The Next President is...

[brickhistory]

Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

Or when Bernie Sanders, avowed, acknowledged Socialist came that close to being the Democrat nominee for President?

 

 

Edited February 13, 2018 by brickhistory

[gearhog]

16 hours ago, drewpey said:

Combat climate change to minimize their warm-water ports.

To win a war against Russia, we must first win the war against Earth's climate.

Sounds reasonable.

[busdriver]

18 hours ago, drewpey said:

Sanctions targeted towards Russian oligarchs and leadership money laundering.  Stop accepting kids of Russian oligarchs into western universities.  Expand NATO east.  Sell more patriot systems and F-35s to counter Russian influence.  Harden our election systems.  Properly fund the state department.  Invest more in renewable energies to minimize their leverage with oil exports.  Combat climate change to minimize their warm-water ports.

Eastern European countries are heavily dependant on Russian oil.  Western not as much as they are able to diversify.

Countering Russia is cornering a dying bear.  Russia is a mess and sanctions only work if they choose to play by the rules of the international political game that was created post WW2.  What about when they go all conqueror again?  

Renewable energies are currently and for the foreseeable future, a pipe dream.  They will not be economically competitive for the developing world for a very long time.  The need for oil will persist long after that point.

Shale oil and an energy independent N/S America seems to be legitimately on the horizon.  Will the US continue to finance world security after that point?  Interesting times are coming.

[nsplayr]

Mueller announces grand jury indictments for 13 Russian nationals and 3 Russian entities re: 2016 influence campaign.

371672481-U-S-v-Internet-Research-Agency-et-al.pdf

Edited February 16, 2018 by nsplayr

[tac airlifter]

On 5/17/2017 at 10:24 PM, nsplayr said:

Look, benefit of the doubt here, if there really is nothing and the President and his campaign associates are innocent of all crimes and wrongdoing, then you have nothing to be worried about. Maybe money and time is wasted, but at this point that's pennies on the dollar to restore the American people's faith and trust in our institutions of government. The President has been pretty emphatic in his denials of wrongdoing and maybe he's right, we're all going to find out if that's the case.

From the link you just posted: "Rosenstein said there is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in the scheme, nor is there any allegation that the scheme affected the outcome of the election."

Two questions: are you prepared to concede POTUS was not in cahoots with Russia to alter our election?  And, ref the portion of your quote I bolded, do you think this process has restored faith in gov institutions?  Because my faith in DOJ/FBI has been significantly degraded.

 

[Azimuth]

30 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

From the link you just posted: "Rosenstein said there is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in the scheme, nor is there any allegation that the scheme affected the outcome of the election."

Two questions: are you prepared to concede POTUS was not in cahoots with Russia to alter our election?  And, ref the portion of your quote I bolded, do you think this process has restored faith in gov institutions?  Because my faith in DOJ/FBI has been significantly degraded.

 

Actually being in cahoots with the Russians and possibly lying saying you knew nothing of the interference and/or trying to prevent investigators from finding out about your direct involvement, knowledge, and possible role in the interference are vastly differently things.  Nixon wasn't in the Watergate hotel planting recording devices yet he still told us he wasn't a crook and quit being President before was impeached.  Weird.

[Azimuth]

3 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Mueller announces grand jury indictments for 13 Russian nationals and 3 Russian entities re: 2016 influence campaign.

371672481-U-S-v-Internet-Research-Agency-et-al.pdf

Your last link sucks.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

Edited February 16, 2018 by Azimuth

[nsplayr]

Let’s wait for the conclusion of the Mueller investigation to make any final judgments. Today’s announcement was not the first indictment and my prediction is that it will not be the last.

Re: faith in institutions. I’m for letting the FBI and DOJ do their work without disparaging or discrediting what they’re doing. If the President and his administration officials are totally innocent as they claim they should be happy to do the same. Strong law enforcement institutions do their work on the level, indict the guilty and exonerate the innocent, and people believe their conclusions.

When judging today’s actors, ask yourself, “Is this how an innocent person would act?”

Nixon and his folks discredited the special counsel at the time and obstructed congressional and DOJ investigstions because they were guilty of knowing about and trying to cover up the watergate break-in. Clinton lied to the investigators and the American people because he DID in fact have sexual relations with that woman.

Time will hopefully reveal the truth and even though I’m somewhat impatient, I’m willing to wait and let the chips fall where they may. If Mueller concludes that POTUS is innocent of all crimes I plan on accepting that.

Edited February 16, 2018 by nsplayr

[nsplayr]

2 minutes ago, Azimuth said:

Your last link sucks.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

Thanks for the add...it’s a pdf I attached so IDK why the forum isn’t handling that well.

[tac airlifter]

19 minutes ago, Azimuth said:

Actually being in cahoots with the Russians and possibly lying saying you knew nothing of the interference and/or trying to prevent investigators from finding out about your direct involvement, knowledge, and possible role in the interference are vastly differently things. 

Sounds like your mind is made up regardless of the findings.  Am I wrong?

18 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

Let’s wait for the conclusion of the Mueller investigation to make any final judgments. Today’s announcement was not the first indictment and my prediction is that it will not be the last........If Mueller concludes that POTUS is innocent of all crimes I plan on accepting that.

Ok, fair.  Although I'm uncertain Mueller will conclude POTUS is "innocent."  As implied above, he may simply conclude there's not enough evidence for charges but that is very different than "innocent" and will not help the nation heal. I'm concerned our country, already deeply divided, will have fault lines exacerbated by a continued investigation without a definitive ending.  

[Prosuper]

49 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

,will have fault lines exacerbated by a continued investigation without a definitive ending.  

If I was Putin I would consider this an outstanding result with few casualties. Mission accomplished! 

[Azimuth]

Gates is testifying against Manafort due to his plea deal.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/374477-gates-plans-to-testify-against-manafort-in-mueller-probe-report

[HeloDude]

Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) says:

"I don't think we'll know anywhere near the full story until [Mueller] issues his report," Casey said. "But once you get into the summer, and you get close to the election, I think it's a mistake for him to release it late. I think you should wait until after [the election]" Casey said."

https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/374407-dem-senator-warns-mueller-against-issuing-russia-report-near-2018

So here are my questions:

1) If this investigation is non-partisan and Dems believe the American public deserves to know the outcome of the investigation, then why would a Democrat Senator want Mueller to wait until after the 2018 midterm elections to release the report?

2) If Democrats believe the Mueller report will be damning to the Trump administration/GOP, then from a partisan perspective, why wouldn't you want those results released before the election?

The only reason that makes sense to me is that he believes this won't hurt Trump/the GOP.  I just find his remarks quite interesting...

[brickhistory]

https://thefederalist.com/2018/02/19/michael-flynns-plea-reversal-uncover-federal-corruption/

On Friday, Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order in United States v. Flynn that, while widely unnoticed, reveals something fascinating: A motion by Michael Flynn to withdraw his guilty plea based on government misconduct is likely in the works.

 

So, to recap: the Administration in office during the election knew of Russian IO and intentionally did nothing https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/us/politics/jeh-johnson-testimony-russian-election-hacking.html

Now, the prized scalp taken might have to be stitched back.

And the Democrats don't want the result released until after the election (see recap point #1)

But #neverTrump or something, I guess...

[nsplayr]

I know y'all won't believe this, but there is the idea that these kinds of things shouldn't be political bomb-shells dropped right before an election. I think that's what Casey is getting at, and would also note that he has absolutely no say in what Mueller does or when he does it whatsoever.

Not dropping what can appear like partisan bombshells goes for the original Russia hacking when Obama was in the seat. As soon as McConnell said he wouldn't sign on to a joint statement that sealed the deal. Think back to how you would have reacted if the Obama admin put out an intel report saying that the Russians were running an influence campaign trying to elect Trump while the GOP leaders in Congress said that they disagreed. "Politicizing intel!! It's a brazen move against Trump!!" And like, it would have seemed that way even if the report was a very straight-laced accounting of the facts as the IC knew them.

I somewhat feel the same way about the Mueller investigation now. It would be better if it wasn't an October surprise right before the midterms, assuming it'll be nearing conclusion by then. I think that's what Senator Casey is getting at...anything released right before an election will inevitably influence it, and that's generally not what you want even if some of those bombshell thing help your side.

That being said, I'd default to letting the special counsel be on whatever timetable the investigation requires, because even saying anything at this point gets politicized, as evidenced by your questions about Sen. Casey's motives. Let the investigation play out and let the chips fall where they may. None of us in the peanut gallery can do anything else anyways.

Edited February 20, 2018 by nsplayr

[brickhistory]

Political considerations should have zero bearing on a criminal investigation.  Then or now.  Regarding Hillary or Trump.

I keep thinking of that blindfolded lady holding the scales.  

If someone is a crook, then the election be damned.  Book 'em, Dan-o...

 

Edited February 20, 2018 by brickhistory

[matmacwc]

It'll leak, because somebody thinks they are being righteous or because the (D)'s have the red telephone to the NYT anyway and hell, they would and have.

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

I know y'all won't believe this, but there is the idea that these kinds of things shouldn't be political bomb-shells dropped right before an election.

Oh please--you know why I don't believe you?  Because you know as well as I do that Democrats are going to 'continue' to bring up the Russia stuff about Trump all the way to the midterms.  So acting as things shouldn't be a "political bombshell" is bullshit because Democrats are making this entirely political, unless you disagree? Casey is no better or worse than all the other Senators (whether D or R) and they all will use what political advantage they can take, so him not wanting this to come out even this summer shows me that he is either worried something 'might' not go their way with the investigation, or worse, actually knows it won't go their way.  If what Dmeocrats allege is actually substantiated as true then it is political gold--so why works nt they want it come out this summer?

 

[drewpey]

2 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Political considerations should have zero bearing on a criminal investigation.  Then or now.  Regarding Hillary or Trump.

I keep thinking of that blindfolded lady holding the scales.  

If someone is a crook, then the election be damned.  Book 'em, Dan-o...

Given the email investigation and the frustration with the dossier/FISA warrant, the FBI is being dragged to center-stage of politics despite their best efforts.  I think the Senator sees the report dropping just prior to the election as continuing down that path, which is not a good idea.  The GOP is already prepping their constituents to discount whatever Mueller presents, regardless of content from their messaging about "collusion isn't a crime" as well as trying to undermine trust in the FBI.  It's working well as I can see here.  I can see Caseys concerns, but given what I've read about Mueller's reputation as business-only, political considerations will have no bearing on the investigation.  He will push out his report when he is well ready, regardless of anyone's timelines.

[nsplayr]

7 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Oh please--you know why I don't believe you?  Because you know as well as I do that Democrats are going to 'continue' to bring up the Russia stuff about Trump all the way to the midterms.  So acting as things shouldn't be a "political bombshell" is bullshit because Democrats are making this entirely political, unless you disagree? Casey is no better or worse than all the other Senators (whether D or R) and they all will use what political advantage they can take, so him not wanting this to come out even this summer shows me that he is either worried something 'might' not go their way with the investigation, or worse, actually knows it won't go their way.  If what Dmeocrats allege is actually substantiated as true then it is political gold--so why works nt they want it come out this summer?

 

Like I said, I know you won’t believe this...

[BFM this]

7 hours ago, drewpey said:

Given the email investigation and the frustration with the dossier/FISA warrant, the FBI is being dragged to center-stage of politics despite their best efforts. due to their gross ethical and professional negligence.

FIFY.  Seriously, say what you will about JEH and his own dossier fetishes, at least he ran a tight ship, including telling pols to go fuck themselves when the occasion arose.

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

Like I said, I know you won’t believe this...

Why would I?  The reality of the situation is not what you posted.

[HossHarris]

I’d rather know BEFORE an election. Regardless of which way the report goes. 

[brickhistory]

10 hours ago, drewpey said:

Given the email investigation and the frustration with the dossier/FISA warrant, the FBI is being dragged to center-stage of politics despite their best efforts. 

Umm, given the actions of the senior leadership at the time, 'dragged' is not the verb I would pick.  Comey and Co. deliberately took the actions at the time.  If a different candidate had won the election, none of this would be seeing the light of day.  That is hardly apolitical behavior.

This and nsplayer's "told you wouldn't believe me" post illustrates the divide that will never be crossed.  Rational people can look at facts and form completely different opinions based upon them depending on their particular tinting of eyeglasses.

[SurelySerious]

11 hours ago, HossHarris said:

I’d rather know BEFORE an election. Regardless of which way the report goes. 

Truth