TrumPutinGate

[Mick]

More like Clinton campaign hired a law firm to hire foreign intelligence lackey to get unsubstantiated dirt from top Russian intelligence officials. Basically, they paid for a fairy tale.

The Clinton campaign then shared with the FBI who used the unsubstantiated dossier to spy on Trump and team and eventually unmask names. Then leak it to select media groups in a smear attempt.

This is a huge scandal. Another one at the feet of the morally bankrupt democrats and Clinton machine.

Your timeline is off; therefore, your analysis is s**t.

 

[hog88]

Long-standing protocol dictates that the FBI and Justice Department operate free of political influence or meddling from the White House. That's one reason that the FBI director serves a 10-year term and does not turn over the reins as presidential administrations come and go. It also means that presidents are not supposed to supervise, initiate or stop law enforcement investigations.

But a POTUS is well within his rights to instruct the AG to lift a gag order from a previous administration.

 

[DC_Vol]

Your timeline is off; therefore, your analysis is s**t.

Which part?

 

[hog88]

Which part?

The part he disagrees with of course.

 

[Mick]

More like Clinton campaign hired a law firm to hire foreign intelligence lackey to get unsubstantiated dirt from top Russian intelligence officials. Basically, they paid for a fairy tale.

The Clinton campaign then shared with the FBI who used the unsubstantiated dossier to spy on Trump and team and eventually unmask names. Then leak it to select media groups in a smear attempt.

This is a huge scandal. Another one at the feet of the morally bankrupt democrats and Clinton machine.

You saying that the FBI used the Dossier to get Fisa warrants?

 

[hog88]

You saying that the FBI used the Dossier to get Fisa warrants?

That would be nice to know if they did or didn’t.

 

[DC_Vol]

You saying that the FBI used the Dossier to get Fisa warrants?

yes, that is what I'm saying. Here's one example.

FBI used dossier allegations to bolster Trump-Russia investigation - CNNPolitics

 

[DC_Vol]

A good rundown:

10 Things Reporters Need To Understand About The Steele Dossier

 

[volinbham]

What we know is that WikiLeaks obtained stolen emails. Team Trump asked for help from WikiLeaks and Russia. WikiLeaks released emails.

DNC and HC paid for opposition research from Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS hires Steele. Steele (former spy of our ally)does Research. Research was given to the FBI.

Here is what I think; When Steele was trying give the information to the DNC, Hillary, or whoever, it was so scandalous no one wanted to touch it (take ownership). Seriously how would the DNC or Hillary use such unconfirmed information? Do like the Late night shows and make pee pee jokes at her rallies?

Again I'll ask if you read the article. Team Trump asked for help from Assange through Cambridge Analytica. Assange said no. His release of the emails was not at the behest of Team Trump and I believe his release or indication he would release them came prior to this request. Nothing in the article says Cambridge asked the Russians for information. The only thing I could possibly point to is the failed Trump Jr. meeting and that was some one approaching them (not Team Trump asking for info from the Russians) and it was bogus.

Team Clinton paid for collection of information to use in the election and part of the information was sourced directly from Russian govt officials (see dossier for details on sources). Unlike the Team Trump efforts Team Clinton actually received information collected by a foreign intelligence agent BUT ALSO information provided by the Russian government.

So Trump got no info and so far as I can tell there's no proof they even asked for info from Russia. Meanwhile Team Clinton did receive information that came directly from the Russian government.

Like I said, if Trump is guilty then Clinton is guilty and actually is more directly linked to receiving Russian government generated information for use in the election.

I think they're both shady as hell but you can claim one is okay and the other is wrong.

 

[volinbham]

Here's the thing - the intel agencies all agree that Russia was trying to undermine our democracy. If you look at the social media campaign they played both sides and are using our divisive nature to drive the wedge deeper and undermine faith in our system.

It's naive to think they only wanted to hurt one candidate. They may have preferred Trump but they wanted a severely damaged Trump.

Both the GOP and the Dems are playing the useful idiot role by saying it was only one side that was helped/hurt. Putin is laughing his ass off at this whole situation - it is exactly what he wanted. Trump was never intended to be his puppet (sorry Volprof).

Our only hope is the Mueller is actually digging into Russian influence efforts regardless of party.

 

[Mick]

That would be nice to know if they did or didn’t.

yes, that is what I'm saying. Here's one example.

FBI used dossier allegations to bolster Trump-Russia investigation - CNNPolitics

I see where you are coming from.
In June 2016, after the Democratic National Committee had been hacked and its emails began to be published online by Wikileaks, Fusion GPS retained Christopher Steele, a private British corporate intelligence investigator and former MI-6 agent, to research any Russian connections to Trump.

So almost as soon as Fusion Gps hired Steele, Steele started giving unsubstantiated information to the campaign, DNC, or someone, and they gave it to the FBI who had to substantiate some of the claims that would give the fisa court cause to provide a warrant.
I could buy that but the DNC/HC never disseminated any information in the dossier to the media prior to the election.

 

[Mick]

Here's the thing - the intel agencies all agree that Russia was trying to undermine our democracy. If you look at the social media campaign they played both sides and are using our divisive nature to drive the wedge deeper and undermine faith in our system.

It's naive to think they only wanted to hurt one candidate. They may have preferred Trump but they wanted a severely damaged Trump.

Both the GOP and the Dems are playing the useful idiot role by saying it was only one side that was helped/hurt. Putin is laughing his ass off at this whole situation - it is exactly what he wanted. Trump was never intended to be his puppet (sorry Volprof).

Our only hope is the Mueller is actually digging into Russian influence efforts regardless of party.

They wanted Trump not Hillary. There was a winner and a loser during the election and you would be hard pressed to point to something that the Russians did that hurt Trump. Numerous undisclosed meetings with Russian actors that have come to light. And every time someone posts some new information about this investigation you give a "but Hillary" trying to say they both are "equal or what Hillary did was worse. It's what you do.

Its actually funny you think since Assange said "no" that it makes everything about the contact OK. It don't. Team Trump was never interested in actually obtaining stolen emails because there is absolutely nothing they could have done with them except leak it to oh lets say WikiLeaks. Breitbart couldn't even touch them. Yet you still want to equate working with a hostile adversary with working with an ally. Collusion with an ally is called cooperation. Cooperation with a hostile actor is called Collusion. And in order to influence or try to influence an election with unverified information, that information would have to be made public which nothing in the Dossier was. Not even the FBI hinted that this thing existed.

 

[armchair]

Here's the thing - the intel agencies all agree that Russia was trying to undermine our democracy. If you look at the social media campaign they played both sides and are using our divisive nature to drive the wedge deeper and undermine faith in our system.

It's naive to think they only wanted to hurt one candidate. They may have preferred Trump but they wanted a severely damaged Trump.

Both the GOP and the Dems are playing the useful idiot role by saying it was only one side that was helped/hurt. Putin is laughing his ass off at this whole situation - it is exactly what he wanted. Trump was never intended to be his puppet (sorry Volprof).

Our only hope is the Mueller is actually digging into Russian influence efforts regardless of party.

played Trump during the campaign? They certainly would have wanted to get some sort of commitment to drop American sanctions on Russia imposed after Russia stole Crimea from Ukraine--and it is likely that Flynn and maybe, too, Sessions offered that concession immediately after the election. The Trumpsters were conniving with the Russians--we know that because there were multiple meetings with the Russian ambassador during the campaign and immediately after the election. Sessions met with him twice. Kushner met with him. Flynn spoke to him on the phone twice--and then lied about it. Flynn had been compromised by the Russians--so said the acting attorney general, and with good reason. We have Trump talking about Putin during the campaign, and after the election, like a lovesick teenager. It was DISGUSTING. He has not only never acknowledged that Russia hacked the election, he has MANY times tried to pretend that they didn't--and cast aspersions on our own intelligence agencies in the process. We know that Trump publicly asked the Russians to hack into our systems to find Clinton emails--what kind of American politician does that? It's treasonous behavior. We also know that Trump has done a lot of business with Russians; indeed, there is a strong suspicion that lots of dirty Russian money has been laundered in the United States via investments/purchases of Trump properties. We also know that the Trumpsters initially lied about their meeting with the Russian lawyer in Trump Tower. They said it was about child adoptions--and then changed their story. And let's not forget Trump campaign manager Manafort, a sleeze like Trump, and his many contacts with Russians and people connected to high-level Russians. And Carter Page--the Trump advisor (unofficial or otherwise), who has lived in Russia for years and is known to be very sympathetic to our enemy. To say there is a lot of smoke would be an understatement.

I'm convinced of one thing: Trump cares about his business more than anything--and it is clear that Russia money--including dirty Russian money-- has propped up his business for years. He wants that Russian money--and that is certainly one reason for his obsequiousness toward Putin. You don't want a U.S. president who is beholden to a sinister Russian dictator--but that's what we've got. There is no telling what Trump would have done for Putin by now had not all this Russian stuff come out. It's also pretty clear that, at a minimum, Kushner wanted some of that Russian money. He grossly overspent for an major office building in Manhattan, and his company is carrying a huge amount of debt on that property. He's been searching rather desperately for investors to relieve that debt burden. If you've got a dictator or enemy with leverage over your presidents and/or top U.S. officials, you have a problem.

There is no question that Putin wants to discredit our democracy and create rancor and chaos in our system--and between Donald Trump and the iconspiracy theorists/crazies on the far right, he has found the perfect idiots willing to undermine our own system of government.

 

[hog88]

They wanted Trump not Hillary. There was a winner and a loser during the election and you would be hard pressed to point to something that the Russians did that hurt Trump. Numerous undisclosed meetings with Russian actors that have come to light. And every time someone posts some new information about this investigation you give a "but Hillary" trying to say they both are "equal or what Hillary did was worse. It's what you do.

Its actually funny you think since Assange said "no" that it makes everything about the contact OK. It don't. Team Trump was never interested in actually obtaining stolen emails because there is absolutely nothing they could have done with them except leak it to oh lets say WikiLeaks. Breitbart couldn't even touch them. Yet you still want to equate working with a hostile adversary with working with an ally. Collusion with an ally is called cooperation. Cooperation with a hostile actor is called Collusion. And in order to influence or try to influence an election with unverified information, that information would have to be made public which nothing in the Dossier was. Not even the FBI hinted that this thing existed.

Numerous?

And no, there was nothing illegal or even inappropriate in the campaign asking Wiki about the emails. You seem to gloss over or forget that they were asking for information on the MISSING emails from her private server, the server that supposedly was never compromised. They weren't asking for the emails from the DNC or Podesta.

 

[theFallGuy]

played Trump during the campaign? They certainly would have wanted to get some sort of commitment to drop American sanctions on Russia imposed after Russia stole Crimea from Ukraine--and it is likely that Flynn and maybe, too, Sessions offered that concession immediately after the election. The Trumpsters were conniving with the Russians--we know that because there were multiple meetings with the Russian ambassador during the campaign and immediately after the election. Sessions met with him twice. Kushner met with him. Flynn spoke to him on the phone twice--and then lied about it. Flynn had been compromised by the Russians--so said the acting attorney general, and with good reason. We have Trump talking about Putin during the campaign, and after the election, like a lovesick teenager. It was DISGUSTING. He has not only never acknowledged that Russia hacked the election, he has MANY times tried to pretend that they didn't--and cast aspersions on our own intelligence agencies in the process. We know that Trump publicly asked the Russians to hack into our systems to find Clinton emails--what kind of American politician does that? It's treasonous behavior. We also know that Trump has done a lot of business with Russians; indeed, there is a strong suspicion that lots of dirty Russian money has been laundered in the United States via investments/purchases of Trump properties. We also know that the Trumpsters initially lied about their meeting with the Russian lawyer in Trump Tower. They said it was about child adoptions--and then changed their story. And let's not forget Trump campaign manager Manafort, a sleeze like Trump, and his many contacts with Russians and people connected to high-level Russians. And Carter Page--the Trump advisor (unofficial or otherwise), who has lived in Russia for years and is known to be very sympathetic to our enemy. To say there is a lot of smoke would be an understatement.

I'm convinced of one thing: Trump cares about his business more than anything--and it is clear that Russia money--including dirty Russian money-- has propped up his business for years. He wants that Russian money--and that is certainly one reason for his obsequiousness toward Putin. You don't want a U.S. president who is beholden to a sinister Russian dictator--but that's what we've got. There is no telling what Trump would have done for Putin by now had not all this Russian stuff come out. It's also pretty clear that, at a minimum, Kushner wanted some of that Russian money. He grossly overspent for an major office building in Manhattan, and his company is carrying a huge amount of debt on that property. He's been searching rather desperately for investors to relieve that debt burden. If you've got a dictator or enemy with leverage over your presidents and/or top U.S. officials, you have a problem.

There is no question that Putin wants to discredit our democracy and create rancor and chaos in our system--and between Donald Trump and the iconspiracy theorists/crazies on the far right, he has found the perfect idiots willing to undermine our own system of government.

there really is no hope for you.

 

[LouderVol]

They wanted Trump not Hillary. There was a winner and a loser during the election and you would be hard pressed to point to something that the Russians did that hurt Trump. Numerous undisclosed meetings with Russian actors that have come to light. And every time someone posts some new information about this investigation you give a "but Hillary" trying to say they both are "equal or what Hillary did was worse. It's what you do.

Its actually funny you think since Assange said "no" that it makes everything about the contact OK. It don't. Team Trump was never interested in actually obtaining stolen emails because there is absolutely nothing they could have done with them except leak it to oh lets say WikiLeaks. Breitbart couldn't even touch them. Yet you still want to equate working with a hostile adversary with working with an ally. Collusion with an ally is called cooperation. Cooperation with a hostile actor is called Collusion. And in order to influence or try to influence an election with unverified information, that information would have to be made public which nothing in the Dossier was. Not even the FBI hinted that this thing existed.

1. they ran FB adds, and colluded with intelligence. the exact same thing they did with Trump.
2. Funny how Russia became a "hostile" when they started working with the Republicans too.
3. dems got info from Russia, who just a sentence before was hostile, now they are an ally?
4. it didn't exist until the dems paid for it.

 

[Mick]

Numerous?

And no, there was nothing illegal or even inappropriate in the campaign asking Wiki about the emails. You seem to gloss over or forget that they were asking for information on the MISSING emails from her private server, the server that supposedly was never compromised. They weren't asking for the emails from the DNC or Podesta.

Yes numerous. You can google the list.

Nothing at all illegal or inappropriate about asking a hostile entity to "find" the missing private emails of a political opponent or "Russia if you're listening"? What do you think "find" means? Put adds on milk cartons or go out with a metal detector? They were asking WikiLeaks(a hostile actor) for help. Don't gloss over the big picture to emphasize that HC's server wasn't hacked; therefore, no foul.

I know you desperately want this to be some liberal conspiracy but much of the smoke has come from not disclosing those meetings with the Russians, lying about those meetings, and then it's leaked that they did meet and had contact with Russians and the propaganda arm of Putin. That is self inflicted.

 

[hog88]

Yes numerous. You can google the list.

Nothing at all illegal or inappropriate about asking a hostile entity to "find" the missing private emails of a political opponent or "Russia if you're listening"? What do you think "find" means? Put adds on milk cartons or go out with a metal detector? They were asking WikiLeaks(a hostile actor) for help. Don't gloss over the big picture to emphasize that HC's server wasn't hacked; therefore, no foul.

I know you desperately want this to be some liberal conspiracy but much of the smoke has come from not disclosing those meetings with the Russians, lying about those meetings, and then it's leaked that they did meet and had contact with Russians and the propaganda arm of Putin. That is self inflicted.

What were these "numerous" contacts, should be easy for you to list them.

Campaigns reach out to many different entities in doing there opo research and why do you consider Wikileaks a hostile actor? They are no friend of the US but I wouldn't list them as a hostile actor.

 

[DC_Vol]

I know you desperately want this to be some liberal conspiracy but much of the smoke has come from not disclosing those meetings with the Russians, lying about those meetings, and then it's leaked that they did meet and had contact with Russians and the propaganda arm of Putin. That is self inflicted.

It is a fairy tale drummed up by Democrats and supported by phoney claims that we now know were propped up by fiction paid for by Democrats and the Clinton campaign.

This is going to turn into a huge scandal for Democrats.

 

[DC_Vol]

Remember all the breathless reporting along with claims of treason when it was alleged that Trump was gathering info from foreign governments?

I'm curious why we don't see the same level of outrage now that is KNOWN the DNC did the same? Is Hillary a traitor?

Bring back VolProf!!!

 

[golfballs]

Uh oh.....

Leon Panetta: Intelligence Committee Needs to Look into Clinton/DNC Dossier Payment

 

[hog88]

Remember all the breathless reporting along with claims of treason when it was alleged that Trump was gathering info from foreign governments?

I'm curious why we don't see the same level of outrage now that is KNOWN the DNC did the same? Is Hillary a traitor?

Bring back VolProf!!!

He's here.

 

[DC_Vol]

He's here.

Which one is he?

 

[hog88]

Which one is he?

Outerbanks posts look familiar fairly often.

 

[Mick]

What were these "numerous" contacts, should be easy for you to list them.

Campaigns reach out to many different entities in doing there opo research and why do you consider Wikileaks a hostile actor? They are no friend of the US but I wouldn't list them as a hostile actor.

Not doing your own research is how you become a Democrat a wise one once said. I believe his name is hog.