The Next President is...

[Lord Ratner]

Don Jr. (a campaign surrogate) agrees to meet with Natalia Veselnitskaya (a foreign national with ties to her government) with the express purpose of getting damaging information on Hillary Clinton (a political opponent in a national election).

The implication according to some: the Trump campaign colluded with Russians in order to unlawfully change the outcome of a presidential election, bringing into question the legitimacy of Trump's presidency.

-----------

Marc E. Elias (a campaign surrogate) pays Christopher Steele (a foreign national with ties to his government and the Russian government) with the express purpose of getting damaging information on Donald Trump (a political opponent in a national election).

The implication according to those screaming Trump collusion: Just normal campaign work by a motivated candidate and her staff.

[Prozac]

Here’s a question: What place does any discussion about Hillary Clinton have in an argument about whether Donald Trump and his administration are fit to govern?  Seriously, I see this all the time and it bugs the shit out of me. Trump is the president of the United States. Hillary is a private citizen. If she is guilty of a crime, try her and dole out whatever punishment is appropriate. Totally separate issue from what’s going on in the White House and does not belong in the same discussion. It’s like trying to pin Iran Contra on Walter Mondale. The Hillary discussion, regardless of whatever merit it may or may not have, is just chaff, meant do distract. I wonder why the administration feels such an urgent need to turn everybody’s heads in some other direction? Trump is the president, not Hillary. Frankly, I don’t give a fuck about what happens to her, what she says publicly, how much she gets paid for speeches, or whether she still gives Bill head. None of that will affect the economy, immigration, crime, US foreign power, or American sovereignty. 

[waveshaper]

2 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Don Jr. (a campaign surrogate) agrees to meet with Natalia Veselnitskaya (a foreign national with ties to her government) with the express purpose of getting damaging information on Hillary Clinton (a political opponent in a national election).

The implication according to some: the Trump campaign colluded with Russians in order to unlawfully change the outcome of a presidential election, bringing into question the legitimacy of Trump's presidency.

-----------

Marc E. Elias (a campaign surrogate) pays Christopher Steele (a foreign national with ties to his government and the Russian government) with the express purpose of getting damaging information on Donald Trump (a political opponent in a national election).

The implication according to those screaming Trump collusion: Just normal campaign work by a motivated candidate and her staff.

This foreign national/former spy "Christopher Steele" sure had a good thing going, with numerous sources of potential pay for his efforts. A few examples; Getting paid by the DNC to get dirt from the Russians on the Republican Nominee for President. Additionally, he received a promise of more payola from the FBI (October 2017) if he continued this productive/FISA worthy/dirt digging work and he also got to tell his story to Yahoo News. I don't know if Yahoo News actually paid him for this info but this news story did make it into the approved final FISA warrant application on Carter Page. I'm sure that some of the key leadership (we know the names or at least most of the names) in the DNC/FBI/Justice Department/(State Department/TBD?) were delighted with this freebee via Yahoo News/Steele.

Edited February 6, 2018 by waveshaper

[Azimuth]

1 hour ago, Prozac said:

Here’s a question: What place does any discussion about Hillary Clinton have in an argument about whether Donald Trump and his administration are fit to govern?  Seriously, I see this all the time and it bugs the shit out of me. Trump is the president of the United States. Hillary is a private citizen. If she is guilty of a crime, try her and dole out whatever punishment is appropriate. Totally separate issue from what’s going on in the White House and does not belong in the same discussion. It’s like trying to pin Iran Contra on Walter Mondale. The Hillary discussion, regardless of whatever merit it may or may not have, is just chaff, meant do distract. I wonder why the administration feels such an urgent need to turn everybody’s heads in some other direction? Trump is the president, not Hillary. Frankly, I don’t give a fuck about what happens to her, what she says publicly, how much she gets paid for speeches, or whether she still gives Bill head. None of that will affect the economy, immigration, crime, US foreign power, or American sovereignty. 

It’s a straw man argument.  Trump even stated he wasn’t going to go after for criminal charges once he became President.  Trump isn’t going to get in trouble for collusion, you know, the topic his legal team keeps bringing up.  He’s going to possibly get in trouble for obstruction of justice.  You know, the same shit that force Nixon to resign before he was impeached and also the topic that his legal team keeps Heismaning. 

[ClearedHot]

2 hours ago, Prozac said:

Here’s a question: What place does any discussion about Hillary Clinton have in an argument about whether Donald Trump and his administration are fit to govern?  Seriously, I see this all the time and it bugs the shit out of me. Trump is the president of the United States. Hillary is a private citizen. If she is guilty of a crime, try her and dole out whatever punishment is appropriate. Totally separate issue from what’s going on in the White House and does not belong in the same discussion. It’s like trying to pin Iran Contra on Walter Mondale. The Hillary discussion, regardless of whatever merit it may or may not have, is just chaff, meant do distract. I wonder why the administration feels such an urgent need to turn everybody’s heads in some other direction? Trump is the president, not Hillary. Frankly, I don’t give a fuck about what happens to her, what she says publicly, how much she gets paid for speeches, or whether she still gives Bill head. None of that will affect the economy, immigration, crime, US foreign power, or American sovereignty. 

Two issues with your assumption.

1.  It appears Hillary's campaign paid for the dossier and provided probably untrue information that was included.  That dossier was used as part of the FISA probable cause to justify tapping Trump's campaign.

2.  Some of the same folks running the Trump investigation also conducted part of the Hillary investigation and some have deep and troubling perception ties to her campaign.  The Deputy Director of the FBI and one of the principle investigators acknowledged his wife's campaign received a $500,000 donation from the Hillary Campaign.   Was it documented....yes, should he have recused himself, ABSOLUTELY.

[brickhistory]

Last October 2017, the IRS admitted, due to a court order, that it had deliberately and repeatedly targeted for adverse action and/or delay conservative groups.  It also paid an undisclosed penalty to be split among those groups.  The only links I can find covering the court decision and IRS statement are right-leaning, so why bother posting since the messenger will be the focus and not the facts.

The FBI officials that I believe involved in both the Hillary shenanagans and the Trump investigation were, until, recently, the FBI's General Counsel, the FBI's Chief of Staff, the FBI's head of the CI division, the FBI's deputy director, and the FBI director.  None of them were Trump appointees.  Holdovers?  Yes.  Appointed?  No.

All of this - the IRS, the unmasking of Americans by the NSA, and the FBI's seemingly lax investigation of Hillary's e-mail (along with all the details I posted earlier), etc, etc, etc - matters because if one side gets away with it, sure as sh1t the other side will go there and beyond.  Democrats and Republicans will happily use instruments of force against us if we let them.

edited to add:  And from the FBI's leaders behavior thus far revealed, there are those in those institutions willing to help with that use.

I'm agin that.

Edited February 6, 2018 by brickhistory

[Vertigo]

21 hours ago, BFM this said:

Paul Bannon, huh?  I get what you're saying.  Wouldn't hang my theories on one of that guy's quotes, regardless of leanings, but whatever blows your skirt up man.

Ahahahahaha I just now caught what I typed. I actually meant this Paul Bannon, because those Scottish marathoners are known for their insider knowledge- https://www.scottishdistancerunninghistory.scot/paul-bannon/


 

[Vertigo]

This will be good for morale.

 

https://www.kctv5.com/story/37443016/trump-tells-pentagon-to-plan-a-military-parade

[drewpey]

11 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

This will be good for morale.

 

https://www.kctv5.com/story/37443016/trump-tells-pentagon-to-plan-a-military-parade

It's not like we've got anything else better to do.

[Azimuth]

Where’d he get the idea from?  Putin?

[di1630]

I wonder if you 3 liberals on here can get a waiver to march with your pink vag hats?

 

[Vertigo]

1 hour ago, di1630 said:

I wonder if you 3 liberals on here can get a waiver to march with your pink vag hats?

 

I doubt that'll get approved. White hoods, however, have blanket approval. 

[di1630]

I doubt that'll get approved. White hoods, however, have blanket approval. 

Sooooo what you are saying is you want to honor the Democratic Party heritage and dress retro like it’s members did in the past?

[Vertigo]

3 minutes ago, di1630 said:

Sooooo what you are saying is you want to honor the Democratic Party heritage and dress retro like it’s members did in the past?
 

Yep. I think you found some common ground for the Dems and GOP to work from. The Dems history and the current GOP have a mutual connection in that regard. Maybe that connection can be a catalyst to getting a damn budget passed (one that omits a line item for military parades).

[dmginc]

19 hours ago, drewpey said:

It's not like we've got anything else better to do.

Apparently it's already been given the kibosh.  He's far too busy with all his morale boosting visits to the troops his golf course.

[nsplayr]

On 2/2/2018 at 9:43 AM, Lord Ratner said:

This is different than if they had actually hacked voting machines.

 

Relevant new information. "Russians Penetrated U.S. Voter Systems Says Top U.S. Official"

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/russians-penetrated-u-s-voter-systems-says-top-u-s-n845721

 

Edited February 8, 2018 by nsplayr

[drewpey]

2 hours ago, nsplayr said:

 

Relevant new information. "Russians Penetrated U.S. Voter Systems Says Top U.S. Official"

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/russians-penetrated-u-s-voter-systems-says-top-u-s-n845721

 

From the "DEEP STATE":

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tillerson-warns-u-s-not-better-prepared-new-russian-election-n845396

 

And some throwback thursday for everyone:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/election-assistance-commission-republicans-congress/516462/

 

Edited February 8, 2018 by drewpey

[Prozac]

On 2/6/2018 at 2:07 PM, ClearedHot said:

Two issues with your assumption.

1.  It appears Hillary's campaign paid for the dossier and provided probably untrue information that was included.  That dossier was used as part of the FISA probable cause to justify tapping Trump's campaign.

2.  Some of the same folks running the Trump investigation also conducted part of the Hillary investigation and some have deep and troubling perception ties to her campaign.  The Deputy Director of the FBI and one of the principle investigators acknowledged his wife's campaign received a $500,000 donation from the Hillary Campaign.   Was it documented....yes, should he have recused himself, ABSOLUTELY.

Sorry, still don’t get it. Law enforcement agencies get information from all sorts of sources. Some are unsavory, some are politically biased, some are even criminal. What difference does it make if the evidence presented is actionable?  So the Clinton campaign paid to dig up dirt on Trump. I know you know the republicans were doing the same thing against Hillary. What if she had won and evidence was uncovered pointing to criminal activity on her campaigns part. Are you arguing that since it’s origin was political in nature it shouldn’t be used against her?  Shit, that would put all of the Clinton’s previous scandals off limits. Sorry. If Robert Muller, the lifelong republican special council thinks there is reason to continue his investigation, regardless of whether some of the evidence was politically driven, let him continue. I don’t for a minute buy the idea that all of these republican law enforcement professionals are part of some grand, deep state Democratic conspiracy to bring down the trump administration. 

[brickhistory]

4 hours ago, nsplayr said:

 

Relevant new information. "Russians Penetrated U.S. Voter Systems Says Top U.S. Official"

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/russians-penetrated-u-s-voter-systems-says-top-u-s-n845721

 

As noted above, this is old news.  Not unimportant, but not new.  BTW, tell me again why the last Administration didn"t do anything about the Russki's and their IO campaign even though they, Administration, admit they knew about said campaign?

 

But I'll see your Russia and raise you the fact that Steele, the former MI6 guy, paid Russian government personnel for their 'information.'

Paid Russian personnel for dirt.

Sooo, conceivably paid Ivan for his IO campaign.

[ClearedHot]

3 hours ago, Prozac said:

Sorry, still don’t get it. Law enforcement agencies get information from all sorts of sources. Some are unsavory, some are politically biased, some are even criminal. What difference does it make if the evidence presented is actionable?  So the Clinton campaign paid to dig up dirt on Trump. I know you know the republicans were doing the same thing against Hillary. What if she had won and evidence was uncovered pointing to criminal activity on her campaigns part. Are you arguing that since it’s origin was political in nature it shouldn’t be used against her?  Shit, that would put all of the Clinton’s previous scandals off limits. Sorry. If Robert Muller, the lifelong republican special council thinks there is reason to continue his investigation, regardless of whether some of the evidence was politically driven, let him continue. I don’t for a minute buy the idea that all of these republican law enforcement professionals are part of some grand, deep state Democratic conspiracy to bring down the trump administration. 

There is a huge difference between information that is actionable and information that is manufactured and untrue, I believe that is the issue at the center of the pushback.  If it the information us true then you are correct who cares where it comes from (and it wouldn't be a crime for Don Jr to meet with the Russians to get "true bad stuff on Hillary).  I am happy to let Mueller's investigation roll, but thus far we have seen no evidence of collusion and the only charges relate to lying to investigators and obstruction.

[gearhog]

5 hours ago, drewpey said:

From the "DEEP STATE":

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tillerson-warns-u-s-not-better-prepared-new-russian-election-n845396

And some throwback thursday for everyone:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/election-assistance-commission-republicans-congress/516462/

i just want someone to come out and say what they mean: 

we cannot defend against russian propaganda and influence directed at the voting public. voting machines cannot be trusted and even if they could, we cant trust the public to make selections that haven't been corrupted. if we don't get more control over vote (the people and the machines) we're basically handing our election process to the Russians and we get trump ...unless we do more to disassociate the electoral college from the popular vote and remove faithless elector rules.

[Vertigo]

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

...information that is manufactured and untrue...

Ignoring the fact that Carter Page's testimony corroborated parts of the dossier.

Just because other parts of the dossier have yet to be corroborated, that doesn't mean it's manufactured or untrue. It could be, but it may not be as well. 

 

6 hours ago, brickhistory said:

BTW, tell me again why the last Administration didn"t do anything about the Russki's and their IO campaign even though they, Administration, admit they knew about said campaign?

 

*ahem* https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-administration-announces-measures-to-punish-russia-for-2016-election-interference/2016/12/29/311db9d6-cdde-11e6-a87f-b917067331bb_story.html?utm_term=.bf14b5e152c5

 

[drewpey]

2 hours ago, Vertigo said:

*ahem* https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-administration-announces-measures-to-punish-russia-for-2016-election-interference/2016/12/29/311db9d6-cdde-11e6-a87f-b917067331bb_story.html?utm_term=.bf14b5e152c5

Also they tried to issue a bipartisan statement on their actions, but turtle threatened to call him out for partisan politics to help Hillary win.  

 

5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

 (and it wouldn't be a crime for Don Jr to meet with the Russians to get "true bad stuff on Hillary)

I don't understand this false equivalence.  Hillary campaign and the DNC (as well as Republican sources) funded Fusion GPS...a private company.  That private company hired a private individual (a foreign national) to gather raw intel, and he went out and gathered intel through consensual interviews and discussions legally.  The lawyer was representing Russia and was offering illegally hacked emails to a political party....are you seriously ok with that?  You are comparing apples to oranges.  What's next...we are going to have politicians touring outside the US to get financial and intelligence support from other countries.  The DNC should start hitting up all our disenfranchised allies and the "liberal EU" and have them pitch in efforts to undermine the next election...just make it a total shit show.  This shows the nearsightedness of the republican party.  It helps you out now, but that path doesn't lead anywhere good, and we should nip it in the bud now.

[ClearedHot]

3 hours ago, Vertigo said:

Ignoring the fact that Carter Page's testimony corroborated parts of the dossier.

Just because other parts of the dossier have yet to be corroborated, that doesn't mean it's manufactured or untrue. It could be, but it may not be as well.

The only portion of Page's testimony the corroborated anything was that he (Page), personally met with senior Russian Folks.  He never implicated Trump, in fact, to this day there is ZERO evidence Trump did anything...ZERO.  I don't like the guy but before we impeach and convict him I would like to see the evidence!

1 hour ago, drewpey said:

I don't understand this false equivalence.  Hillary campaign and the DNC (as well as Republican sources) funded Fusion GPS...a private company.  That private company hired a private individual (a foreign national) to gather raw intel, and he went out and gathered intel through consensual interviews and discussions legally.  The lawyer was representing Russia and was offering illegally hacked emails to a political party....are you seriously ok with that?  You are comparing apples to oranges.  What's next...we are going to have politicians touring outside the US to get financial and intelligence support from other countries.  The DNC should start hitting up all our disenfranchised allies and the "liberal EU" and have them pitch in efforts to undermine the next election...just make it a total shit show.  This shows the nearsightedness of the republican party.  It helps you out now, but that path doesn't lead anywhere good, and we should nip it in the bud now.

Sorry brother but I think it is you who is wrapped up in a false equivalence....our at least some false facts.  It was not just Hillary hiring a company to collect oppo research, they made it up...flat out made up salacious details to add shock value.  Pissing on hookers...come on, you honestly think that was collected raw intel that added value to a fucking FISA warrant?  I guess you are ok with that as long as it furthers the liberal agenda.   We it comes to Don Jr and Emails from what I have seen all he was told was they had dirt on Hillary...I have yet to see where the Russians said we have the hacked emails.  Except for the news story that falsely said the Trump campaign got the DNC info BEFORE it was released to the public when in fact they got it AFTER.  I am certainly not in favor of one party using hacked emails provided by a foreign government to influence an election, but thus far I have yet to see proof that happened.  As a bit of a sidebar, we still don't know who actually got Hillary's emails...likely many folks did which leads me to ask why isn't she in jail?

[brickhistory]

4 hours ago, Vertigo said:

Ignoring the fact that Carter Page's testimony corroborated parts of the dossier.

Just because other parts of the dossier have yet to be corroborated, that doesn't mean it's manufactured or untrue. It could be, but it may not be as well. 

 

*ahem* https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-administration-announces-measures-to-punish-russia-for-2016-election-interference/2016/12/29/311db9d6-cdde-11e6-a87f-b917067331bb_story.html?utm_term=.bf14b5e152c5

 

Did you read the "actions" taken as listed in your posted link?

Again, why didn't the Administration in office do something?  If Ivan was attempting to disrupt a fundamental issue for our democracy, sanctioning the GRU and FSB seems pretty weak sauce.   

But it did virtue signal so that counts, I guess.

But to recap the important points, for me anyway:  the IRS was weaponized against political adversaries; the NSA was weaponized to spy on American citizens for political purposes; the FBI phoned it in investigating a national security issue dealing with one candidate and deceived a court to spy on the opposition candidate.  There's more, but these cover the concept.

All fun and games until it's done to you.