Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

The Russia Investigation: Trump Pardons Flynn


whoknew

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Banger said:

because it's going to get much worse when the "no collusion" mantra that Trump has ranted for the past 2 years is shown to be a lie and when the extent of the obstruction / coordination of lies is shown.  

Well I hope you're right but I'm a lot less optimistic than you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This Butina plea is under the radar but could be huge...they have a Russian spy that infiltrated the NRA/Republican party that is pleading guilty and agreed to cooperate.  Follow the money...

 

Natasha Bertrand‏Verified account @NatashaBertrand

Ann Ravel, former chair of the Federal Election Commission, on advertising by the Trump campaign & the NRA in 2016: “I don’t think I’ve ever seen a situation where illegal coordination seems more obvious. It is so blatant that it doesn’t even seem sloppy."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

By far the most important thing that would change the landscape would be if Fox News turned anti-Trump.  That's the only way I could see him actually getting removed from office but I don't see it happening.

Well remember that Murdock and McConnell had a meeting a couple weeks ago. Could be to decide how to play the Mueller report. The key thing to remember is unless Pence is involved, he would become president and that’s probably pretty attractive right now to a lot of the GOP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Banger said:

This Butina plea is under the radar but could be huge...they have a Russian spy that infiltrated the NRA/Republican party that is pleading guilty and agreed to cooperate.  Follow the money...

 

If she really is a Russian agent, I can't see her flipping and cooperating fully. I would think that a true agent would keep their mouth closed and do the time. Unless her bosses told her to flip...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Biff84 said:

Well remember that Murdock and McConnell had a meeting a couple weeks ago. Could be to decide how to play the Mueller report. The key thing to remember is unless Pence is involved, he would become president and that’s probably pretty attractive right now to a lot of the GOP.

A vast majority of Republican senators and congressmen would have happily traded Trump for Pence a long time ago, but they haven't, because the vast majority of Republican voters would flip out.  The Republican Congress won't turn on Trump unless the voters turn on Trump.  The voters won't turn on Trump unless Fox turns on Trump.  Fox has shown no inclination to turn on Trump.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Z Machine said:

If she really is a Russian agent, I can't see her flipping and cooperating fully. I would think that a true agent would keep their mouth closed and do the time. Unless her bosses told her to flip...

she was certainly working for Torshin which is why he was "retired" last week from his central bank job.  She's not a GRU agent but she was working for the Russian gov't to infiltrate the R's and the NRA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, squistion said:

Wow.

Ex-federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy told Fox & Friends he thinks Trump will be indicted in Manhattan Federal Court on campaign finance charges. "If you read the sentencing memo ... it’s clear that Trump is the target and will be indicted eventually."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/former-federal-prosecutor-andrew-mccarthy-thinks-president-trump-will-face-indictment-in-manhattan

He's gonna be your man in motion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

A vast majority of Republican senators and congressmen would have happily traded Trump for Pence a long time ago, but they haven't, because the vast majority of Republican voters would flip out.  The Republican Congress won't turn on Trump unless the voters turn on Trump.  The voters won't turn on Trump unless Fox turns on Trump.  Fox has shown no inclination to turn on Trump.

I'm so undecided about all this. We didn't have Fox during Watergate. But I'll happily post away anyway.

Demographics work against Trump and Fox (nine million older Americans who were eligible to vote in '16 won't be alive for the '20 election and a chunk of those are Fox viewers) but surely he'll pick up some reinforcements along the way from the lesser among us. There is nothing he will (or maybe CAN) do to improve his approval ratings because he's, well, Donald Trump and not very smart. So Repubbie bigwigs indeed have tough decisions to make. Donald is at his best during the primaries when the base crazies can really toss their relatively few numbers around but his legal circumstances may make it impossible for him to win re-election. OTOH, Mike Dense can't beat any decent candidate run by the Dems. He's really dumb, socially conservative in an increasingly secular society and he's forever attached to TrumpStink® in the electorates' eyes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, roadkill1292 said:

I'm so undecided about all this. We didn't have Fox during Watergate. But I'll happily post away anyway.

Demographics work against Trump and Fox (nine million older Americans who were eligible to vote in '16 won't be alive for the '20 election and a chunk of those are Fox viewers) but surely he'll pick up some reinforcements along the way from the lesser among us. There is nothing he will (or maybe CAN) do to improve his approval ratings because he's, well, Donald Trump and not very smart. So Repubbie bigwigs indeed have tough decisions to make. Donald is at his best during the primaries when the base crazies can really toss their relatively few numbers around but his legal circumstances may make it impossible for him to win re-election. OTOH, Mike Dense can't beat any decent candidate run by the Dems. He's really dumb, socially conservative in an increasingly secular society and he's forever attached to TrumpStink® in the electorates' eyes.

You're assuming that if somehow Pence became President before 2020 he'd be the Republican nominee.  I think there's a good chance that's true but it's not a lock. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, The Z Machine said:

BTW, what exactly is a process crime, and how does one commit said crime to enrich hinself and not have any fear of prosecution? 

Asking for a friend.

Dude as long as you're not President when you do it, no one will care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sara Danner Dukic‏ @saradannerdukic

Reminder re the coming details on Butina's plea deal: in addition to the laundering of Russian money, the illegal coordination with the Trump campaign, and the repeated attempts to make direct contact with Trump himself via the NRA, the NRA also worked with Cambridge Analytica.

More

Looks like the NRA works with Cambridge Analytica. What are they doing with this data? Who are they targeting? What are they convincing them to do?

More

(cont’d from the House Minority Report linked above) May, 2016: “a senior Russian official approached the Trump campaign through the National Rifle Association (NRA) to try and arrange a meeting between candidate Trump and President Putin.”

2:12 PM - 6 Aug 2018

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Thanks, but I think this is a fantasy. 

IMO the results of the election are far less important than the fact that the base of the Republican Party is solidly hehind Donald Trunp. Until that goes away, Republicans in Congress will never publicly turn against him no matter what they say privately. 

No revelation, no report by Mueller or uncovering of direct guilt, no damage to the economy will sever the union between Trump and the GOP base. There’s only one thing that will do that: Trump has to get thumped in 2020- not narrowly beaten, in which case they will claim the Democrats cheated,  but crushed. Only then will the Republicans move in another direction. 

Those two things are interrelated though, right?

I'll try a contrarian argument. The House is lost to the GOP, is that a fair statement? It depends on what the Dems do (let's assume they don't nominate someone deeply flawed and unpopular, they can either go experienced and trusty or young and energizing, but either way is good so long as they are likable and popular), but the WH is in very shaky shape for the GOP. The Senate is absolutely crucial. 

Last time in November the way I recall it there were 10 Dem held seats that Trump won in 2016, and the GOP took 2 of those 10. MS, GA, FL & TX were way too close for comfort. I don't know what the math is in 2020 but my guess is the red/blue cycle for the Senate will ebb the other way this time. If that's the case the Trump-Red base won't matter, it will be the suburban & professional/trade/educated voters who will matter. If the GOP has to choose between Trump and losing all of the House, WH and the Senate, well I am not so sure they will choose Trump. And I will add that if you were a GOP Congressman even if you thought Trump was impeachable there's no way you'd do it until Mueller finished his work. It will make a lot more sense to act with Mueller's indictments and maybe (maybe) a report behind you if and when you do turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bostonfred said:

There is a lot of pressure on Republicans in Congress

@timschochet

This may be the answer to your biggest concern.  If even a couple Republicans publicly stop backing trump, there will be a domino effect where the whole party shifts away from him. (I'm linking the article because they suggest it's starting to happen, but take it with a grain of salt.)

44 former Senators including 10 Republicans join in a call for the Senate to prioritize the national interest over politics.

Quote

Regardless of party affiliation, ideological leanings or geography, as former members of this great body, we urge current and future senators to be steadfast and zealous guardians of our democracy by ensuring that partisanship or self-interest not replace national interest.

The Republicans include Chuck Hagel, Alan Simpson, Ben Campbell, William Cohen, John Warner, John Danforth, David Durenberger, Al D'Amato.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

A vast majority of Republican senators and congressmen would have happily traded Trump for Pence a long time ago, but they haven't, because the vast majority of Republican voters would flip out.  The Republican Congress won't turn on Trump unless the voters turn on Trump.  The voters won't turn on Trump unless Fox turns on Trump.  Fox has shown no inclination to turn on Trump.

Which would make sense that Murdock would be meeting with McConnell, to make sure they are on the same page. Fox News isn’t going to anti-Trump unless Senators will follow and vise versa.

If they think Trump is toxic to the party, they’re gonna want to rip off the bandaid sooner rather than later. If it looks like backlash from Trump will lose them the Senate in 2020, they’re gonna take the hit from the base. The party of Trump is not sustainable and they know it. Clearly it wasn’t an option when they controlled everything. Now that the Democrats have the House, legislation will grind to a halt and there’s no reason to wait if they want to move away from Trump and try and return to resemblance of the GOP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the best the crazies could hope for would be eight years of Trump. There is nothing sustainable about anything Donald is trying to do. There's no plan. There's never been a plan. There's only resentment.

But while Trumpism has no staying power, let's be careful not to bury the Republicans. They'll be back. They always come back. There's so much change to fear and hate on that they'll always have a sizable constituency.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Last time in November the way I recall it there were 10 Dem held seats that Trump won in 2016, and the GOP took 2 of those 10. MS, GA, FL & TX were way too close for comfort. I don't know what the math is in 2020 but my guess is the red/blue cycle for the Senate will ebb the other way this time. If that's the case the Trump-Red base won't matter, it will be the suburban & professional/trade/educated voters who will matter. If the GOP has to choose between Trump and losing all of the House, WH and the Senate, well I am not so sure they will choose Trump. And I will add that if you were a GOP Congressman even if you thought Trump was impeachable there's no way you'd do it until Mueller finished his work. It will make a lot more sense to act with Mueller's indictments and maybe (maybe) a report behind you if and when you do turn.

Impeachment is a death sentence for Republicans, just like it was in 1974. They are going to make their stand on Process Crime Hill.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phase 2 of the plan has to be to hang Trump out to dry and sit back and watch the chaos, right?

 

Russia Is Ready to Publish Correspondence on Alleged U.S. Election 'Interference,' Official Says

Russia is ready to publish its correspondence with the U.S. on its alleged "interference" in the 2016 elections, a top official at the Federal Security Service’s (FSB) national cyber security center has said. 

U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign with hacking and propaganda, in an effort that included attempting to tilt the race in President Donald Trump's favor. Russia has consistently denied the claims.

Read More

U.S. Slaps Russians With Sanctions for Election Meddling and Cyber Attacks

Nikolai Murashov, the deputy director of the FSB’s National Computer Incident Coordination Center (NCCIC), said Tuesday that Moscow was ready to disclose the full correspondence between Russia and the United States on the alleged election interference, but said that it would need Washington’s consent to do so, the state-run RIA Novosti news agency reported Tuesday. 

Murashov said that the U.S. had first approached Russia about the alleged hacking campaign in October 2016, after which the NCCIC analyzed the data and sent an “exhaustive answer” back to the American side prior to Donald Trump’s inauguration.

https://themoscowtimes.com/news/russia-ready-to-publish-correspondence-on-alleged-us-election-interference-official-says-63782

  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CNN and MSNBC have to give this impeachment talk a rest. Yes we are talking felonies for campaign finance violation but let's just wait for what Mueller has down the road. We already knew Trump directed Cohen from the audio months ago so this really isn't really much of anything new. Going to war with the very little ammunition  we have now when much more is sure to come seems silly. Stop crying wolf. Folks are tired of the Mueller investigation and there aren't any that going to turn on Trump with this. Keep in mind no one wants to see Trump go down worse than me.  

Edited by lazyike
  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, lazyike said:

CNN and MSNBC have to give this impeachment talk a rest. Yes we are talking felonies for campaign finance violation but let's just wait for what Mueller has down the road. We already knew Trump directed Cohen from the audio months ago so this really isn't really much of anything new. Going to war with the very little ammunition  we have now when much more is sure to come seems silly. Stop crying wolf. Folks are tired of the Mueller investigation and there aren't any that going to turn on Trump with this. Keep in mind no one wants to see Trump go down worse than me.  

Yeah there’s no reason to jump the gun, wait for the full report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, roadkill1292 said:

Yeah, the best the crazies could hope for would be eight years of Trump. There is nothing sustainable about anything Donald is trying to do. There's no plan. There's never been a plan. There's only resentment.

But while Trumpism has no staying power, let's be careful not to bury the Republicans. They'll be back. They always come back. There's so much change to fear and hate on that they'll always have a sizable constituency.

“Trumpism” is an interesting term.

I agree that Donald Trump himself has no staying power. But the more important question is: does the nativist, isolationist, anti-trade, anti-immigrant movement that brought Trump to power have staying power within the Republican Party? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

As his commendation for the Bronze Star later read, “Second Lieutenant Mueller’s courage, aggressive initiative and unwavering devotion to duty at great personal risk were instrumental in the defeat of the enemy force and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and of the United States Naval Service.”

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a couple people here can clarify a few things for me.

If Donald Trump has connections to Russian oligarchs and high level officials, why was he so very dependent upon third party actors to connect him with extremely low level Russian "agents" in an attempt to subvert the Presidential Election? 

If Donald Trump and his campaign were working in coordination with the Russians, why would he have the need to go out in public, in front of the media and ask the Russians to find Hillary's 33,000 missing e-mails?

If Donald Trump and his campaign were working in concert with the Russians, why would they have meetings in such public places and communicate via such "open" modes of communication?

Am I correct in remembering that the only publicly known conversations between someone associated with the Trump campaign/transition and a high level Russian "agent" was when Mike Flynn spoke with Sergei Kislyak regarding sanctions during the transition and when Jeff Sessions spoke with Kislyak at his senatorial office in Septmeber of 2016? 

Do a conservative activist who works with the NRA and is banging some 28 YO Russian "Agent" trying to set up back channel communications with the Kremlin and a low level staffer and foreign policy adviser talking with a professor trying to arrange a back channel to meet with Kremlin associates sound like a group who are in close contact with and working in concert with "the Russians" to subvert the US election? 

Was Pappadumbass told by Trump campaign officials that they probably shouldn't try to arrange meetings with Russians, does this sound like a group who was actively colluding with Russia?

To anyone's knowledge, were these back channels with the Kremlin ever established, or were there just attempts by low level third parties to coordinate these connections?

Which takes me back to the main point...  If Donald Trump has connections to Russian Oligarchs, why in the world are there no records of communications between Trump, high level members of his campaign, and high level Russians?  You know why, the Russians and the Trump campaign were not colluding and Trump has no high level connections in Russia.

It seems to me that what has happened is that you have an extremely unsophisticated group of people who are trying to get Trump elected president. People who were easily duped into a grand charade by the Russians in order to sew discord and divide the US.  All the actions taken by Russia were out in the open, they left a clear and an easy to follow trail.  Everything, from digital signatures during their hacks, to communicating with Trump acolytes on devices they knew were being listened in on, to setting up meetings at Trump Tower, etc...  all of this is highly visible and unconventional for Russian intelligence officers. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 1m1 minute ago

James Comey just totally exposed his partisan stance by urging his fellow Democrats to take back the White House in 2020. In other words, he is and has been a Democrat. Comey had no right heading the FBI at any time, but especially after his mind exploded!

 

TIL Democrats aren't allowed to head the FBI.

Edited by Skoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dooook said:

Maybe a couple people here can clarify a few things for me.

If Donald Trump has connections to Russian oligarchs and high level officials, why was he so very dependent upon third party actors to connect him with extremely low level Russian "agents" in an attempt to subvert the Presidential Election? 

If Donald Trump and his campaign were working in coordination with the Russians, why would he have the need to go out in public, in front of the media and ask the Russians to find Hillary's 33,000 missing e-mails?

If Donald Trump and his campaign were working in concert with the Russians, why would they have meetings in such public places and communicate via such "open" modes of communication?

Am I correct in remembering that the only publicly known conversations between someone associated with the Trump campaign/transition and a high level Russian "agent" was when Mike Flynn spoke with Sergei Kislyak regarding sanctions during the transition and when Jeff Sessions spoke with Kislyak at his senatorial office in Septmeber of 2016? 

Do a conservative activist who works with the NRA and is banging some 28 YO Russian "Agent" trying to set up back channel communications with the Kremlin and a low level staffer and foreign policy adviser talking with a professor trying to arrange a back channel to meet with Kremlin associates sound like a group who are in close contact with and working in concert with "the Russians" to subvert the US election? 

Was Pappadumbass told by Trump campaign officials that they probably shouldn't try to arrange meetings with Russians, does this sound like a group who was actively colluding with Russia?

To anyone's knowledge, were these back channels with the Kremlin ever established, or were there just attempts by low level third parties to coordinate these connections?

Which takes me back to the main point...  If Donald Trump has connections to Russian Oligarchs, why in the world are there no records of communications between Trump, high level members of his campaign, and high level Russians?  You know why, the Russians and the Trump campaign were not colluding and Trump has no high level connections in Russia.

It seems to me that what has happened is that you have an extremely unsophisticated group of people who are trying to get Trump elected president. People who were easily duped into a grand charade by the Russians in order to sew discord and divide the US.  All the actions taken by Russia were out in the open, they left a clear and an easy to follow trail.  Everything, from digital signatures during their hacks, to communicating with Trump acolytes on devices they knew were being listened in on, to setting up meetings at Trump Tower, etc...  all of this is highly visible and unconventional for Russian intelligence officers. 

 

 

 

Which begs the question "Why did all of the people involved in the campaign, from Trump on down, lie about their contacts continuously?"

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 1m1 minute ago

James Comey just totally exposed his partisan stance by urging his fellow Democrats to take back the White House in 2020. In other words, he is and has been a Democrat. Comey had no right heading the FBI at any time, but especially after his mind exploded!

 

TIL Democrats aren't allowed to head the FBI.

1. James Comey was registered Republican for most of his adult life and currently identifies as an independent, not a "fellow Democrat".

2. James Comey was a Republican when he was chosen to head the FBI.

3. by definition, Comey is nonpartisan.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Dooook said:

If Donald Trump has connections to Russian oligarchs and high level officials, why was he so very dependent upon third party actors to connect him with extremely low level Russian "agents" in an attempt to subvert the Presidential Election? 

The simple answer is that it was easier to conceal his illegal activities by working with lower-level actors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 1m1 minute ago

James Comey just totally exposed his partisan stance by urging his fellow Democrats to take back the White House in 2020. In other words, he is and has been a Democrat. Comey had no right heading the FBI at any time, but especially after his mind exploded!

 

TIL Democrats aren't allowed to head the FBI.

Apparently only Republicans are cool with shady crooks in the WH. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 1m1 minute ago

James Comey just totally exposed his partisan stance by urging his fellow Democrats to take back the White House in 2020. In other words, he is and has been a Democrat. Comey had no right heading the FBI at any time, but especially after his mind exploded!

 

TIL Democrats aren't allowed to head the FBI.

Comey's point was that impeaching Trump could cause damage to the country, and it would be far better if he was thrown out via election by national consensus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Comey's point was that impeaching Trump could cause damage to the country, and it would be far better if he was thrown out via election by national consensus.

Trump isn't leaving the white House willfully....if he loses the next election....his tantrums will be nuts and he will cry collusion and voter fraud

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

The simple answer is that it was easier to conceal his illegal activities by working with lower-level actors.

The even simpler answer is Oligarchs aren't equipped to carry out a plan themselves. It's like asking why 2 companies needed to involve a mail vendor when they had CEO-CEO agreement to send out a letter.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dooook said:

Maybe a couple people here can clarify a few things for me.

If Donald Trump has connections to Russian oligarchs and high level officials, why was he so very dependent upon third party actors to connect him with extremely low level Russian "agents" in an attempt to subvert the Presidential Election? 

If Donald Trump and his campaign were working in coordination with the Russians, why would he have the need to go out in public, in front of the media and ask the Russians to find Hillary's 33,000 missing e-mails?

If Donald Trump and his campaign were working in concert with the Russians, why would they have meetings in such public places and communicate via such "open" modes of communication?

Am I correct in remembering that the only publicly known conversations between someone associated with the Trump campaign/transition and a high level Russian "agent" was when Mike Flynn spoke with Sergei Kislyak regarding sanctions during the transition and when Jeff Sessions spoke with Kislyak at his senatorial office in Septmeber of 2016? 

Do a conservative activist who works with the NRA and is banging some 28 YO Russian "Agent" trying to set up back channel communications with the Kremlin and a low level staffer and foreign policy adviser talking with a professor trying to arrange a back channel to meet with Kremlin associates sound like a group who are in close contact with and working in concert with "the Russians" to subvert the US election? 

Was Pappadumbass told by Trump campaign officials that they probably shouldn't try to arrange meetings with Russians, does this sound like a group who was actively colluding with Russia?

To anyone's knowledge, were these back channels with the Kremlin ever established, or were there just attempts by low level third parties to coordinate these connections?

Which takes me back to the main point...  If Donald Trump has connections to Russian Oligarchs, why in the world are there no records of communications between Trump, high level members of his campaign, and high level Russians?  You know why, the Russians and the Trump campaign were not colluding and Trump has no high level connections in Russia.

It seems to me that what has happened is that you have an extremely unsophisticated group of people who are trying to get Trump elected president. People who were easily duped into a grand charade by the Russians in order to sew discord and divide the US.  All the actions taken by Russia were out in the open, they left a clear and an easy to follow trail.  Everything, from digital signatures during their hacks, to communicating with Trump acolytes on devices they knew were being listened in on, to setting up meetings at Trump Tower, etc...  all of this is highly visible and unconventional for Russian intelligence officers. 

I think I know someone who can answer all of your questions.  for some reason, the President is desperately trying discredit him though.  Not sure why he'd want to do that to someone who is about to exonerate him.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dooook said:

Which takes me back to the main point...  If Donald Trump has connections to Russian Oligarchs, why in the world are there no records of communications between Trump, high level members of his campaign, and high level Russians?  You know why, the Russians and the Trump campaign were not colluding and Trump has no high level connections in Russia.

So the premise is the absence of overt "high level communications" means Trump had no connections to the Russian Oligarchy? 

If so, seems just a bit short sighted. 

Edited by JerseyToughGuys
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, JerseyToughGuys said:

(meanwhile there were high level communications)

Pfft... I guess if you call the Russian Ambassador to the United States, a Deputy Prime Minister, three people with senior positions in the White House with the last name Trump, and the Attorney General of the United States "high level". Seems a bit of a reach though.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd actually almost forgotten about Kushner, who is Senior Adviser to the President, proposing the back channel with the Russian ambassador. I'd say that probably qualifies as a "publicly known conversation[] between someone associated with the Trump campaign/transition and a high level Russian 'agent.'" It also belies the point that this was done in the open.

I think Cohen eschewing help from the guy promising synergy because Cohen felt like he already had contacts with a guy who acted on behalf of the Russian government implies that Cohen had such high-level meetings. But I'll agree that falls under the "stuff we know exists but don't know the details" heading. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And let's not even mention the meeting with Trump's son, son-in-law, and campaign manager with the woman who has said that she kept in close contact with the Russian prosecutor general while she was advocating against sanctions. Those three guys lied about that meeting over and over until it finally came out they were promised derogatory information about HilClin.

Their current story is that the meeting was about adoptions, which as anyone who follows the news knows deals with Russia's response to sanctions imposed. So we know they talked about dirt, we know they talked to someone who was advocating on behalf of the Russian government about sanctions, and we know they talked about how they could make it easier for Americans to adopt Russian kids again--which was Russia's retaliation to US sanctions. That sounds bad.

The lady they talked to resurfaced in a case in Switzerland because one of their top cops was fired  "after allegations of bribery, violating secrecy laws, and 'unauthorized clandestine behavior'" after he got caught taking stuff from her. The fired Swiss guy was working on a case their version of those same Russian sanctions and money laundering. That sounds worse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Butina was much more than a gun industry lobbyist.  Think it's kind of shameful the way she's been locked up in solitary confinement, accused of trading sex for power etc.  It's gross really.  There is no evidence to indicate she was working as a spy.  Seems like the extent of her crimes was not notifying the AG of her lobbying activities and being Russian.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

I don't think Butina was much more than a gun industry lobbyist.  Think it's kind of shameful the way she's been locked up in solitary confinement, accused of trading sex for power etc.  It's gross really.  There is no evidence to indicate she was working as a spy.  Seems like the extent of her crimes was not notifying the AG of her lobbying activities and being Russian.  

Failing to register as a foreign agent is still a crime in this country, right?  And that's what she was charged with?

 The law and order party--justifying white collar crime since 1972.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fun fact: once upon a time, Maria Butina was endorsed by board hero Alexei Navalny.

Yasha Levine ‏@yashalevine

"Maria Butina lobbies for gun rights and is practically the only candidate running a good election campaign...[she's] worthy of your support." — Alexei Navalny, the liberal anti-Putin politician much admired by progressive American journalists. (He's a gun rights nut, too.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Fun fact: once upon a time, Maria Butina was endorsed by board hero Alexei Navalny.

Yasha Levine ‏@yashalevine

"Maria Butina lobbies for gun rights and is practically the only candidate running a good election campaign...[she's] worthy of your support." — Alexei Navalny, the liberal anti-Putin politician much admired by progressive American journalists. (He's a gun rights nut, too.)

Don't think any of the posts that came up in your search make him a "board hero."   It's news when Putin locks up his opposition.   Which right-wing conspiracy site are you parroting these talking points from?   Wouldn't it just be quicker to post the link?

Link to comment
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   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...