Russian election Interference thread

The Trump campaign/administration never used or tried to use Russia to hurt Hillary’s campaign and ultimately help President Trump win?

Necroposting this because that is exactly what the Right is upset about: it’s funny that the Clinton campaign paid a law firm who paid an oppo research company who compiled a report, which cited Russian intelligence officers as valid HUMINT sources, and as subsequently released to the press with the SOLE PURPOSE to damage the opposing campaign. Both the report and press articles ABOUT the report were used as the basis for at least one (but probably TWO) Title 1FISA warrants, which are used for FOREIGN intelligence, against an American citizen and then those details of those highly classified counterintelligence investigations were leaked to the press for...

basis of Congressional hearings. Both parties openly cite press reports in their letters to agencies and witnesses.

The Right is upset because 12 of the MOST senior DOJ and FBI managers have been fired or resigned.

The Left is excited that Trump connected associates have been convicted of process crimes.

Never forget the effects of Harry Reid’s precedence. The IC was used (and duped*) against an opposing campaign and after two years America is still hurting as well as weakened because of it. FBI, “justice”, elections are now jokes.

*only senior managers were aware the Steele Dossier, paid by Democrats, was the ultimate source of the CI case

Edit: Regarding the current indictments, this is worth a watch.

 
Last edited:
Spin aside... so you’re saying yes, just that the Clinton’s did too, and it’s damaged the FBI and our election process (or at least shed light on a very damaged system).

Who is ‘excited’ about that? Not me, my friend.

We will see what happens with Roger Stone, but at this point, there are some very clear facts we can state about the 2016 election.

One of those is, ‘in one form or another, Steve Bannon actively sought the release of hacked emails through an intermediary known as Guccifer 2.0 and that intermediary was Roger Stone, and that entity was an intelligence operation run by the state of Russia. Steve did this in hopes of winning the election.’

There will be more facts, but we are getting there. I’m ok with saying ‘everyone else does it!’ , but just do me s favor and don’t put me on either side of this because I don’t care.

Burn it to the ground. Start with this administration, because there’s plenty of kindling.
 
Spin aside... so you’re saying yes, just that the Clinton’s did too, and it’s damaged the FBI and our election process (or at least shed light on a very damaged system).

Who is ‘excited’ about that? Not me, my friend.

We will see what happens with Roger Stone, but at this point, there are some very clear facts we can state about the 2016 election.

One of those is, ‘in one form or another, Steve Bannon actively sought the release of hacked emails through an intermediary known as Guccifer 2.0 and that intermediary was Roger Stone, and that entity was an intelligence operation run by the state of Russia. Steve did this in hopes of winning the election.’

There will be more facts, but we are getting there. I’m ok with saying ‘everyone else does it!’ , but just do me s favor and don’t put me on either side of this because I don’t care.

Burn it to the ground. Start with this administration, because there’s plenty of kindling.

Fully agree that you are not excited but rather the Resistance is overjoyed as it supports the “he’s illegitimate” narrative. Curious why Stone wasn’t charged with conspiracy with his solicitation with Guccifer?

Again, you’re advocating that it was wrong for Brannon to do EXACTLY what Clinton did (acquire political embarrassing info). The only difference is the medium: emails vs HUMINT. Both emails and Steele sub sources were Russian intel officers. I assume this is the modern version of breaking into a shrinks office to get details on a leaker (ref Pentagon Papers).

It’s worth noting that Podesta’s emails were real whereas the Fusion GPS info was apparently fabricated as ALL of the non-public information has yet to be corroborated.

Modern politics are very dirty and agree we need a reset. I think the money sources need to be tracked.
 
This is a frustrating conversation to have.

Yes, I am advocating that Bannon and the presidents campaign team was wrong, actively engaged (knowingly or unknowingly) with a concerted Russian state sponsored hacking of the DNC, most likely with aid from now-dead (and surrounded nefariously in nature) Seth Rich. Who, by the way, got merked for his hack and subsequent leak in conjunction with Guccifer and Wikileaks.

.I ALSO fully accept that if there was an alternate universe, where Hillary’s campaign was investigated, the fecal matter would be impacting the oscillating air mover in probably the same way with the same, conceivably more, volume and intensity.

This endless roundabout we are engaged in is pointless unless the other person can get past ‘The other side did it too!’ And can get to ‘Alright, we wanted to drain the swamp, just turns out it’s our swamp going first. This is what’s best for America right now with the facts we have in front of us.’

Instead, it’s blame shifting, finger pointing, moral relativism, scapegoating and outright lying all on repeat from both sides.

I don’t give a shit about the left, and who did what with the dossier. We can and should get to that and any number of other things we will find out in a second.

I just want to make America great again.

ETA- Edits cause phone is dum
 
Last edited:
Serious question for @Poccington, @Salt USMC, and others:

Which action of the Trump campaign or its surrogates do you all find so offensive? I think the crux of the argument is “Team Trump” leveraged foreign actors and information in an effort to influence the election.

Is that correct or is there more?

Offensive?

In terms of my interest in the whole matter, I genuinely find the whole Russian interference and the subsequent Mueller investigation to be really interesting, both the scale of it and the lengths the Russians went to in an attempt to insert themselves inside American politics. It's wild to watch it play out in real time.

As for the Trump Campaign, two constants of the Mueller investigation have been that during the Russian interference, Trump Campaign officials and advisors were in contact with both Kremlin linked Russians and a Russian cutout (Wikileaks) and those same officials and advisors, when questioned about those contacts, have repeatedly lied about it.

In terms of what I think they did, I really don't know. I find it hard to believe that there was a giant quid pro quo setup because it would be absolutely staggering if it did but who knows? All I do know is that I enjoy talking about the whole thing with folks on here, although I understand the whole thing is a far more serious affair for you guys over there.
 
I do appreciate the replies. I think the final Mueller report will be interesting and the subsequent declassification of both SIGINT and HUMINT holdings after the release.
 
Another great piece by former US Attorney Andrew McCarthy:

The rationale for the Trump-Russia investigation — namely, the notion that the Trump campaign had “coordinated” in the Kremlin’s cyber-espionage operation to meddle in the 2016 campaign — has been nothing more than a suspicion harbored by political, law-enforcement, and intelligence officials who loathed Donald Trump. That there may be a thousand good reasons to dislike Donald Trump is irrelevant, for we are talking about investigations, not politics. Investigative suspicions must be rooted in fact, not contempt.

Not only was the suggestion of a Trump-Russia conspiracy not founded on fact. The officials calling the shots had reason to know that the premise was factually false. In truth, there was no evidence of Trump-campaign complicity in Russian espionage — nothing but the Clinton-campaign generated, unverified Steele dossier. The months-in-the-making Stone indictment is just the latest proof of that.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019...sia-conspiracy/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
 
I feel like this guy hasn't even read the indictment.

What was the articulable suspicion that a crime was committed by Trump or members of his campaign to initiate the SC investigation?

Many cite the CI investigation however the DOJ doesn’t allow SC’s to conduct intelligence operations and the Trump campaign was never in possession of classified information.
 
I think there are some good points in here but I strongly disagree with his suggestion. I believe all participants in our legal process should simply go where the evidence takes them. Jury nullification seems to subvert that process. Our system is far from perfect but, when not prejudiced, seems pretty darn good.

https://www.americanthinker.com/art...traged_americans_can_beat_robert_mueller.html
a full-scale FBI SWAT team of 29 members, replete with long weapons, body armor, and even a flash-bang grenade or two. The arrest took place at "zero dark thirty" or 5:30 A.M. Nevertheless, a CNN crew was on hand to film the whole thing.

The fact that a CNN crew was allowed to film Stone's arrest is evidence that nobody believed he was dangerous. Indeed, he was not: he is 66-year-old white-collar suspect with no prior history of violence, who didn't even have weapons in his house. Even the judge processing Stone's arraignment implicitly accepted that Stone was not dangerous; he allowed Stone to be released on a $250,000 surety bond.

Paul Manafort got it much worse. Manafort not only was subjected to the same kind of pre-dawn raid as Stone, but also denied bail and held in solitary confinement – before his trial.


All suspects are, legally, presumed innocent until they have been duly convicted. The government has a positive duty to treat all suspects as decently as possible until their convictions. Tactics such as the ones employed on Stone and Manafort are an outrage and instances of government tyranny.
 
"DOJ doesn’t allow SC’s to conduct intelligence operations"

What is SC's?

Special Counsel and their mandate is very clear: investigate crime as if a US Attorney. Counterintelligence is not a crime fighting tool but rather an intelligence operation. In my opinion, the DOJ used CI authorities in hopes to bring espionage charges against Team Trump, who didn’t get access to defense information until after 8 Nov but FISA warrants were approved well into 2017. Last person to chop one the Page FISA was Dep Attorney General, who currently controls Mueller and will resign upon Barr’s confirmation.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/part-600
§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

§ 600.6 Powers and authority.
Subject to the limitations in the following paragraphs, the Special Counsel shall exercise, within the scope of his or her jurisdiction, the full power and independent authority to exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney.
 
What was the articulable suspicion that a crime was committed by Trump or members of his campaign to initiate the SC investigation?

Many cite the CI investigation however the DOJ doesn’t allow SC’s to conduct intelligence operations and the Trump campaign was never in possession of classified information.
Let me try to understand what you're talking about here: are you saying that this is ultimately a CI matter, and is not within the special counsel's remit?

Because section (b)(i) of the SC's appointment letter specifically says "[A]ny links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign" as well as any other matters within the scope of 28 CFR 600.4(a), which includes a number of other offenses including perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and a few other things.

If I'm off base, let me know.
 
Let me try to understand what you're talking about here: are you saying that this is ultimately a CI matter, and is not within the special counsel's remit?

Because section (b)(i) of the SC's appointment letter specifically says "[A]ny links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign" as well as any other matters within the scope of 28 CFR 600.4(a), which includes a number of other offenses including perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and a few other things.

If I'm off base, let me know.

Yes, I exactly. 28 CFR 600.4(a) also states, the sentence right before the portion you posted, “The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated.”

Please cite “the specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated” (that means the crime committed) AND the conflict which the DOJ could not resolve on its own (ref 28 CFR 600.1 (a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances;

US Attorneys all over the US could easily investigate “perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and a few other things.” since the do that everyday.

Additionally, please post the secondary letter the DAG gave to Mueller. Oh, sorry, it’s heavily redacted. Criminal case outside espionage classified?

This is the text of the appointment of Starr. Note the crime referenced therein:

Upon consideration of the application of the attorney general pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 592 (c)(1)(A) for the appointment of an independent counsel with authority to exercise all the power, authority and obligations set forth in 28 U.S.C. Section 594, to investigate whether any individuals or entities have committed a violation of federal criminal law, other than a Class B or C misdemeanor or infraction, relating in any way to James B. McDougal's, President William Jefferson Clinton's, or Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton's relationships with Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan Assn., Whitewater Development Corp., or Capital Management Services Inc.; it is:

ORDERED by the court in accordance with the authority vested in it by 28 U.S.C. Section 593 (b) that Kenneth W. Starr, Esquire, of the District of Columbia bar, with offices at Kirkland and Ellis, 655-15th St., NW, Washington, D.C., 20005, be and he is hereby appointed independent counsel with full power, independent authority, and jurisdiction to investigate to the maximum extent authorized by the Independent Counsel Reauthorization Act of 1994 whether any individuals or entities have committed a violation of any federal criminal law, other than a Class B or C misdemeanor or infraction, relating in any way to James B. McDougal's, President William Jefferson Clinton's, or Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton's relationships with Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan Assn., Whitewater Development Corp., or Capital Management Services Inc.

This is Mueller’s appointment letter:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download
Additional scope:

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000162-8b23-d039-a976-dfe7110d0001
This is the investigation that Comey ref’d in his HPSCI testimony cited in the appointment letter:

Speaking before the House Intelligence Committee, Comey said that he had been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm the investigation publicly “in an extraordinary step” since the agency does not typically do so with open investigations.

“I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part out our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government, and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts,” he said.


What specifically is the CRIME that Mueller is investigating? Remember, Mueller is using tax dollars and We The People have no idea what the hell his ultimate end goal.

Well done Comrades Rosenstein and Mueller. The Party will be proud.
 
Last edited:
@lindy , So, what is the end state here? We have (presumably) a legal team working for the president that is probably more qualified than you are, with more information than you have, and yet this investigation continues. Why? Why is it years and $X deep? If it’s as simple as you, a guy, on the internet posting some links and verbiage to what appears to be a super clear case that this really is just a Democrat led witch hunt- why are we here or even having this conversation.


As a follow on- what should we do about the convictions and sentences already rendered? Should those be null and void because they’re essentislly fruit of the poison tree? If they weren’t asked about this quite obviously erroneous investigation, then they wouldn’t have had to lie.

None of this logically follows for me. I’d rather just wait and see what the end state is and go from there.
 
@lindy , So, what is the end state here? We have (presumably) a legal team working for the president that is probably more qualified than you are, with more information than you have, and yet this investigation continues. Why? Why is it years and $X deep? If it’s as simple as you, a guy, on the internet posting some links and verbiage to what appears to be a super clear case that this really is just a Democrat led witch hunt- why are we here or even having this conversation.


As a follow on- what should we do about the convictions and sentences already rendered? Should those be null and void because they’re essentislly fruit of the poison tree? If they weren’t asked about this quite obviously erroneous investigation, then they wouldn’t have had to lie.

None of this logically follows for me. I’d rather just wait and see what the end state is and go from there.

I really wish We knew what the desired end state is. I thought the goal was to identify the perpetrators of that enabled foreign powers to sow discord in our electoral process but it seems the goal is to try to validate the information in the Steele Dossier and find crimes committed by Trump associates.

I think the investigation will wrap up soon with a lot of allegations and the various House committees will take up the charge until the President is impeached (conviction dependent on any high crimes and misdemeanors discovered). I know Schiff and Cummings have unti mid-Feb to present their outlines to Pelosi.

Regarding the indictments and convictions, let’s look at those. How many were ref’d in the Dossier? Where are the indictments and convictions of America for conspiracy to defraud the US?

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2018/interactive_mueller-indictments-russia-cohen-manafort/
Next, let’s look at the 12 GRU officers indicted. Curious how the indictment states details about the hacking of servers of Clinton Campaign, the DNC, and the DCCC. Press reporting and Congressional testimony indicates the FBI never received the servers. Another curious point the the indictment was moved away from prosecutors over to the National Security Division.

https://www.scribd.com/document/383803281/Baghdad-Bob-Mueller-Indictment
If you don’t like my posts in this thread, delete them. I think I’m following the TOS of the site and have been staying on topic but you are the Administrator with the power. I’m just happy to be here! I have yet to be warned that I’m out of line. I believe I’ve posted a different point of view and hopefully some of those points cause readers to research more. I think there is some strange stuff going on here and I think it should be a topic of conversation; no different than a pass interference call that kept the Saints fro the Super Bowl. I’m not a referee, pro ball player, or affiliated with a team but I can find the rules, grab clips from other games, etc to form an opinion.

Alinsky would commend the ridicule.
 
All t
I really wish We knew what the desired end state is. I thought the goal was to identify the perpetrators of that enabled foreign powers to sow discord in our electoral process...

Alinsky would commend the ridicule.
So, you and I agree on more than we disagree.

I want to find out who wants to harm America, and that might be Flynn, Hillary, or other. Depending on how we judge malicious intent or well meaning procedural violation, tjosecandwers could be different.

I’ll take the Alinsky allusion for a compliment- he and I share many traits, save maybe his penchant for anarchy in favor of his activism.

I will say this, for your benefit because you werent real active during some of the flail on the board- you’re free to post whatever you want and go as hard as you like. Me as a person and me as an admin are not the same rule set; you haven’t done anything wrong and I appreciate your passion. I don’t even delete my own posts (or edit them) when I’m found to be wrong and that happens often. It’s important that you see things in context without revising at least as far as I see it. This board isn’t an echo chamber and as a staff, we value that as long as you adhere to the moral fiber of the board, which you do.

But your opinion is open to critique and skepticism- sometimes sharp in nature- when you make it public.

Doesn’t mean I’m right; doesn’t mean you’re wrong. But I want to say thanks because you’re posting good, sourced material and you have a cogent point.

I just don’t agree with you. 😎
 
@amlove21

I’m not at all opposed to disagreement with my viewpoint, facts, or conclusions drawn: I think it’s actually helpful. I doubt you remember but we had nearly the same exchange in 2016 and I took a hiatus because of the combined actions of you and the banned admin. My position is still the same as back then:

weapons free on my thoughts or ideas but any Admin or Mod that is reduced to personal ridicule or attacks because they are unable to offer a well-sourced counterpoint should not, in my opinion, be moderating users’ posts.

I try to present fact-based coherent arguments when I’m not being a smart ass. I have been known to fail at both.

I think we’re good.
 
Open questions regarding Roger Stones indictment:

Per Steele Dossier, Carter Page and Paul Manafort were working with the Russian intelligence services to create a back channel to facilitate exchange of Democrat hacked material and Cohen went to Prague to pay for the services/materials.

Why did Stone need to contact Assange via 3rd party to get info about the multiple dumps of the emails?

The FBI and DOJ were so convinced by the Dossier that it key in getting the FISA on Page.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/carter-page-fisa-applications-fbi-steele-dossier/
Investigators had '50/50' chance of securing FISA warrant for Trump aide without dossier: testimony


It should be illegal for EVERYONE to lie to Federal agents, Congress, and tamper with witnesses...not just Republicans.
 
@amlove21

I’m not at all opposed to disagreement with my viewpoint, facts, or conclusions drawn: I think it’s actually helpful. I doubt you remember but we had nearly the same exchange in 2016 and I took a hiatus because of the combined actions of you and the banned admin. My position is still the same as back then:

weapons free on my thoughts or ideas but any Admin or Mod that is reduced to personal ridicule or attacks because they are unable to offer a well-sourced counterpoint should not, in my opinion, be moderating users’ posts.

I try to present fact-based coherent arguments when I’m not being a smart ass. I have been known to fail at both.

I think we’re good.
Yep.
 
Back
Top