Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can someone explain Russiagate to me?

Collapse

Google Ads

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Can someone explain Russiagate to me?

    There is a lot of confusion about Russia right now with the Flynn stuff happening. But I want to reset a bit and ask what is it that Democrats got wrong about Russia in 2016?

    My understanding is that Russia interfered with the election by spending money to run ads hitting Hillary and to operate a "troll army" to flood social media with disinformation and "I'm a Democrat voting for Trump and you should too" comments. They also may or may not have hacked the DNC's server and Podesta's email account, releasing a trove of emails and documents in an effort to damage the Clinton campaign. The Trump campaign may or may not have communicated and coordinated with Russian-connected operatives in some of these efforts. Plenty of Trump campaign officials did communicate, but the exact context of those conversations isn't clear.

    That's the story, right?

    So help me understand why it is such a bad thing that the FBI was looking into that and why they shouldn't have had the Russian ambassador under surveillance (how Flynn got caught)? Like, I legit don't get the GOP outrage on this topic.

  • #2
    Investigate the Clinton Foundation! The answers are all there!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Nash View Post
      Investigate the Clinton Foundation! The answers are all there!
      That's very QAnon of you

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DPR View Post
        There is a lot of confusion about Russia right now with the Flynn stuff happening. But I want to reset a bit and ask what is it that Democrats got wrong about Russia in 2016?
        OK, but only if you are serious. Russiagate is bigger than Russia and Trump. You have to include the Obama Administration (including DOJ, FBI, and Other intel), Ukraine, and the Clinton Campaign.


        Originally posted by DPR View Post
        My understanding is that Russia interfered with the election by spending money to run ads hitting Hillary and to operate a "troll army" to flood social media with disinformation and "I'm a Democrat voting for Trump and you should too" comments.
        ok, so lets start here. Russia attempted to, and did to an extent, use socially media accounts to sow confusion into the election. The troll army attacked both campaigns. And the Trump Dossier was also a part of this effort. The Russians wereshone that hilliary was open to dirt on trump when one of her law firms paid Russia for the fake scandal sheet on Trump.

        Originally posted by DPR View Post
        They also may or may not have hacked the DNC's server and Podesta's email account, releasing a trove of emails and documents in an effort to damage the Clinton campaign.
        Enter the IT security company CROWDSTRIKE. Crowdstrike says Russians Hacked the DNC and Podesta. However, the FBI took their word for it and did no forensics of their own. It is also a theory, at least on Podesta, that is simple password (which was password1) may have contributed to the alleged hack. As lat as last week, Crowdstrike admits there was no direct proof that is was russians, just indications. Enter Wikileaks and the debunked narritive that trump had wikileaks hack the DNC.

        Originally posted by DPR View Post
        The Trump campaign may or may not have communicated and coordinated with Russian-connected operatives in some of these efforts. Plenty of Trump campaign officials did communicate, but the exact context of those conversations isn't clear.
        On this one, its pretty clear they had some contact, but Mueller found nothing, and the document dumps since, have shown that No one produced evidence of trump campaign wrong doing or involvement in a conspiracy. Furthermore, the intel dumps have shown that many of the Trump associates were both set up by the intel community to entice them to break laws. And none of them broke any process laws related to the campaign. Cohen went to prison for Tax issues, Flynn's plea was forced under the threat to his son, and Papadopolus was a CIA informant and a Mueller lawyer hid that from a FISA court. And also, he was debriefed by the CIA when he had contact with the russians.

        Originally posted by DPR View Post
        That's the story, right?
        That's only part of the story.

        Originally posted by DPR View Post
        So help me understand why it is such a bad thing that the FBI was looking into that and why they shouldn't have had the Russian ambassador under surveillance (how Flynn got caught)? Like, I legit don't get the GOP outrage on this topic.
        The FBI was closing the case on Flynn Right as the election happened. That's when Comey and McCabe took it upon themselves to get the guy fired in an effort to execute the Insurance Policy you heard so much about. They were fine to snoop. I think there were even fine to unmask. But the reason for the whole impeachment was as much to cover the Previous Administrations spying on a political opponent, as it was to take down a President. SO that is all the hoo haw about why the GOP might be a little outraged.

        and the FBI report coming out soon, will likely be full of stuff we we told that the FBI didn't do, but actually did.


        Comment


        • #5
          Okay, I'm going to try and make a good faith effort to engage with Dynasty here (god help me):

          Troll armies - these seemed to be heavily in favor of Trump, so I'm not sure why you are saying they attacked both. Maybe a few were attacking Trump to provide cover, but Putin clearly wanted Trump to win and has admitted as much.

          The Steele Dossier was leaked after the election took place and Trump was certified the winner. I fail to see how this had any implication on the election itself. The leaks of Podesta's email, the DNC servers etc were all done before the election and had an unmeasurable impact.

          Crowdstrike said they couldn't provide hard evidence that it was Russia hackers, but stated it was very likely Russian hackers and no evidence of it being anyone else has come up. And considering Russian hackers have gone after Merkel and other world leaders, this isn't a difficult story to believe. Nor is it a wild conspiracy. They probably did it.

          There is no proof of entrapment anywhere to my knowledge.

          Now Flynn was set up to executive the "insurance policy"? What did the execution of this "insurance policy" look like? Did it stop Trump from becoming president? Was the deep state working specifically to stop Flynn and only Flynn? This makes no sense.

          But there isn't any evidence that they were spying on Trump. They only caught Flynn because he was talking to someone under surveillance.

          And the impeachment was directly related to Trump leveraging taxpayer-funded foreign aid to Ukraine in exchange for them digging up dirt on Biden, his likely opponent in 2020.

          You've made a valiant effort, but I still don't see how Flynn was set-up. Russians were meddling, Obama was spying on the Russian ambassador and just so happened to see Flynn speaking to him and trying to undermine US policy, so he was questioned and he committed a crime.

          But again, what is Russiagate? Was the Obama admin not allowed to investigate whether a Russia-backed 3rd party hacked a major US political party in an effort to swing an election? And did that investigation not turn up evidence that they likely did and will try again in 2020?

          When people here say "muh Russia" I'd really like to know what they think happened, or if they just think it's fine that a foreign government is openly assisting one candidate over the other.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            Okay, I'm going to try and make a good faith effort to engage with Dynasty here (god help me):
            I am will also make this pledge.

            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            Troll armies - these seemed to be heavily in favor of Trump, so I'm not sure why you are saying they attacked both. Maybe a few were attacking Trump to provide cover, but Putin clearly wanted Trump to win and has admitted as much.
            I concede that most were pro-trump, if you will similary concede some were Pro-hillary, but i also believe the dossier was part of this campaign.

            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            The Steele Dossier was leaked after the election took place and Trump was certified the winner. I fail to see how this had any implication on the election itself. The leaks of Podesta's email, the DNC servers etc were all done before the election and had an unmeasurable impact.
            The Dossier was leaked by Mother Jones on the eve of the election. Halloween night if i recall. And i looked through al the podesta email i could, and while there was alot of backstabbing and cat fighting, there really wasn't much there that hillary supporters cared about. Did they care that the fix was in for hillary, and bernie was being shut out? Not a chance one mind was changed. So i would argue that they showed the DNC in a bad light, and not really about hillary at all.

            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            Crowdstrike said they couldn't provide hard evidence that it was Russia hackers, but stated it was very likely Russian hackers and no evidence of it being anyone else has come up. And considering Russian hackers have gone after Merkel and other world leaders, this isn't a difficult story to believe. Nor is it a wild conspiracy. They probably did it.
            And I am willing to concede it probably was Russia. However the lack of effort in a proper investigation just makes all the other stinky parts of the Mueller probe seemingly connected. And likely aren't though.

            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            There is no proof of entrapment anywhere to my knowledge.
            So you really need to read up on the Carter Page Case. I said Papadopoulos, but i was talking about page. An American intel asset was actively trying to get him to cheat on his wife, and confess while undercover, that the Trump campaign was in league with russia. Too much to type out here, but you should look it up. Flynn was trapped into a charge of lying to the FBI. And the way they did it was dirty. and reason they did it the way they did it was so they did not have to give the evidence they had in their possession to Flynns lawyers. They basically told him they had him on lying and if he did not take the plea, they were going to go after his son next. Comey Admitted on a TV show that he sent in FBI agents to trip him up right after Jany 20th, even though On January 4th, Comey recived a report that Flynn was not guilty of anything. They created a situation where they tricked him into pleading guilty to a lesser crime, telling him there was a bigger crime, but there was not.


            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            Now Flynn was set up to executive the "insurance policy"? What did the execution of this "insurance policy" look like? Did it stop Trump from becoming president? Was the deep state working specifically to stop Flynn and only Flynn? This makes no sense.
            Well, im just as interested in the truth on this one. The insurance policy was never about keeping trump from winning, it was about keeping him 1. finding out about all the spying 2. setting him up for legal action or impeachment. We won't know it all until Durham's report drops in July or August. "Getting" Flynn, deprived Trump of a good intel asset. And anything Trump did to help Flynn played right into the collusion narrative.

            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            But there isn't any evidence that they were spying on Trump. They only caught Flynn because he was talking to someone under surveillance.
            The FISC allowed 4 instances of spying on trump associates. Trump would naturally get caught up in data dumps. And they didn't catch flynn on anything. His conversations with the russian ambassador, was completely legit, and normal in a transition period. Remember he was charged with lying To the FBI. Because they already had the call taped and transcripted. They knew what he said, all they needed was for him to say monday, when on the call he said Tuesday.

            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            And the impeachment was directly related to Trump leveraging taxpayer-funded foreign aid to Ukraine in exchange for them digging up dirt on Biden, his likely opponent in 2020.
            No that was just the excuse. The calls for impeachment started before he took office. Literally, i think MSNBC had someone on election night say, i can't wait until he is impeached. 2 years beforethe call took place. It was the best shot they had when the Mueller probe couldn't find anything.

            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            You've made a valiant effort, but I still don't see how Flynn was set-up. Russians were meddling, Obama was spying on the Russian ambassador and just so happened to see Flynn speaking to him and trying to undermine US policy, so he was questioned and he committed a crime.
            The data dump this wees shows that obama was looking into reasons that Flynn might not be trusted, and Comey said in that meeting there was potential reasons, even thought just days earlier, the agents investigating Flynn cleared him.

            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            But again, what is Russiagate? Was the Obama admin not allowed to investigate whether a Russia-backed 3rd party hacked a major US political party in an effort to swing an election? And did that investigation not turn up evidence that they likely did and will try again in 2020?
            I think it is going to be something much bigger than what it is now. It was about trump associates and Russian hackers. Literally as im typing this, news just broke FBI is opening an investigation into the origins of the Flynn case. So that just happened.
            I think the russians are already trying things. Look how much division they created for $160,000?

            Originally posted by DPR View Post
            When people here say "muh Russia" I'd really like to know what they think happened, or if they just think it's fine that a foreign government is openly assisting one candidate over the other.
            I think they were playing both sides, Facebook for Trump and Dossier for Clinton. IMHO.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by DynastyFSU2 View Post
              I concede that most were pro-trump, if you will similary concede some were Pro-hillary, but i also believe the dossier was part of this campaign.
              I already said some were probably pro-Hillary but it is hard to tell and the obvious theme is that the vast majority were pro-Trump. And the Steele Dossier wasn't even finished until Dec 2016 and published Jan 2017. It wasn't part of the campaign. No voters, to my knowledge, were aware of its contents.

              The Dossier was leaked by Mother Jones on the eve of the election. Halloween night if i recall.
              Nope. Published by Buzzfeed Jan 10, 2017 - three months after the election.

              And i looked through al the podesta email i could, and while there was alot of backstabbing and cat fighting, there really wasn't much there that hillary supporters cared about. Did they care that the fix was in for hillary, and bernie was being shut out? Not a chance one mind was changed. So i would argue that they showed the DNC in a bad light, and not really about hillary at all.
              Are you trying to claim no harm, no foul over the illegal hacking of a major political party?

              And I am willing to concede it probably was Russia. However the lack of effort in a proper investigation just makes all the other stinky parts of the Mueller probe seemingly connected. And likely aren't though.
              If it was Russia, then why shouldn't we be investigating all connections to it, foreign and domestic?

              So you really need to read up on the Carter Page Case. I said Papadopoulos, but i was talking about page. An American intel asset was actively trying to get him to cheat on his wife, and confess while undercover, that the Trump campaign was in league with russia. Too much to type out here, but you should look it up.
              I'm aware of Page. He was suspected of being a Russian agent for years before ever coming on with the Trump campaign. The guy worked in Moscow and openly trashed US policy to Russian officials. I have no idea if that makes him an agent, but shouldn't it concern you that Trump hired a guy who praises Putin and trashes American policy? Why did Trump need to hire and defend such people? If Biden hires someone closely connected to China and heavily sympathetic to their government while critical of ours, would that not raise a red flag?

              Flynn was trapped into a charge of lying to the FBI.
              It is impossible to be "trapped" into lying. You are always capable of telling the truth.

              And the way they did it was dirty. and reason they did it the way they did it was so they did not have to give the evidence they had in their possession to Flynns lawyers. They basically told him they had him on lying and if he did not take the plea, they were going to go after his son next. Comey Admitted on a TV show that he sent in FBI agents to trip him up right after Jany 20th, even though On January 4th, Comey recived a report that Flynn was not guilty of anything. They created a situation where they tricked him into pleading guilty to a lesser crime, telling him there was a bigger crime, but there was not.
              If all of this is true, and I don't think it is, it simply means Trump hired a complete idiot to be in charge of - checks notes - US national security.


              Well, im just as interested in the truth on this one. The insurance policy was never about keeping trump from winning, it was about keeping him 1. finding out about all the spying 2. setting him up for legal action or impeachment. We won't know it all until Durham's report drops in July or August. "Getting" Flynn, deprived Trump of a good intel asset. And anything Trump did to help Flynn played right into the collusion narrative.
              See, this is where the conspiracy loses me. They were intelligent enough and crafty enough and diabolical enough to set up this long con but couldn't simply sabotage his campaign and cost him the election? If Comey released in that letter to Chaffetz about digging back into Clinton's emails that he was also going after Trump, don't you think that would have been a smarter play for the FBI if they were truly out to get Trump? I mean, good grief. What kind of stupid plan involves going after someone by ensuring they are elected to the one office that they can't touch? Please tell me you're not serious about this.

              The FISC allowed 4 instances of spying on trump associates. Trump would naturally get caught up in data dumps. And they didn't catch flynn on anything. His conversations with the russian ambassador, was completely legit, and normal in a transition period. Remember he was charged with lying To the FBI. Because they already had the call taped and transcripted. They knew what he said, all they needed was for him to say monday, when on the call he said Tuesday.
              Well if they were so legit, surely Trump will release them, yes? And calling the ambassador to run a shadow foreign policy unit against the wishes of the president is - checks notes - illegal and a felony. It was bad enough that Trump fired him for it. Remember that? If it was legit, Trump would never have fired him. Please square that for me. TIA


              No that was just the excuse. The calls for impeachment started before he took office. Literally, i think MSNBC had someone on election night say, i can't wait until he is impeached. 2 years beforethe call took place. It was the best shot they had when the Mueller probe couldn't find anything.

              The data dump this wees shows that obama was looking into reasons that Flynn might not be trusted, and Comey said in that meeting there was potential reasons, even thought just days earlier, the agents investigating Flynn cleared him.
              Did they clear him or did they just close the investigation? Those are two different things.

              I think it is going to be something much bigger than what it is now. It was about trump associates and Russian hackers. Literally as im typing this, news just broke FBI is opening an investigation into the origins of the Flynn case. So that just happened.
              I think the russians are already trying things. Look how much division they created for $160,000?
              The least shocking development here is that Bill Barr is using the power of his office to ensure the guy who will reappoint him AG is reelected. And I'm sure this investigation will be like Benghazi, grab the headlines, and then close up in December after the election with a whimper.

              I think they were playing both sides, Facebook for Trump and Dossier for Clinton. IMHO.
              If you truly believe that, then why aren't you outraged at Trump for doing nothing about it? Why aren't you angry that Russia is trying to divide this country to the point they can diminish our power on the global stage so they can be the controllers of Europe again and gain leverage on key markets like oil imports?

              Why are you ignoring Trump's complete obedience to Moscow? Shouldn't this shit piss you off?

              Comment


              • #8
                I really am trying to uphold our civil agreement here.

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                I already said some were probably pro-Hillary but it is hard to tell and the obvious theme is that the vast majority were pro-Trump. And the Steele Dossier wasn't even finished until Dec 2016 and published Jan 2017. It wasn't part of the campaign. No voters, to my knowledge, were aware of its contents.
                The Steele Dossier was floating around Washington well before the election and Mother Jones spilled the beans on the last day of Oct 2016. Yes, Congress members started seeing it over Thanksgiving, but it was known to many by then.

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                Nope. Published by Buzzfeed Jan 10, 2017 - three months after the election.
                Sorry man, you're wrong. https://www.motherjones.com/politics...-donald-trump/

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                Are you trying to claim no harm, no foul over the illegal hacking of a major political party?
                Absolutely not. Im saying the FBI didn't do enough!

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                If it was Russia, then why shouldn't we be investigating all connections to it, foreign and domestic?
                And i think that is fine. But the evidence collected was pointing to russia doing this for Russia. Not for one party or another.

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                I'm aware of Page. He was suspected of being a Russian agent for years before ever coming on with the Trump campaign. The guy worked in Moscow and openly trashed US policy to Russian officials. I have no idea if that makes him an agent, but shouldn't it concern you that Trump hired a guy who praises Putin and trashes American policy? Why did Trump need to hire and defend such people? If Biden hires someone closely connected to China and heavily sympathetic to their government while critical of ours, would that not raise a red flag?
                He is literally a CIA informant.


                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                It is impossible to be "trapped" into lying. You are always capable of telling the truth.
                If they told him first that they had a transcript of the call and then asked him his recollections, that would have been one way to seek the truth. However, they told him he did not need a lawyer, and asked for recollections in order to compare them to the transcript. Again. the conversation with the russian ambassador was legit.

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                If all of this is true, and I don't think it is, it simply means Trump hired a complete idiot to be in charge of - checks notes - US national security.
                I think he was an idiot to believe the FBI was on his team

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                See, this is where the conspiracy loses me. They were intelligent enough and crafty enough and diabolical enough to set up this long con but couldn't simply sabotage his campaign and cost him the election? If Comey released in that letter to Chaffetz about digging back into Clinton's emails that he was also going after Trump, don't you think that would have been a smarter play for the FBI if they were truly out to get Trump? I mean, good grief. What kind of stupid plan involves going after someone by ensuring they are elected to the one office that they can't touch? Please tell me you're not serious about this.
                Nah man. They all believed Hilldawg was a shoe in. And she was never gonna look into this stuff. Much of the stuff we are hearing about now is CYA and trying to frame Comey in the context of the mastermind. I have no idea if he was or not. but im thinking he wasn't alone.

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                Well if they were so legit, surely Trump will release them, yes? And calling the ambassador to run a shadow foreign policy unit against the wishes of the president is - checks notes - illegal and a felony. It was bad enough that Trump fired him for it. Remember that? If it was legit, Trump would never have fired him. Please square that for me. TIA
                First explain why mueller didnt bring him up on those charges when it was clear he wasnt able to deliver them the president's complicate behavior with the russians? The firing is easy to answer. Trump thought the FBI was being honest with him at that point. Why would they lie?


                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                Did they clear him or did they just close the investigation? Those are two different things.
                Both actually were going to happen, until Andrew McCabe told them to leave the case open.

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                The least shocking development here is that Bill Barr is using the power of his office to ensure the guy who will reappoint him AG is reelected. And I'm sure this investigation will be like Benghazi, grab the headlines, and then close up in December after the election with a whimper.
                Burr is a straight shooter. We can agree to disagree here. But think about this for a sec....if everything I have said is true, and the mechanisms of the FBI were turned on a candidate and a transition president, Wouldn't it make sense that any investigation into it, would be favorable to that President?


                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                If you truly believe that, then why aren't you outraged at Trump for doing nothing about it? Why aren't you angry that Russia is trying to divide this country to the point they can diminish our power on the global stage so they can be the controllers of Europe again and gain leverage on key markets like oil imports?
                How do you know he isn't? There are sanctions in place now. If he was such a puppet, you'd think those would just go away, right?

                Originally posted by DPR View Post
                Why are you ignoring Trump's complete obedience to Moscow? Shouldn't this shit piss you off?
                I don't see what you see. Its really that simple.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Fake News Dynasty strikes again!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Nash View Post
                    Fake News Dynasty strikes again!
                    Dynasty has to take his L on Obamagate
                    DaCat has to take his L on U1
                    DSMoney has to take his L on Maud

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by sctrojan View Post

                      Dynasty has to take his L on Obamagate
                      DaCat has to take his L on U1
                      DSMoney has to take his L on Maud
                      Trojan has to take his L on the English language.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        First off, stop using bold text so I can't quote you. But I'll summarize my thoughts here.

                        Reid only released that in response to Comey's letter. At some point, you have to start fighting back. If we examine the actions of the FBI in 2016, they were very transparent in dealing with Clinton so everyone knew about it, but kept a lid on their investigations of Trump. This absolutely helped Trump as he constantly attacked Clinton for being under investigation.

                        But the contents of it were not released. It was just a possible document that they were investigating.

                        As for Flynn - stunning stupidity isn't an excuse for breaking the law. I personally think he knew he should have a lawyer with him but was arrogant enough not to care. And he was right, as his lying charges are being dropped thanks to Trump. He was just ahead of the curve in that regard.

                        And they didn't trick him at all. It wasn't some minor detail they got him on. The Trump admin won't release the transcript, so we can't see it, but according to the FBI he lied about the essential nature of the call itself.

                        Mueller did charge him. It's why this is a story. As to why they didn't charge him with the Logan Act? Probably easier to just get him on lying. I dunno, I'm not a federal prosecutor.

                        Barr isn't a straight shooter. This guy was the hatchet man for HW to cover up Iran-Contra. He's one of the most corrupt government officials of the past 40 years. And I'd like to see a fair and unbiased report on how that investigation was started. But so far, what we can see is that it started directly because Flynn was - gasp - breaking the law. He's a former general. He knew that talking to Russia and telling them not to react to Obama's sanctions because they'd give them a better deal later on was not only illegal but also unethical.

                        The sanctions that Trump has fought tooth and nail? Really? The sanctions he was legally forced to enact despite his best efforts to persuade Congress against them? Those sanctions?

                        Again, all of this seems to be stemming from Trump being far too cozy with a lot of Russians while they were sabotaging a major candidate's presidential campaign. Everywhere you look with Trump he's in debt to Russia. He did all of this while trying to sign a tower deal in Moscow, all the while telling America he had nothing to do with Russia. This deal carried into his first year in office before falling apart.

                        A large part of the blame, if Trump is actually 100% innocent of anything here, is squarely on Trump for constantly being caught lying about so many facets to this story. If he was honest with us, for even a moment, and explained everything this would go away. But he hasn't. Why not?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Nash View Post

                          Trojan has to take his L on the English language.
                          LMFAO. Nash is ruined because I spelled something with an "s" instead of a "z"

                          At least I don't type then instead of than - or your instead of you're - a common mistake among posters on this board


                          +1 for making me LMFAO

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Nash View Post
                            Fake News Dynasty strikes again!
                            Really? I'm shocked you don't watch the news, or read a paper, or listen to a radio. Do you know how google works? Look it up princess.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by DPR View Post
                              First off, stop using bold text so I can't quote you. But I'll summarize my thoughts here.

                              Reid only released that in response to Comey's letter. At some point, you have to start fighting back. If we examine the actions of the FBI in 2016, they were very transparent in dealing with Clinton so everyone knew about it, but kept a lid on their investigations of Trump. This absolutely helped Trump as he constantly attacked Clinton for being under investigation.

                              But the contents of it were not released. It was just a possible document that they were investigating.

                              As for Flynn - stunning stupidity isn't an excuse for breaking the law. I personally think he knew he should have a lawyer with him but was arrogant enough not to care. And he was right, as his lying charges are being dropped thanks to Trump. He was just ahead of the curve in that regard.

                              And they didn't trick him at all. It wasn't some minor detail they got him on. The Trump admin won't release the transcript, so we can't see it, but according to the FBI he lied about the essential nature of the call itself.

                              Mueller did charge him. It's why this is a story. As to why they didn't charge him with the Logan Act? Probably easier to just get him on lying. I dunno, I'm not a federal prosecutor.

                              Barr isn't a straight shooter. This guy was the hatchet man for HW to cover up Iran-Contra. He's one of the most corrupt government officials of the past 40 years. And I'd like to see a fair and unbiased report on how that investigation was started. But so far, what we can see is that it started directly because Flynn was - gasp - breaking the law. He's a former general. He knew that talking to Russia and telling them not to react to Obama's sanctions because they'd give them a better deal later on was not only illegal but also unethical.

                              The sanctions that Trump has fought tooth and nail? Really? The sanctions he was legally forced to enact despite his best efforts to persuade Congress against them? Those sanctions?

                              Again, all of this seems to be stemming from Trump being far too cozy with a lot of Russians while they were sabotaging a major candidate's presidential campaign. Everywhere you look with Trump he's in debt to Russia. He did all of this while trying to sign a tower deal in Moscow, all the while telling America he had nothing to do with Russia. This deal carried into his first year in office before falling apart.

                              A large part of the blame, if Trump is actually 100% innocent of anything here, is squarely on Trump for constantly being caught lying about so many facets to this story. If he was honest with us, for even a moment, and explained everything this would go away. But he hasn't. Why not?
                              Well, you wanted to know what the hubbub was all about. There you go. You clearly have opinions that trump is bad. You say even if he is innocent, its his own fault. That's all i need to know. Thanks for hanging in there with me.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X