U.S. charges Russians with 2016 U.S. election tampering to boost Trump

[Khun Han]

14 hours ago, heybruce said:

Read my above reply, most notably the one where you state that you have established that Steele released his dossier to the press and quoted a source that stated the opposite. 

 

I'm not embarrassed.  Are you?

 

No, I'm not. But you should be. The source I quoted pointed out that he is claiming as his defence in court that he didn't release his dossier to the press. It has been established by FBI documentation released in the Nunes memo, and a previous declaration to court that he had met with Yahoo news, that he did. But you knew that anyway.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Khun Han

[Khun Han]

14 hours ago, heybruce said:

22 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

"Another claim you can't defend.  If my anti-Trump rants are all over the forum, you will have no problem finding a few."

 

From post #142 in this thread:

 

"As much as I dislike using the word "smart" and the name "Trump" in the same sentence, it is possible that Trump was smart enough to not get directly involved in collusion with Russia.  However I think it is very likely that Trump is a sufficiently arrogant micro-manager to have been involved in covering up the collusion of family and friends, and will continue to be involved.  That would not be as satisfying as uncovering the money-laundering, tax evasion, and corrupt conflict of interest deals with Russia and other countries that are certain to exist, but it would be good enough to get him impeached, and a lot easier to prove."

 

From the "Do you think Trump will finish his first term?" thread:

 

Post #4 "Do I want a completely unqualified, clueless, erratic, self-absorbed buffoon to have the power to launch nuclear weapons?  No, I want him removed from office as soon as possible.

 

Cue the "But, but, but....the stock market!" replies."

 

Post #16 "The economy was doing fine before Trump, and his only Supreme Court nomination is appalling.

 

"Rotten to the core doesn't begin to describe Trump."

 

Post #53 "Considering the overall cluelessness of Trump regarding military affairs in general and nuclear deterrence in general, what makes you so confident he won't start a nuclear war?  He's such an insecure egotist he might do it just so people will remember his name."

 

And on and on and on.

 

By the way, the above can't be classed as stalking. I'm merely providing information for which Heybruce has repeatedly asked me.

I stand by all the above statements.  Trump is totally unqualified for any military matters, especially nuclear weapons (I suspect I have more experience with nuclear issues than you do).  Trump has a long history of opaque financial dealings that bankrupt partners, and refuses to follow convention and open his finances for outside scrutiny.  Trump is known for micromanaging his businesses, his ego and arrogance are obvious, and his erratic behaviour was on full display during a televised bi-partisan meeting on immigration reform when he first agreed with the Democrats that a "clean" DACA deal was desired, then allowed one of his Republican handlers to reverse him.    https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/01/09/feinstein-trump-white-house-immigration-meeting-clean-daca-sot-lead.cnn

 

You're entitled to stand by them. But that doesn't change the fact that they are rants.

[mtls2005]

Sarah Huckabilly Sanders probably set a new low, and that's saying something, from the podium today. A record number of lies pertaining to Russia. What little credibility she retained has drained away.

[Srikcir]

4 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

A record number of lies pertaining to Russia.

Trump has done more than Obama on Russia

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/02/20/sarah-sanders-trump-done-more-on-russia-than-obama-sot.cnn

LOL

[Becker]

5 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

You're entitled to stand by them. But that doesn't change the fact that they are rants.

Please. As a man-child supporter you really shouldn't even mention the word facts as the creature you're supporting is a habitual proven liar.

BTW, rants can be as true as any other expressions of opinions and in the case of heybruce's post they most definitively are. The man-child is so spectacularly unfit for the office he holds it would have been funny if it wasn't so dangerous.

[Jingthing]

Sarah Huckabilly Sanders probably set a new low, and that's saying something, from the podium today. A record number of lies pertaining to Russia. What little credibility she retained has drained away.

That was amazing. The reporters are getting better at picking at her. A bit of tag teaming. She'd shut one of them up and later ones would follow. Even Fox immediately called her on blatant lies right after it was over. It seems stuff is really cracking up there behind the scenes.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[ravip]

Russians are smart!

[heybruce]

9 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Frankly, I find it truly astonishing that you are still trying to spin these issues the way that you are doing.

 

The notion that the two experienced senators Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham would end their distinguished political careers in ignominy by lying about such a serious matter, and putting their lies on permanent record is so 'out there', it belongs in another universe. Yet, here you are suggesting such a thing!!!

 

Let's get away from all the unnamed sources in news feeds and get back to basics. The Nunes memo is full of facts. It's credible opponents say, not that it contains lies, but that it has omissions. It doesn't matter, with regard to the facts that are actually in the memo, that the authors of the memo may have a political agenda, because the memo is still all facs, even with omissions.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/02/politics/fbi-nunes-memo-full/index.html

 

The memo states unequivocally, citing documentation from the FBI and FISC applications, that Christopher Steele is a liar. This is fact. Maybe  something has been omitted from the memo. So does that make Steele a partial liar?

 

The memo cites FBI information which contradicts Steele's lawyers' submission that he is not responsible for leaking his dossier to the media. Maybe something has been left out. does that mean that the lies that Steele's lawyers are  presenting under his instructions to a UK court are only little lies?

 

And you really are clutching at straws with your point about Steele never getting paid by the FBI. The memo makes clear that he was engaged and then fired by the FBI.

 

"No, you "hasn't"."

 

Reduced to trolling typos now, are you? How old are you?

"The memo states unequivocally, citing documentation from the FBI and FISC applications, that Christopher Steele is a liar. This is fact."

 

Identify the part of the memo that says Nunes is a liar.

 

"The memo cites FBI information which contradicts Steele's lawyers' submission that he is not responsible for leaking his dossier to the media."

 

Identify the part of the memo that says Nunes leaked his dossier to the media.

 

"And you really are clutching at straws with your point about Steele never getting paid by the FBI. The memo makes clear that he was engaged and then fired by the FBI."

 

From your source:

 

"Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jones article by David Corn. "

 

I've already provided sources that state that Steele wasn't paid by the FBI.  Why did you harp on about Steele working for, and being fired by, the FBI.  He was an unpaid source who the FBI stopped using after he went to the press.  Steele went to the press because he suspected the FBI was covering up a serious security issue. 

 

"Reduced to trolling typos now, are you? How old are you?"

 

Actually it was an obvious grammatical error, not a typo.  Quite sensitive, aren't you?  How young are you?

[dick dasterdly]

Good grief.

 

I thought we'd moved beyond the mccarthy years, but apparently not as it's increasingly obvious that many are determined to start it again - even though Russia is now only a shadow of the ussr....

 

 One has to be particularly credulous to believe that russia had any influence over the votes cast in 'poor' states.

 

The UK press is pedalling the same nonsense re. 'reds under the bed' in britain....

[heybruce]

9 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

No, I'm not. But you should be. The source I quoted pointed out that he is claiming as his defence in court that he didn't release his dossier to the press. It has been established by FBI documentation released in the Nunes memo, and a previous declaration to court that he had met with Yahoo news, that he did. But you knew that anyway.

Your sources said that he met with the press, not that he provided his dossier to them.  In fact in your own source Steele's lawyers explicitly stated that he did not provide the dossier to the press.

 

You seem to believe that politicians with an agenda never lie on the record.  They do so repeatedly, just look at the BS Trump has stated.  That is why I don't accept memos crafted by politicians to advance a political agenda at face value.  You shouldn't as well.

 

However lawyers know better than to lie on record, especially a lie that will be caught.  If it is discovered that Steele's lawyers knowingly lied on this matter, they will be in big trouble.

[heybruce]

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

Good grief.

 

I thought we'd moved beyond the mccarthy years, but apparently not as it's increasingly obvious that many are determined to start it again - even though Russia is now only a shadow of the ussr....

 

 One has to be particularly credulous to believe that russia had any influence over the votes cast in 'poor' states.

 

The UK press is pedalling the same nonsense re. 'reds under the bed' in britain....

One has to be particularly credulous to believe that exciting lies targeting key audiences on social media will not affect the less educated ("I love the uneducated!"  Donald Trump) and less intelligent voters.

 

Putin is a former KGB agent and a master at disinformation.  Evidence shows that he has created effective disinformation organizations and is using them to destabilize any country that isn't subservient to Russia.

[dick dasterdly]

5 minutes ago, heybruce said:

One has to be particularly credulous to believe that exciting lies targeting key audiences on social media will not affect the less educated ("I love the uneducated!"  Donald Trump) and less intelligent voters.

 

Putin is a former KGB agent and a master at disinformation.  Evidence shows that he has created effective disinformation organizations and is using them to destabilize any country that isn't subservient to Russia.

Sadly, I've no doubt you believe this mccarthyist mantra....

[heybruce]

6 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Sadly, I've no doubt you believe this mccarthyist mantra....

I and every US intelligence agency believe that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 election.  I and everyone who cares about democracy in the US want something done about it.  What about you?

[mogandave]

8 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I and every US intelligence agency believe that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 election.  I and everyone who cares about democracy in the US want something done about it.  What about you?

 

Impeaching tRump would be a great start. 

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

I and every US intelligence agency believe that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 election.  I and everyone who cares about democracy in the US want something done about it.  What about you?

Russia attempted to interfere

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

I and every US intelligence agency believe that Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 election.  I and everyone who cares about democracy in the US want something done about it.  What about you?

 

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Russia attempted to interfere

I see; you're ok with that.  No response needed, right?

 

I'll put you in the "Don't care about democracy in the US" camp.

 

BTW: In an election that close, it is impossible to say that the Russian interference did not affect the outcome.  But that's only a concern if you care about democracy.

Edited February 21, 2018 by heybruce

[Jingthing]

Exactly. "trump" keeps squawking that it did not impact the outcome. That is going to be unknowable for good. Maybe it did and maybe it didn't.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Jingthing]

On the Russian thing, "trump" sure ACTS like a guilty man. A very guilty man. It might not be anything like explicit election collusion. It could easily be about illegal Russian money laundering going back decades. 

 

 

Quote

In other words, Trump’s furious claims of spotless innocence could be entirely consistent with the truth. But as Queen Gertrude observed to Hamlet, “the lady doth protest too much, methinks.” Surprising as this is in a veteran of showbiz, Trump seems not to understand how a close-up magnifies every gesture. His jumpiness around the subject of Russia; his hand-wringing over ways to end the investigation; his rhetorical flop-sweat at the mention of the letters F, B and I — all these and more have his audience thinking: Gee, for an innocent man he sure does act guilty.

http://www.paywallnews.com/life/Opinion-|-For-an-innocent-man--Trump-sure-does-act-guilty.H1-IHgPcwz.html

Edited February 21, 2018 by Jingthing

[selftaopath]

On 2/19/2018 at 10:02 AM, Berkshire said:

I think it likely that Trump believes he has hidden his tracks with respect to the money laundering and Russian connection.  At least in a legal sense.  His financial handlers and lawyers have probably told him that much.  But with Mueller and his money laundering experts going through all this, Trump will get nailed.  They will see through all the BS.  In a legal sense, there's probably enough technicalities and legal loopholes that Trump the "citizen" may be able to weasel out of it with just a fine.  But Trump the POTUS?  Even the Republican Congress will have a hard time covering-up for Trump on this one.

You give Republicans/Congress more credit than I do. Have they put America/Americans first? When? How? They are all about money/power. Whoever gives them the biggest bribes get their support. Currently it's the NRA, Oil, big business, and maybe Russia.

[mogandave]

1 hour ago, selftaopath said:

You give Republicans/Congress more credit than I do. Have they put America/Americans first? When? How? They are all about money/power. Whoever gives them the biggest bribes get their support. Currently it's the NRA, Oil, big business, and maybe Russia.

While I generally agree with your sentiment, you might be way off on who the biggest bribes come from.

[selftaopath]

On 2/19/2018 at 2:29 PM, Thaidream said:

Bill and Hillary Clinton are as political as one gets but  at this point no clinton is President nor running for President so I am not interested in her emails or anything else surrounding her.

 

Donald Trump is POTUS.  He has access to the closest held American secrets and he seems to not understand what must be kept top secret and not shared.   He refuses to believe American Intelligence and the FBI and gives the impression he believes anything Vladimir Putin says.

 

There is evidence that Carter Page was under investigation for improper ties to Russia and we know that General  Flynn  has had 'discussions' with the Russians We also know that Donald Trump Jr had discussion with the Russians and the Steve Bannon actually felt that such meetings were 'treasonous'.

 

American Intelligence has determine that Russia has a programs(s) to affect American elections.  There have already been arrests of Russians in the US for election tampering. I still believe most of not all of the dossier is correct as its pieces and bits of information fit the mindset of Trump- especially the Golden Shower portion.  Trump seems to actually despise Obama as evidenced by trying to wipe out his legacy.

 

Trump himself is not smart enough to have courted the Russians but Putin and his operatives are smart enough to have compromised Trump and when he ran for President Putin must have felt that he won the lottery.  Are Trump supporters so blind that they cannot see that Russia Is attempting (and may have succeeded) to penetrate the highest office-the Presidency- 

 

At the very least- Trump is being played.  At the worst he is a traitor. The Mueller investigation is starting to close in on the truth. Even if Trump wasn't complicit in the Russian penetration and he waas an ignorant dupe- he is trying to stall the investigation and obstructing justice.

 

Once this is all over and the truth is known- it is time that the US Congress and State legislatures reform the American political process and get rid of the corruption that can actually purchase political  positions and even the Presidency.  It's a sad day when people sell their soul's to the devil 

None of the current Congress should be re-elected. Actually banning them from "all things political" including lobbying would be a great message to send for not putting country above party. 

[selftaopath]

On 2/20/2018 at 12:13 AM, heybruce said:

It was a legitimate question:  Do you really think it is hypocritical to investigate Russian interference in the US election?  I think it is critical to do so.

 

I do wonder about people who are in denial about the need for an investigation; where they are from, what they are up to, and where their loyalties lie.

I like the Liberal Red Neck's view: