it easier for Trump to dismiss and obstruct all the other ongoing investigations.
Right.

It obviously doesn't have to be at the forefront all of the time......but to not put it in the quiver and use it occasionally  is bad politicking. 

 
My opinion.  

I don’t feel the Russian hacking had any more or less impact on any of the other issues in 2016.   
At this point, the efficacy of the hacking is essentially meaningless. No one is disputing the outcome of the election. The facts are that the hacking occurred,  and Trump's campaign AT BEST allowed contact between itself and the Russians, failed to contact the FBI when it did, and covered it up after the fact.

That's assuming the campaign wasn't in direct coordination the entire time, which would be a criminal conspiracy. There is a lot of evidence (not proof) that this is what actually occurred. 

 
The article is saying that Russians didn’t change votes by hacking into the voting system and electronically switching a Clinton vote to a Trump vote.

That’s very different from saying that Russians didn’t change votes by interfering in the election.
It's Hillary's fault she lost. Not because of the Russians. She didn't even campaign in Wisconsin. I know that opinions like this aren't welcome here.

 
More "man on the street" interviews, this time from Los Angeles, heart of the Resistance. They interviewed some Bernie Sanders people. Once again, no impeachment. More hearings are fine, but move on to discuss education, health care, jobs.

The message is very clear from the public, whether it's from Democrats, Republicans, independents- do NOT make this the primary issue. MOVE ON. Let Trump talk about this for the next 2 years; it will only hurt him.

 
The Russians did the job we used to count on our journalists to do.  Unfortunately, they were too deep in the Hillary bag.  
Aren't there a ton of conservative journalists and journalism outlets like Fox News, Breitbart, Drudge, National Review, The Daily Caller, The Blaze, OAN, Gateway, etc.? Why weren't they doing it? Or were they deep in the Hillary bag too?

 
It's Hillary's fault she lost. Not because of the Russians. She didn't even campaign in Wisconsin. I know that opinions like this aren't welcome here.
I welcome it.  And as a Hillary fan, I agree with you. She blew it.

But I also think that one is not necessarily exclusive of the other.  Hillary blew it by not campaigning in Wisconsin late, along with many many other errors.  But the Russians also were involved, and the Wikileaks release of emails in particular, which they apparently engineered, hurt Hillary as well.  These two statements are not contradictory.

 
It's Hillary's fault she lost. Not because of the Russians. She didn't even campaign in Wisconsin. I know that opinions like this aren't welcome here.
Amigo, it’s welcome, but you’re talking avocados and apricots here. The report doesn’t address the effects of the interference, but the specific transfer of polling data about those states (WI etc) from Trump’s campaign chief to a Russian intelligence asset is pretty significant.

 
It's Hillary's fault she lost. Not because of the Russians. She didn't even campaign in Wisconsin. I know that opinions like this aren't welcome here.
Yes it is her fault and she did lose. However, we will have future elections and we need to know what happened, how it happened, and prevent it in the future. The President not being cooperative and instead being dismissive of it is a real problem. 

 
More "man on the street" interviews, this time from Los Angeles, heart of the Resistance. They interviewed some Bernie Sanders people. Once again, no impeachment. More hearings are fine, but move on to discuss education, health care, jobs.

The message is very clear from the public, whether it's from Democrats, Republicans, independents- do NOT make this the primary issue. MOVE ON. Let Trump talk about this for the next 2 years; it will only hurt him.
How much of the non-Trump supporting folks do you think feels like this?

I don't the sense at all there's any appetite to move on. Feels like the opposite. 

 
They're not mutually exclusive. Hillary and the Russians both contributed to the loss.
Exactly how did the Russians help Trump win? Hillary lost because she was a terrible candidate and ran a terrible campaign.  You actually think that Russians influenced voters here to vote for Trump?

 
How much of the non-Trump supporting folks do you think feels like this?

I don't the sense at all there's any appetite to move on. Feels like the opposite. 
We’re going to find out pretty shortly from polling. Prior to this report coming out (two days ago) 54% of the public wants us to move on. Now? Listening to the interviews, I don’t think that number has changed much. But I could be wrong. We’ll find out soon. 

 
I would guess a couple do read since they seem to have the time.  Others read the summary then make fun of the righties for not reading. It makes them feel superior..
Well, people have mocked those for not reading it for opining in things and repeating Barr’s first “Summary “ rather than what Mueller actually said.

The reports and many relevant quotes have been posted by people willing to actually discuss the report.

 
Exactly how did the Russians help Trump win? Hillary lost because she was a terrible candidate and ran a terrible campaign.  You actually think that Russians influenced voters here to vote for Trump?
Yes, this has all been documented for years now.

Is your position that our entire intelligence community got together and decided to just made this up out of thin air?

 
stlrams said:

I would guess a couple do read since they seem to have the time. Others read the summary then make fun of the righties for not reading. It makes them feel superior..

If you try to post a conclusion that appears to be based on the report, and your conclusion doesn't align with anything published in the report, and you fail to provide links to the report which are associated with your claim, then you are going to be called out on it.

Every. Single. Time.
 
Exactly how did the Russians help Trump win? Hillary lost because she was a terrible candidate and ran a terrible campaign.  You actually think that Russians influenced voters here to vote for Trump?
It’s possible.  For the same reason that advertisements work in people...misinformation can work.  And I believe the intel community stated Russian measures reached 100 million Americans.

And even saying that...it’s besides the point.  Effective or not, crimes were committed.  Trumps campaign did have many contacts with Russians and did cover up such things and appear to have obstructed the investigation.

Just saying, oh well, Hillary would have lost anyway isn’t a very good defense.

 
Exactly how did the Russians help Trump win? Hillary lost because she was a terrible candidate and ran a terrible campaign.  You actually think that Russians influenced voters here to vote for Trump?
This has been discussed endlessly, in great detail, in this thread, on all the news stations for the past 2 years. I’m astonished that at this late date, having participated so much in this discussion, you would even ask this question. It’s basically a “What is this whole thing about?” question. 

 
Give me the cliffs notes.  No way I’m reading 484 pages. Plus I have better things to spend my time on.
When I get the time I’ll post the summaries for you that Barr would not three weeks ago: they’re pretty short and simple though there are several of them. I’m not doing it if you’re not interested.

 
It's a reasonable question.

Just because folks don't agree with you doesn't mean dissenting opinions aren't welcome.
I take it you miss all the snark and condescending comments. No worries. Hillary lost and the Dems hate Trump. I remember watching the night of the election and many were saying there were going after him to impeach him. The Mueller report didn't work out the way many of you hoped. If the Dems want to win in 2020m they move on from this, get more to the center and start with a message that appeals to middle America. What will they do to make things even better. The impeachment talk and the socialist stance isn't going to work. Just my opinion.

 
It’s possible.  For the same reason that advertisements work in people...misinformation can work.  And I believe the intel community stated Russian measures reached 100 million Americans.

And even saying that...it’s besides the point.  Effective or not, crimes were committed.  Trumps campaign did have many contacts with Russians and did cover up such things and appear to have obstructed the investigation.

Just saying, oh well, Hillary would have lost anyway isn’t a very good defense.
The number 1 issue during the campaign ended up being her emails.

Russia was involved in this.  Colluding with folks from Trump's team, using wikileaks to achieve their objective of harming Hillary and helping Trump.

It's all related, it's all focused around the #1 critical issue of the 2016 campaign, and folks want to pretend it didn't matter.

Ok.

 
It’s possible.  For the same reason that advertisements work in people...misinformation can work.  And I believe the intel community stated Russian measures reached 100 million Americans.

And even saying that...it’s besides the point.  Effective or not, crimes were committed.  Trumps campaign did have many contacts with Russians and did cover up such things and appear to have obstructed the investigation.

Just saying, oh well, Hillary would have lost anyway isn’t a very good defense.
Hillary lost because she ran a terrible campaign and was arrogant to think she had it in the bag just like many of her supporters did.

 
This has been discussed endlessly, in great detail, in this thread, on all the news stations for the past 2 years. I’m astonished that at this late date, having participated so much in this discussion, you would even ask this question. It’s basically a “What is this whole thing about?” question. 
You guys are convinced of this because you can't accept Hillary losing and Trump being President. And wow....will things get ugly if Trump gets to appoint another Supreme Court judge.

 
I take it you miss all the snark and condescending comments. No worries. Hillary lost and the Dems hate Trump. I remember watching the night of the election and many were saying there were going after him to impeach him. The Mueller report didn't work out the way many of you hoped. If the Dems want to win in 2020m they move on from this, get more to the center and start with a message that appeals to middle America. What will they do to make things even better. The impeachment talk and the socialist stance isn't going to work. Just my opinion.
There is snark and condescending comments directed at me.  I don't whine about it.  I try to engage with them and if they don't engage back, I move on.  I'll note that you've been in that category at times.

REgarding Trump winning, many weren't saying they were going after him to impeach him.  This is like something Trump would say "Many people are saying"...when it's just not true.

 
More "man on the street" interviews, this time from Los Angeles, heart of the Resistance. They interviewed some Bernie Sanders people. Once again, no impeachment. More hearings are fine, but move on to discuss education, health care, jobs.

The message is very clear from the public, whether it's from Democrats, Republicans, independents- do NOT make this the primary issue. MOVE ON. Let Trump talk about this for the next 2 years; it will only hurt him.
Go on and stand for nothing, but when you do you will find you have lost the moral authority to lead.

"Yeah we won, but now no one seems to care or believe us".

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top