Russians Indicted by FBI for Interference in 2016 Elections

  • Thread starter Thread starter HCTC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ProVobis said:
Had Obama fired Comey just prior to the election, Obama would have been investigated.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, I do not believe this. If Obama had been caught with a million dollar check in his pocket signed by Putin, it would not have been investigated. Much of the government was “weaponized” as a political extension of the Dem party during the Obama administration. It would not have attacked its own.
 
Ridgerunner said:
He gave a number of reasons in the interview with Holt, and probably meant every one of them. Never did he say “I wanted to stop the investigation” as his reason. He did mention “this Russia thing” obliquely, calling it a Democrat fakery, which it is.
Click to expand...
He had made it abundantly clear of many occasions that he wanted the Russia investigation ended, and he had previously praised Comey for his work even not long before he fired him. Comey also said that Trump lied about some aspects of their meetings.

And how in the world could you possibly know that this is all “Democratic fakery”? Do you have access to all that Mueller has? Comey, Mueller, and Rosenstein are all Republicans, and yet you’re claiming that it’s “Democratic fakery”?! And of his staff, six lied about not having Russian meetings, a total of nine have been indicted thus far, but yet it’s “Democratic fakery”?! Really???
 
Actually my point was about the timing. Had Trump fired Comey the first day in office, I’m thinking the reaction would have been different.

Timelines are part of the investigation. That’s why I think it’s only fair to extend Trump’s campaign to where he started with his birtherism stuff, if not before.
 
Putin wasn’t likely to write Obama or Hillary for that matter any checks, especially after her “We came, we saw, he died” laughing comment after Putin’s buddy Gaddafi was killed by his own people. Talk about a revenge factor against Hillary.
 
Metis1 said:
And how in the world could you possibly know that this is all “Democratic fakery”? Do you have access to all that Mueller has? Comey, Mueller, and Rosenstein are all Republicans, and yet you’re claiming that it’s “Democratic fakery”?! And of his staff, six lied about not having Russian meetings, a total of nine have been indicted thus far, but yet it’s “Democratic fakery”?! Really???
Click to expand...
What’s the alternative for a Trump supporter, to admit that it’s possible the Trump campaign received some sort of aid (however that is constituted) from Russian sources? To admit Mueller is justified in his investigation is to admit that at least some of the allegations are true.
 
Of course he wanted it ended. So do I.

And I wouldn’t believe Comey about anything. If Rosenstein himself said Comey was destructive to the FBI, then why should I doubt it? Rosenstein is not a Trump supporter by any stretch.

And there are plenty of Repubs who are “never Trumpers”.

But regardless, Rosenstein has no announced political affiliation, and said so in his confirmation hearing. Mueller says he’s a Repub, but was appointed by Obama. Same with Comey. Comey has recently said he’s not a Republican even though he used to say he was. But that’s Comey…shifts with the wind, which is why neither the Dems nor the Repubs liked him.
 
niceatheist said:
What’s the alternative for a Trump supporter, to admit that it’s possible the Trump campaign received some sort of aid (however that is constituted) from Russian sources? To admit Mueller is justified in his investigation is to admit that at least some of the allegations are true.
Click to expand...
The alternative is to say there’s no evidence of it, which is true.

I, for one, certainly don’t think there is a valid reason for the Mueller investigation of Russia collusion, nor has he yet provided any good reason to think there is. “Russia collusion” is all either “dossier” stuff or “fruit of the poison tree”.
 
I think the main problem for me is that the Trump organization definitely has had numerous business ties in the past with Russian businesses. Additionally, they have (and most likely still do) wanted to have a property in Moscow.

This could possibly cause decisions to be made regarding Russia, that while beneficial to the Trump organization, might not be in the best interest of the USA.

There is some evidence that decisions were being made that would be beneficial to Russia prior to the election. One example was the changes made to the Republican platform. Now, whether Trump himself set these decisions in motion, was just amenable, or even had a clue about what was being done for Russia, has not yet been made public.

But, at the end of the day, it is quite evident that the Trump campaign was not as anti-Russia as the rest of the Republican party has traditionally been.
 
Ridgerunner said:
40.png
niceatheist:
What’s the alternative for a Trump supporter, to admit that it’s possible the Trump campaign received some sort of aid (however that is constituted) from Russian sources? To admit Mueller is justified in his investigation is to admit that at least some of the allegations are true.
Click to expand...
The alternative is to say there’s no evidence of it, which is true.
Click to expand...
No, that’s a claim. Whether there is evidence or not is the point of Congressional investigations and Mueller’s job.
I, for one, certainly don’t think there is a valid reason for the Mueller investigation of Russia collusion, nor has he yet provided any good reason to think there is. “Russia collusion” is all either “dossier” stuff or “fruit of the poison tree”.
Click to expand...
You understand that what either of us think is actually irrelevant. Neither of us possess much in the way of facts. You just cannot countenance Trump actually having colluded, whereas I can certainly countenance the notion that he didn’t in fact collude, but will await the conclusion of investigations.
 
niceatheist said:
You understand that what either of us think is actually irrelevant. Neither of us possess much in the way of facts. You just cannot countenance Trump actually having colluded, whereas I can certainly countenance the notion that he didn’t in fact collude, but will await the conclusion of investigations.
Click to expand...
Of course it’s irrelevant what either of us think.

I don’t know that “can’t countenance” is adequate. I just don’t believe he did or that he had any reason to do it for election purposes. I am entirely willing to believe, e.g., Manafort did so for business reasons; even that Kushner might have.

Lots of people did business with Russians prior to the “Russians are coming. The Russians are coming” frenzy of late. Among them were Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and John Podesta.
 
Hey I have a question and I don’t know if this thread is the place to ask it but I’ve been wondering,
Didn’t all this supposed Russian interference happen on Obama’s watch?
And had Hillary Clinton won the election, would we even had ever heard anything about Russian bots on Facebook? I think not, but what do I know.
Just wondering, thank you.
 
Last edited:
If Hillary had won, you probably would have heard about it from Putin big time. IMO
 
I don’t know had Hillary won the election-which everyone expected-even me- I doubt we would have ever heard a thing about it.
 
Given the free airtime Trump seems to get, it is unlikely that he’d shut up forever.
 
Metis1 said:
And another question as to how he tried to secure a loan for $15 million and couldn’t get it, but then worked for the Trump election and suddenly obtained around $30 million, if my memory is correct, while taking no pay from the campaign in the process?
Click to expand...
And he could have tweaked the business plan to get the loan, or just gone to another bank that was less risk adverse.

I’m pretty confident though that some free campaign work won’t yield $30m as indirect compensation.
 
Thank you, Lord, that Hillary Clinton lost the election!!!

[Read “Clinton Cash” about the $135,000,000 she collected from Russia for Uranium One.]
 
If you bothered to check even Wikipedia, Rosenstein is a Republican and Comey only left the Republican Party in 2016. Mueller was first appointed by Bush, not Obama, and served mostly Republican presidents going back to Reagan in other positions. To call this “Democratic fakery” is simply so utterly bizarre.

And why would anyone who truly wants justice want this investigation stopped? I get the impression that you really underneath think he’s likely guilty.
 
I did bother. Rosenstein’s political affiliation is unknown at present. https://heavy.com/news/2017/05/rod-...affiliation-is-he-a-republican-or-a-democrat/. In his confirmation hearing, he said he was not active in any party.

Mueller might be a “never Trumper” Repub, of whom there are some. But if he had any honor at all, he would not have taken on the job of attempting to get a Repub president impeached or indicted.

And yes, Comey left the Repub party.

Well, you don’t know my mind. The reality in the Mueller prosecution is that it will almost certainly end up like they have all been. The ostensible purpose of the investigation will turn out to be a big nothing; just as was the case in the Watergate and “Plamegate” investigations. And what the prosecutors then do is go after some tangential thing like a blue dress, or an innocent person like Scooter Libby.

I really do agree with Alan Dershowitz, a Democrat/Libertarian who compares these “special prosecutions” to the Soviet system in which Beria once said to Stalin “Tell me the man and I’ll find the crime”. That’s what they do in these. No known crime has been committed. They just go after individuals and ruin their lives; and almost always the lives ruined are those of the small fry who can’t match the government dollar for dollar in defense.
 
ProVobis said:
How are those sanctions coming along?
Click to expand...
Frankly, what Trump is not doing is simply traitorous, imo. Not enforcing the sanctions that Congress overwhelmingly voted for and he signed, and why? His refusal to give the OK to the NSA chief to help go after the ongoing Russian meddling that’s attempting to undercut this year’s elections, and why? His refusal to say or do anything that might go against Putin, and why?

My guess is that Putin has Trump by the short-hairs and that the latter knows it. But what is it with Putin that Trump won’t say anything negative about him or impose the sanctions? And why is it that Trump’s supporters still stick with him even with he and Putin having this bromance, especially with Putin’s atrocious actions in Europe?

And we pretty much know Putin’s motive here as he’s done much the same in Europe, which makes me wonder if Putin is eventually going to unload on Trump at some time to really drive an even deeper wedge into American society that could lead to a constitutional crises? What Putin unveiled yesterday could possibly be the start of that because it’s putting Trump on the spot as to how to react, and it could make Trump & Co. out to be so utterly depraved, or corrupt, or all of the above.

IOW, this ain’t over yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top