Friday, 16 February 2018

Russians Indicted

quote [ The indictment says that the defendants allegedly, by early to mid 2016, were "supporting the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump." ]

Can't wait for more "No one has proof the Russians were involved... even though every intelligence agency has said they did and who cares, it doesn't matter any way."
[SFW] [politics] [+4 Interesting]
[by conception@6:50pmGMT]

Comments

Taxman said @ 8:15pm GMT on 16th Feb [Score:2 Good]
Ankylosaur said @ 6:56pm GMT on 16th Feb [Score:1 Funny]
These are just Crisis Russians™ hired for the false flag op.
norok said @ 10:35pm GMT on 16th Feb [Score:1 Good]
It's been a long road bbqkink but it's finally here. Are you satisfied?
bbqkink said[2] @ 10:54pm GMT on 16th Feb
Here we are again...are you ready to admit that Russians meddled in our election?

This is nothing but page one of this "Story Indictment"

In the beginning there were Russians (12 of them) It simply ends any reasonable claim of "Which Hunt" "Fake News" or any other bumper sticker you can think up to deny that this happened in the first place.

The other things it tells us that are important is that they are indeed going to bring charges for campaine law....we didn't know for sure until today. The other thing and this should scare Trumps staff to death they have DEEP piles of documents and seem to have read them all.

The bigger news is about the Two new Witness working for team USA witnesses both pleading guilty and having their "Queen for a Day" talks behind them. That leaves the total 4 guilty pleas 12 more indictments bringing that total to 13

You don't get a pass unless they get a bigger fish...remember this was the first page.

norok said @ 11:12pm GMT on 16th Feb
Well now, a lawyer once told me he could indict a ham sandwich...

I'm kidding. Yea it seems to be the consensus that the Russians did meddle.

Is it news to you that in the report it cites that they also ran pro-Bernie campaigns? Now, I'm not going to say that Bernie was a pro-Russian agent (even though he took his honeymoon to the Soviet Union many years before Trump went). It seems like a unilateral anti-Hillary campaign.

I think this is all you are going to get.
bbqkink said @ 11:40pm GMT on 16th Feb
This all seems to stem out of a pure anti Hillary hate for the role she played in the Moscow elections when she was Sec. State it turned pro Trump later. All we are going to get? are you kidding? This page one on a 80 page report.
norok said @ 11:54pm GMT on 16th Feb
Don't forget the Ukranian elections. My armchair geopolitical theory is that that really pissed Moscow off the most.
bbqkink said @ 1:23am GMT on 17th Feb
Oh this has been on all over the world for years.
Taxman said[1] @ 12:12am GMT on 17th Feb
Most underrated statement in the whole article:

“Three defendants are charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud, and five defendants are charged with aggravated identity theft.”

norok said @ 12:36am GMT on 17th Feb
Why is it underrated?
Taxman said @ 12:53am GMT on 17th Feb [Score:1 Underrated]
The doors it opens, the agencies that can get involved, and the reach (since it's effectively international).

This account touches that account, which touches that account, which touches that account...

kylemcbitch said @ 9:42am GMT on 18th Feb
Let me spell it out.

Pathway to perp walking Trump:

These Russian agents indicate an active and criminally hostile foreign action on our soil.

These Russians tie to the Kremlin.

Know who else you can tie to the Kremlin? Natalia Veselnitskaya.

Who can you tie to her? Paul Manafort.

So here's the jig: If Manafort knew anything about this push by Russia, he goes down for willful collusion, treason, and conspiracy against the united states. If he told anyone else about it.... they do too. Donald Jr willingly met with her, and now the context of that meeting is extremely important to national security.

You may not even need congress for this one. I suspect in the next month or two we are going to see an attempt at a pardon for Manafort or some serious shit going down.
hellboy said @ 12:46am GMT on 17th Feb
Mueller has indicted Manafort, cut plea deals with Papadopolous and Flynn, and is allegedly in the middle of cutting another with Gates. Plus Bannon spent 20 hours answering questions this week, and we haven't heard from the money laundering investigation yet. I think you're as wrong about this being over as you were about it going nowhere.
bbqkink said @ 1:25am GMT on 17th Feb
"the money laundering investigation"

The original sin. can't wait.
hellboy said @ 2:01am GMT on 17th Feb
This could all still turn out to fizzle like Fitzmas did, so I'm not getting my hopes up, but it's clear that what's being investigated is probably much bigger than blowing the cover of a covert agent. I just hope it doesn't end up either with "we know something fishy probably went on but we can't make a strong enough case so oh well" or "we know some serious bad shit went on, so bad that it would destroy the country if it got out, so we need to hush it all up". There's enough smoke that there's almost certainly a fire, and a pretty bad one, and anything less than a proper housecleaning is just going to encourage something worse to happen.
bbqkink said[1] @ 3:09am GMT on 17th Feb
Just like Bannon said.

"Their path to [expletive] Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr. and Jared Kushner." For good measure he added, "It's as plain as a hair on your face."

The rumor is they are about to revoke Manafort's bail Shits about to hit the fan.


Mueller levels new claim of bank fraud against Manafort

Prosecutors say they've found 'additional criminal conduct' by the former Trump campaign chairman.
bbqkink said @ 7:06pm GMT on 17th Feb
robotroadkill said @ 4:41am GMT on 17th Feb
The pro-Bernie stuff has been known for a while now.The so-called 'bernie bros' were meant to split the democratic party by pitting original Bernie supporters against Clintonites and vice versa.
robotroadkill said @ 4:44am GMT on 17th Feb
In other words, they weren't a strategy towards actually supporting Bernie, just hurting Hillary.
bbqkink said @ 12:44am GMT on 18th Feb
Did the same with Stein in the general, any vote they could pull away From Clinton. I thought it was O that Putin hated guess it was them as a group.
Ussmak said @ 9:47pm GMT on 18th Feb
Sounds to me like we owe this Russian troll farm a debt of gratitude.

Taxman said @ 10:52pm GMT on 18th Feb [Score:1 Insightful]
Hey, remember when we as a nation could all agree Russia was the enemy? Good times.
Ussmak said @ 2:57am GMT on 19th Feb
Remember when liberals said that was Anti-American and that overtly demonizing Russia was a sign of Republican brainwashing?
Taxman said @ 2:59am GMT on 19th Feb
Source?
Ussmak said @ 12:31pm GMT on 19th Feb
https://mises.org/library/evolution-anti-anti-communist

If you want earlier, you're gonna have to go to the library and look up some microfiche.
Taxman said @ 1:09pm GMT on 19th Feb
So this one guy who had a republican to liberal awakening represents all liberal thought, but Barack Obama the latest liberal president who imposed sanctions on Russia (and liberals cheered him on) doesn’t. Seems legit. ;-)
Ussmak said @ 1:14am GMT on 20th Feb
Yes. Thank you for understanding the concept of ideological drift.
Taxman said @ 1:35am GMT on 20th Feb
I think you found one guy.

Can you show me a leader (other than the current one. Zing!) that wants to be friends with the country that we were in a cold war with for 40+ years?
Ussmak said @ 12:34pm GMT on 22nd Feb
Bill Clinton donating money to Boris Yeltsin's campaign isn't good enough?
Taxman said @ 6:05pm GMT on 22nd Feb
So pre-Putin?
hellboy said @ 6:56pm GMT on 16th Feb
So much for "but there's no evidence of Russian interference in the election".
Seneki said @ 10:51pm GMT on 16th Feb
In before "fake news!"...
bbqkink said @ 10:58pm GMT on 16th Feb
This was not in before or fake news so what is yo point?
arrowhen said @ 1:23am GMT on 17th Feb [Score:1 Informative]
"In before X, often abbreviated as “in b4,” is an expression commonly used on discussion forums and imageboards to forecast an anticipated response or a predictable outcome within a given thread."

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/inb4--2
bbqkink said @ 1:27am GMT on 17th Feb
Sometimes my age and non presence in social media really shows.
arrowhen said @ 2:52am GMT on 17th Feb
It's a big internet, no one's gonna get all the references.

I mostly know it from video game and RPG forums I hung out on in the late 90s/early 2000s. It was usually something like "in before the lock" or "in before the ban" as a snarky way of saying "this post violates the forum rules and you're going to get in trouble." And it was almost always spelled "in before" rather than "in b4", as the boards I spent time on typically had either rules or local cultural taboos against "leetspeak".
Ussmak said @ 9:46pm GMT on 18th Feb
It's a 4chan meme.

Just admit you go on 4chan.
Taxman said @ 11:50pm GMT on 16th Feb
He’s joking. They’re saying they posted before the trolls start calling it fake news.
bbqkink said @ 1:28am GMT on 17th Feb
Thanks.
Seneki said @ 11:46pm GMT on 16th Feb
Just being silly. I need coffee...
Taxman said @ 11:49pm GMT on 16th Feb
Still working on that reply feature? ;-)
bbqkink said @ 3:28am GMT on 17th Feb
Preet Bharara trolls Trump over indictments: 'How about some sanctions now?'
Fish said @ 6:24am GMT on 17th Feb [Score:-2]
filtered comment under your threshold
bbqkink said @ 5:16pm GMT on 17th Feb [Score:-1 Funsightful]
filtered comment under your threshold
Fish said @ 7:16pm GMT on 17th Feb [Score:-2 Troll]
filtered comment under your threshold
bbqkink said @ 3:48am GMT on 17th Feb
There are four important tracks to follow in the Trump-Russia story. First, we must determine whether there is credible evidence for the underlying premise that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Trump win. Second, we must figure out whether Trump or people around him worked with the Russians to try to win the election. Next, we must scrutinize the evidence to understand whether Trump and his associates have sought to obstruct justice by impeding a federal investigation into whether Trump and Russia colluded. A fourth track concerns whether Republican leaders are now engaged in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice through their intense and ongoing efforts to discredit Mueller’s probe.

https://theintercept.com/2018/02/16/trump-russia-election-hacking-investigation/
BUGGERLUGS123 said @ 11:49am GMT on 17th Feb
So that's all four then........ BLATANTLY FRACKING OBVIOUS ISN'T IT!
Fish said @ 6:28am GMT on 17th Feb [Score:-3 Troll]
filtered comment under your threshold
Taxman said[1] @ 12:06pm GMT on 17th Feb
Fish said @ 3:47pm GMT on 17th Feb [Score:-4 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
Taxman said @ 5:01pm GMT on 17th Feb [Score:-3]
filtered comment under your threshold
Seneki said @ 5:16am GMT on 17th Feb
yes ;P
bbqkink said @ 1:22am GMT on 18th Feb
This group wasted a lot of money released this a day before Rosenstein virtually made himself bulletproof.

Tea Party group targets Rosenstein in new attack ad
bbqkink said @ 6:28am GMT on 18th Feb
Taxman said[1] @ 1:04pm GMT on 18th Feb
So, arguably, there is no time limit on addendums. If something came up on your top secret clearance (for example) that you didn’t disclose, the investigating agency would approach you directly about it. You could deny it, amend your submission, or ask for time to “get the answers”. No matter what choice you make, a note is made about how the information did not match up. If the mismatch is a crime, the investigation stops there, clearance revoked. If the information is in a grey area, or would require deeper investigation by, I don’t know, a federal financial investigative agency. Then they would make you sign, one way or another, that this information is about you or it’s not. The important part being that signature admitting “this information we found is about you, correct?”.

On a side note it would be terrible, just awful, if you were ever in court and the prosecution had a signed document stating you were involved in potential crime. I think the AUSA’s call it a ‘slam dunk’. Them and their crazy lingo.

So anyways, the only reason you would need to be worried about your job is if your manager, director, or boss was concerned about these failures to disclose (they’re being reported to him/her). Oh, or if that federal investigative agency got involved, that would probably not be a good sign at all.

“The Internal Revenue Service and Justice Department have issued subpoenas to lenders and investors in real estate projects managed by Kushner’s family, Bloomberg reported Thursday, seeking information from people who lent money for Kushner Cos. projects in New York and New Jersey. According to Bloomberg, that likely stems from a separate investigation than the ongoing FBI probe into possible ties between Russia and Trump’s team.“

Come to think of it, it would be really terrible if you linked yourself (via disclosure) to something you would prefer not to be linked to at a later date.
BUGGERLUGS123 said @ 3:27pm GMT on 18th Feb
A shed load of LLC companies with $M sums in them isn't there? I can see why trump didn't disclose shit now, shame Muller has by now scrutinized it into the next millennia.

All of them seem to be crooks don't they! Who'd thought it????

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.



Posts of Import
Karma
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings
ScoobySnacks
HoZay
Paracetamol
lilmookieesquire
Ankylosaur