Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-22-2017, 07:28 PM
skdo23 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,065

Trump associates may have coordinated with Russians, according to US officials


So do we get to say "go back to Russia" to conservatives now?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/22/politi...ans/index.html
  #2  
Old 03-22-2017, 07:32 PM
samclem is offline
Graphite is a great
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 26,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by skdo23 View Post
So do we get to say "go back to Russia" to conservatives now?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/22/politi...ans/index.html
Not that simple. Conservatives come in many distinct groups, as do liberals. Try to phrase your point more closely.
  #3  
Old 03-22-2017, 07:37 PM
skdo23 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
Not that simple. Conservatives come in many distinct groups, as do liberals. Try to phrase your point more closely.
Fair enough, I'm just tired of hearing it from the people who by and large elected Trump whenever I say that people shouldn't starve to death or be denied healthcare just because they're poor.
  #4  
Old 03-22-2017, 07:53 PM
Simplicio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 11,805
So 9 months after Trump's campaign chair resigned over his ties to Russia, 6 months after another advisor bragged about knowing in advance when Russian anti-Hillary info dumps were coming, a month after his National Security Director resigned over the same and a few weeks after his AG recused himself from the investigation for lying about a meeting with the Russian Ambassador during the campaign: "Trump Associates may have colluded with Russians" seems like kind of a weird headline.

And the article itself relies on unnamed FBI sources, but than just goes on to repeat a bunch of stuff that's already been stated by named officials in public. I wish the media was more resistant to this kind of baiting from Anonymous sources. Its pretty obvious someone at the FBI just wants to bump this story.

Last edited by Simplicio; 03-22-2017 at 07:57 PM.
  #5  
Old 03-23-2017, 05:25 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by skdo23 View Post
So do we get to say "go back to Russia" to conservatives now?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/22/politi...ans/index.html
No. From your cite:

Quote:
The FBI cannot yet prove that collusion took place,
  #6  
Old 03-24-2017, 09:29 AM
drad dog's Avatar
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 5,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
No. From your cite:

I don't get your point. That's what grand juries are for. This is early in the process isn't it?
  #7  
Old 03-24-2017, 09:58 AM
Chisquirrel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
No. From your cite:
Sure didn't stop "LOCK HER UP!", "GUILTY!", or "You'd be in jail."

Back to Russia.
  #8  
Old 03-24-2017, 10:02 AM
Superdude is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Fortress of Solidude
Posts: 10,375
Manafort is offering to testify.
  #9  
Old 03-24-2017, 10:02 AM
Johnny L.A. is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: NoWA
Posts: 60,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
Sure didn't stop "LOCK HER UP!", "GUILTY!", or "You'd be in jail."
That's because Clinton was guilty. Because she's a Socialist. Also, because she's Clinton. Obviously, she's guilty!

Trump and his team are Not-Clinton, therefore they are innocent. And even if they're not, whatever they do is OK because they're Not-Clinton, and certainly Not-Obama!
  #10  
Old 03-24-2017, 10:34 AM
Little Nemo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 80,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
I don't get your point. That's what grand juries are for. This is early in the process isn't it?
The depressing part is we went through all this before with the Reagan administration and Iran. The final result was that it was found that laws had been broken and crimes had been committed and a few low-level officials were convicted. But the process dragged out for years in arguments over minutae. There were plea bargains, immunity deals, classification of evidence, appeals, and presidential pardons and all the big fish got away.

I'm predicting the same thing is going to happen again. People in the Trump administration colluded with Russia. And we're going to spend the next few years arguing over it. And while we're arguing over what laws were broken and who broke them, Trump will be able to complete his term, get re-elected, and Pence will get elected to secede him. Eventually the people who were committing crimes in 2016 will leave office and then nobody will care anymore.
  #11  
Old 03-24-2017, 11:17 AM
Euphonious Polemic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Eventually the people who were committing crimes in 2016 will leave office and then nobody will care anymore.
I'm always impressed with how easily and quickly the talking heads can segue between:

"It's early in the investigation, so we don't know everything yet - stop asking questions"

To:

"It's all ancient history now, it's all in the past, nobody cares - stop asking questions."
  #12  
Old 03-24-2017, 12:20 PM
Ike Witt's Avatar
Ike Witt is online now
Friend of Cecil
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Lost in the mists of time
Posts: 14,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
I'm always impressed with how easily and quickly the talking heads can segue between:

"It's early in the investigation, so we don't know everything yet - stop asking questions"

To:

"It's all ancient history now, it's all in the past, nobody cares - stop asking questions."
The important thing to take away is to stop asking questions. After all, isn't ignorance bliss?
  #13  
Old 03-24-2017, 12:46 PM
Crybaby Boobie's Avatar
Crybaby Boobie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post

I'm predicting the same thing is going to happen again. People in the Trump administration colluded with Russia. And we're going to spend the next few years arguing over it. And while we're arguing over what laws were broken and who broke them, Trump will be able to complete his term, get re-elected, and Pence will get elected to secede him. Eventually the people who were committing crimes in 2016 will leave office and then nobody will care anymore.
I'm pretty sure I'm going to secede if that comes to pass.
  #14  
Old 03-24-2017, 12:54 PM
Simplicio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 11,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
The depressing part is we went through all this before with the Reagan administration and Iran. The final result was that it was found that laws had been broken and crimes had been committed and a few low-level officials were convicted. But the process dragged out for years in arguments over minutae.
Eh, Iran Contra investigations didn't start till late '86, so there's a lot more runway for the Trump investigation to have to run out. Plus, frankly, a lot of the people in this seem like they'd flip pretty fast for a deal, rather than take the risk of drawing things out. Carter Page hardly seems like the top to fall on his sword. (plus, there seems to be some reason to think Flynn's already flipped). Plus you'd think that at some point Republicans would figure they'd be better off just ripping off the bandage now, rather than let it draw out into the midterm election season.

That said, this stuff seems like it would be pretty hard to prosecute even if the gov't wasn't largely controlled by people studiously trying not to find out the details. Unless there's tape of someone making an explicit quid-pro-quo with the Russians, I'm not sure the investigation is going to get super far regardless of how much time they have.

Last edited by Simplicio; 03-24-2017 at 12:56 PM.
  #15  
Old 03-24-2017, 01:14 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,778
I don't need prosecutions, don't need some Republicans learning macrame at Club Fed. I need the truth. That will do nicely, thanks.
  #16  
Old 03-24-2017, 01:32 PM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,471
Everyone is volunteering to testify all of a sudden. Everyone except Michael Flynn. Possible that he has already testified?
  #17  
Old 03-25-2017, 04:00 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 11,883
A CNN correspondent and Harvard professor, Juliette Kayyem, is saying this on twitter:

Quote:
From my sources and what has been openly reported, it increasingly looks like #Flynn may have a deal with the FBI. #trumprussia
I look forward to hearing more.
  #18  
Old 03-25-2017, 04:14 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 85,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
I don't get your point. That's what grand juries are for. This is early in the process isn't it?
What's so confusing? You say it's early in the process. Wouldn't "go back to Russia" best something one would say at the end of the process (assuming the process produces a guilty verdict)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel
Sure didn't stop "LOCK HER UP!", "GUILTY!", or "You'd be in jail."

Back to Russia.
And those people were roundly called stupid here, for such actions. Is it your goal to be jus like them?

Last edited by John Mace; 03-25-2017 at 04:14 PM.
  #19  
Old 03-25-2017, 05:50 PM
Count Blucher is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Near Baroni&Kelly's Jail.
Posts: 13,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
A CNN correspondent and Harvard professor, Juliette Kayyem, is saying this on twitter:



I look forward to hearing more.
There were four tweets sent by the same person immediately after that, ALL OF WHICH are interesting:

Quote:

(1) First, as an attorney I want to make clear that, if this @CNN analyst's sources are correct, the #Russiagate scandal is blown wide open.

(2) The FBI flips witnesses, turning them into cooperating individuals, _only_ when they can help secure conviction of a bigger "target."

(3) Michael Flynn was the National Security Adviser for the President of the United States. The only _bigger_ target is Donald J. Trump.

(4) But Flynn also held a clandestine meeting with Russian ambassador/spy Sergey Kislyak and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner in December '16.
There's a little bit here for everybody.
  #20  
Old 03-26-2017, 02:30 AM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,778
Somebody in the Trump camp? Yeah, sure, but not him. Gonna have to see a lot of evidence to get over my conviction that nobody would be dumb enough to tell him a secret that fucking big. I doubt trust is something Putin has a lot of.

Saw a lot of stuff that I think was Russian stuff, but it was mostly centered on infuriating the Bernie camp against Hillary. Breathless headlines from orgs i never heard of and couldn't find anything about. Now, there were some that were legit, from real Bernie people who really did hate the horse she rode in upon, but others just suddenly appeared out of nowhere.

If the Russians had any major impact, that was it. So, it might boil down to: did they fan enough Hillary hate amongst the Dems that about a hundred thousand of them didn't go vote for her, in those five crucial states? Hundred thousand or so isn't that many out of millions, so, yeah, maybe.

And if they did, then the Russians actually did screw our election. It may actually have happened. Jesus Marimba, what a friggin' mess! Tom Clancy meets Steven King.
  #21  
Old 03-26-2017, 09:18 AM
Simplicio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 11,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
A CNN correspondent and Harvard professor, Juliette Kayyem, is saying this on twitter:
"
From my sources and what has been openly reported, it increasingly looks like #Flynn may have a deal with the FBI. #trumprussia"

I look forward to hearing more.
Eh, again, this is just someone putting widely spread rumors in the mouth of anonymous sources to make them seem more sexy and credible. If he were willing to say that Flynn actually did cut a deal it would be noteworthy, but the fact that Flynn *might* have is the opposite of news. Its second hand reporting of someone elses guesses.

Probably a lost cause, but I wish the major media outlets would knock this off.
  #22  
Old 03-26-2017, 12:25 PM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicio View Post
So 9 months after Trump's campaign chair resigned over his ties to Russia, 6 months after another advisor bragged about knowing in advance when Russian anti-Hillary info dumps were coming, a month after his National Security Director resigned over the same and a few weeks after his AG recused himself from the investigation for lying about a meeting with the Russian Ambassador during the campaign: "Trump Associates may have colluded with Russians" seems like kind of a weird headline.
Then there was the time Trump went on national TV and asked Russia to hack his opponent's e-mail.
My view is that the damage has been done whether or not the allegations are true. Russia has denied their involvement up to now. But if they wanted to, they could leak evidence of collusion. So they now OWN Trump by virtue of this issue.

And everyone is talking about the timing of Trumps pro-Russia positions on Ukraine but I think his anti-NATO positions are even more damning. And The Bannon Breitbart alt-right Paleo-conservative contingent is totally into Russia.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1...eitbart-Russia

https://townhall.com/columnists/patb...of-us-n1764094
  #23  
Old 03-26-2017, 01:55 PM
Simplicio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 11,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
Somebody in the Trump camp? Yeah, sure, but not him. Gonna have to see a lot of evidence to get over my conviction that nobody would be dumb enough to tell him a secret that fucking big. I doubt trust is something Putin has a lot of.
I don't think the Russians ever thought this scam would get this far. Part of the point was to make it pretty clear that Trump was their guy, to embarrass the US at how far an obviously compromised candidate could get.

Indeed, when the intel dossier was published a few months ago, a lot of the media focus was unsurprisingly on the story of Turmps supposed urine fetish. But most of the actual document was about how the Russians were getting increasingly freaked out about how well their plan was working, fearing that the end result would just be a pissed off President Hillary and an American Public ready for the Cold War part deux.
  #24  
Old 03-26-2017, 02:12 PM
Fuzzy_wuzzy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Hedonia View Post
Then there was the time Trump went on national TV and asked Russia to hack his opponent's e-mail.
My view is that the damage has been done whether or not the allegations are true. Russia has denied their involvement up to now. But if they wanted to, they could leak evidence of collusion. So they now OWN Trump by virtue of this issue.

And everyone is talking about the timing of Trumps pro-Russia positions on Ukraine but I think his anti-NATO positions are even more damning. And The Bannon Breitbart alt-right Paleo-conservative contingent is totally into Russia.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1...eitbart-Russia

https://townhall.com/columnists/patb...of-us-n1764094
Trump did no such thing.
  #25  
Old 03-26-2017, 02:25 PM
Superdude is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Fortress of Solidude
Posts: 10,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy_wuzzy View Post
Trump did no such thing.
How do you figure? It was widely reported at the time.

From that link:
Quote:
“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” the Republican nominee said at a news conference in Florida. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
  #26  
Old 03-26-2017, 02:34 PM
Sam Stone is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 27,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Hedonia View Post
And everyone is talking about the timing of Trumps pro-Russia positions on Ukraine but I think his anti-NATO positions are even more damning. And The Bannon Breitbart alt-right Paleo-conservative contingent is totally into Russia.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1...eitbart-Russia

https://townhall.com/columnists/patb...of-us-n1764094
That seems a bit like confirmation bias. Trump's 'anti-NATO' position is better described as browbeating NATO into increasing their defense spending. That's not in Putin's interest. And Trump has been a huge proponent of fracking and more oil drilling, which affects Russia's bottom line directly. Putin also can't be thrilled with Trump's plan to heavily invest in expanding the U.S. military, nor can he be particularly happy with Trump's strong Israel positions or the apparent shift towards a more aggressive policy towards Iran,

For every thing Trump has said or done that would seem to benefit Russia, there are multipke others that are a direct threat to Russian interests. So it's very hard to see why Putin would want Trump over Hillary, whose state department watched fecklessly as Russia gained territory and power around the world.
  #27  
Old 03-26-2017, 02:39 PM
Johnny L.A. is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: NoWA
Posts: 60,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy_wuzzy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Hedonia View Post
Then there was the time Trump went on national TV and asked Russia to hack his opponent's e-mail.
Trump did no such thing.
'Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.'
  #28  
Old 03-26-2017, 03:41 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,778
Actually, I think that was sheer sarcasm, which is hard to parse when the speaker has no actual sense of humor or irony.
  #29  
Old 03-26-2017, 03:45 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
That seems a bit like confirmation bias. Trump's 'anti-NATO' position is better described as browbeating NATO into increasing their defense spending. That's not in Putin's interest. And Trump has been a huge proponent of fracking and more oil drilling, which affects Russia's bottom line directly. Putin also can't be thrilled with Trump's plan to heavily invest in expanding the U.S. military, nor can he be particularly happy with Trump's strong Israel positions or the apparent shift towards a more aggressive policy towards Iran,

For every thing Trump has said or done that would seem to benefit Russia, there are multipke others that are a direct threat to Russian interests. So it's very hard to see why Putin would want Trump over Hillary, whose state department watched fecklessly as Russia gained territory and power around the world.
And Mr. Tillerson, prime minister of the sovereign nation of Exxon? His plan to cut a deal with Russia, pump a whole bunch of petrodollars into Putin's pocket? Did you miss that part, or was it inconvenient? You did notice that he is now SecState, yes?
  #30  
Old 03-26-2017, 04:40 PM
Fuzzy_wuzzy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,109
Which is not the same as asking Russia to hack his opponent. The hack had already occurred. I shouldn't have to point out that Clinton's server had been wiped. The emails were completely missing. Not a trace of them were left according to multiple sources and investigations. Trump was asking the Russian's to find(in another statement he asked them to release) the 30,000 emails. He was assuming the "hacking" had already taken place. The only way on Gods earth 30,000 wiped Clinton emails could have been found was if Russia already had them in their possession before they were wiped.

Unless that is you believe the 30,000 emails were somehow still on Clinton's server after this statement by Trump?

Last edited by Fuzzy_wuzzy; 03-26-2017 at 04:41 PM.
  #31  
Old 03-26-2017, 04:45 PM
Johnny L.A. is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: NoWA
Posts: 60,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy_wuzzy View Post
Which is not the same as asking Russia to hack his opponent.
Yes, it is.
  #32  
Old 03-26-2017, 04:54 PM
Johnny Ace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
For every thing Trump has said or done that would seem to benefit Russia, there are multipke others that are a direct threat to Russian interests. So it's very hard to see why Putin would want Trump over Hillary, whose state department watched fecklessly as Russia gained territory and power around the world.
Because Putin hates and fears Hillary far more, and probably knew that Trump would be a feckless opponent.
  #33  
Old 03-26-2017, 05:00 PM
Fuzzy_wuzzy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny L.A. View Post
Yes, it is.
That's that settled then. Im still confused as to how a wiped and destroyed server can be hacked. Far more likely Trump was talking of an event which took place long before he's discussing it on the campaign trail clips.
  #34  
Old 03-26-2017, 05:27 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,778
She destroyed the server? What, put it in a server destroyer machine, had it ground up? Those things are kinda expensive, maybe you should check your source on that. Either that, or refrain from embellishment. If its not too much trouble.

Last edited by elucidator; 03-26-2017 at 05:28 PM. Reason: malform follows malfunction
  #35  
Old 03-26-2017, 05:39 PM
Simplicio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 11,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy_wuzzy View Post
He was assuming the "hacking" had already taken place. The only way on Gods earth 30,000 wiped Clinton emails could have been found was if Russia already had them in their possession before they were wiped.

Unless that is you believe the 30,000 emails were somehow still on Clinton's server after this statement by Trump?
Or the recipients of the emails were hacked. One likely place to look for such emails might be the gmail account of her campaign chairperson, for example.

Last edited by Simplicio; 03-26-2017 at 05:41 PM.
  #36  
Old 03-26-2017, 06:46 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Ace View Post
Because Putin hates and fears Hillary far more, and probably knew that Trump would be a feckless opponent.
Other stories are that he never actually expected his blackmailee to win (who did?), but only wanted his primary antagonist, President Clinton, to be incurably weakened politically, with the possible bonus of discrediting democracy itself among Americans.
  #37  
Old 03-26-2017, 07:27 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 21,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
For every thing Trump has said or done that would seem to benefit Russia, there are multipke others that are a direct threat to Russian interests. So it's very hard to see why Putin would want Trump over Hillary, whose state department watched fecklessly as Russia gained territory and power around the world.
1) Hillary would have actively sought to combat Russian aggression. That's a lot worse than having someone getting in your way, every once in a while, by happenstance.

2) Hillary is competent. Where Trump works against Putin, he'll do so incompetently.

One thing that hasn't gotten much press, but seemed pretty clear from the Politico timeline, is that Bernie Sanders was also aided by Russia during the primaries. Putin really didn't want Hillary to get the job.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 03-26-2017 at 07:28 PM.
  #38  
Old 03-26-2017, 08:07 PM
Snarky_Kong is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,186
Golly gee guys, why can't you see that asking someone to publicly release digital records that are hidden is completely different than asking them to hack.

And why don't you stop assuming that a president that calls for sanctions relief, recognizing Russia military conquests, cooperation on Syria, and destruction of the most dominant military alliance in world history would be preferred by Putin. Going to far out on a limb!
  #39  
Old 03-27-2017, 12:49 AM
Fuzzy_wuzzy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
She destroyed the server? What, put it in a server destroyer machine, had it ground up? Those things are kinda expensive, maybe you should check your source on that. Either that, or refrain from embellishment. If its not too much trouble.
Nope. Sorry, it was her phones that were physically destroyed; her server was wiped. Every piece of evidence as good as destroyed. Everything. How can it then be hacked? Perhaps you can tell those on this thread embellishing against Trump to stop embellishing too. I suspect you won't.

Last edited by Fuzzy_wuzzy; 03-27-2017 at 12:52 AM.
  #40  
Old 03-27-2017, 12:56 AM
Fuzzy_wuzzy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicio View Post
Or the recipients of the emails were hacked. One likely place to look for such emails might be the gmail account of her campaign chairperson, for example.
Once again though, that would be a hack that had already occurred.
  #41  
Old 03-27-2017, 01:20 AM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy_wuzzy View Post
....Perhaps you can tell those on this thread embellishing against Trump to stop embellishing too. I suspect you won't.
Didn't catch them. Caught you.
  #42  
Old 03-27-2017, 02:21 AM
ZebraShaSha is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Fuck, I'm in Greensboro
Posts: 2,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
Somebody in the Trump camp? Yeah, sure, but not him. Gonna have to see a lot of evidence to get over my conviction that nobody would be dumb enough to tell him a secret that fucking big. I doubt trust is something Putin has a lot of.

Saw a lot of stuff that I think was Russian stuff, but it was mostly centered on infuriating the Bernie camp against Hillary. Breathless headlines from orgs i never heard of and couldn't find anything about. Now, there were some that were legit, from real Bernie people who really did hate the horse she rode in upon, but others just suddenly appeared out of nowhere.

If the Russians had any major impact, that was it. So, it might boil down to: did they fan enough Hillary hate amongst the Dems that about a hundred thousand of them didn't go vote for her, in those five crucial states? Hundred thousand or so isn't that many out of millions, so, yeah, maybe.

And if they did, then the Russians actually did screw our election. It may actually have happened. Jesus Marimba, what a friggin' mess! Tom Clancy meets Steven King.
Don't forget, once Flynn registered as a Foreign Agent we also learned that he paid ex-FBI agent Brian McCauley a retainer of $28,000. McCauley, of course, is the FBI agent that reported to the media that there may have been "quid pro quo" with the State Department to declassify one of Clinton's emails.

This story broke on October 19, a few weeks before the election... and two weeks after McCauley got paid by Flynn...

The Washington Post story

And also don't forget that the FBI field office, as we speak, is under a DOJ investigation because it leaked classified information -- like all the stuff about how there might be a new case against Clinton because of the Wiener emails, which very easily could explain a massive shift against her in the week before the election.

The NY FBI office has numerous links to Trump and his administration.

AND, people still aren't taking the Steele dossier seriously, at least not in America. But everything about it is slowly being confirmed. The central allegation? That Russia promised Trump a stake of Rosneft if he'd lift sanctions. All investigators need is some documents, or the right person to talk..................... like maybe Flynn, who hasn't been heard of in a few weeks......
  #43  
Old 03-27-2017, 02:30 AM
galen ubal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,555
Coincidentally, I've just finished reading through this mega-thread on Twitter, from Seth Abramson, concerning much of what ZebraShaSha is talking about:
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/sta...35383129772032
One of the more central matters of interest; a main informant for Steele on the Rosneft connection turned up dead - after his report was passed on to Comey, and (presumably) the New York Field office.
Have a read.

Last edited by galen ubal; 03-27-2017 at 02:31 AM.
  #44  
Old 03-27-2017, 08:28 AM
Silver lining is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 738
Quote:
Originally Posted by skdo23 View Post
So do we get to say "go back to Russia" to conservatives now?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/22/politi...ans/index.html

This is a non-story. I keep hearing words like allegedly, according to sources, and such with zero proof and a juicy headline.

If there was something on Trump working with the Russians to rig the election, don't ya think it would have been out there by now?

And how could the Russians really change the way people vote?

To clarify, Trump certainly worked with Russians during his tenure as a builder. So what.

IMO, Clinton did far worse by taking 20 million or so that we are aware of from Iran, a nation who sponsors terrorism and hates us for her campaign. Additionally, her collusion with the press in the form of giving her debate questions in advance, and skulduggery with the DNC, by using Sanders ethnicity against him was shocking.

The hilarious part about the election was Clinton herself. Part of the top 1%, and in deep with wall street and the banks. Essentially she was a closet Republican.
  #45  
Old 03-27-2017, 10:02 AM
Johnny Ace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy_wuzzy View Post
Nope. Sorry, it was her phones that were physically destroyed; her server was wiped. Every piece of evidence as good as destroyed. Everything. How can it then be hacked? Perhaps you can tell those on this thread embellishing against Trump to stop embellishing too. I suspect you won't.
Utterly false. Forensic IT guys are really good at rehabilitating data from so-called 'wiped' drives. The only true defense against it is physically destroying the drives that the data is saved on.
  #46  
Old 03-27-2017, 10:05 AM
PatriotX is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Fayettenam
Posts: 7,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Ace View Post
Utterly false. Forensic IT guys are really good at rehabilitating data from so-called 'wiped' drives. The only true defense against it is physically destroying the drives that the data is saved on.
You should probably define "wiped" and provide a citation for your claim.
  #47  
Old 03-27-2017, 10:09 AM
Johnny Ace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver lining View Post
To clarify, Trump certainly worked with Russians during his tenure as a builder. So what.
And Trump associates have been proven to have had contact with Russians during the campaign. So what.

And Trump sold a property to one of the biggest players in Russia to use as a hedge against his wife taking his assets. For a 100% profit after owning the property for two years, without any improvements whatsoever. So what.

And the Trump campaign modified a Republican party plank so that it wouldn't be so unacceptable to the Russians and Putin. So what.

And a number of intelligence agencies noted that the Russians very likely did interfere in the election, including various pieces of evidence that they were in charge of hacking the DNC and Clinton servers. So what.

And at least two Trump campaign associates have resigned over Russia ties. So what.

Yeah, uh, not nearly quite so extenuating as you appear to believe.

Last edited by Johnny Ace; 03-27-2017 at 10:12 AM.
  #48  
Old 03-27-2017, 10:13 AM
Johnny Ace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatriotX View Post
You should probably define "wiped" and provide a citation for your claim.
That would take a long and involved explanation of a number of things that are IT-related which I really don't want to get into. However, if there are any IT folks around here who could corroborate my statement?
  #49  
Old 03-27-2017, 10:14 AM
Johnny L.A. is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: NoWA
Posts: 60,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Ace View Post
The only true defense against it is physically destroying the drives that the data is saved on.
In a previous job, we had an axe and a sledge hammer to destroy the large IBM hard drives to keep the data out of the wrong hands.




.

Last edited by Johnny L.A.; 03-27-2017 at 10:14 AM.
  #50  
Old 03-27-2017, 10:18 AM
Johnny Ace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny L.A. View Post
In a previous job, we had an axe and a sledge hammer to destroy the large IBM hard drives to keep the data out of the wrong hands.




.
If you're talking about the 'platter' drives (about the size of a washing machine), that could actually work, though a nice open flame would be better. You wouldn't need to destroy the machine itself, just the platters.

Last edited by Johnny Ace; 03-27-2017 at 10:19 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017