Beren wrote:Who cares if Mueller brings down the Clintons too? They should retire anyways.
I for one don't care if he does that. I think she should have been prosecuted by the DoJ anyway, and my opinion is that she was not prosecuted for political, not legal reasons.
Finfinder wrote:The leftist mob cares they have so my invested in the Clinton's at this point it's like they are fighting to keep whatever credibility hey have left. Look no further than this place to see that.
There were billions invested in Clinton and they came up empty. It's the greatest political upset since the 1980 election when governor Reagan won the presidency.
Zagadka wrote:Oh? Who were the big Clinton supporters?
Clearly, baltwade who actually worked for the Clinton campaign. Drlee gave us numerous examples of how he was a Republican, would vote for Trump in the primary and Hillary Clinton in the general election. That was the thinking inside the Hillary Clinton campaign. SpecialOlympian provided endless predictions of how Hillary would win and Trump would implode. Heck, you moderators even deliberately killed my thread "Trump calls it like it is; the Establishment can't take it".
anna wrote:The right is trying to spin this so desperately that Hannity slipped up and called her "President Clinton" the other night. Part of the problem is the parallel universe they live in.
What's there to be desperate about? It doesn't show any ties between Russia and Trump. That was the point of the investigation. They've had a year now to put together a case.
anna wrote:When you move in a bubble between print (Breitbart, et al.), radio (Rush, et al.) and TV (FOX, and in particular Fox and Friends and Hannity) and you don't go outside that bubble because all the voices who've brainwashed you have warned you it's not safe to go outside the bubble, then you're going to believe them, and you're going to be so invested in them that to walk away would bring a cost you can't bear.
I provided links to SonofNewo's videos. He's not FoxNews, Rush Limbaugh or Breitbart. He's an independent video maker.
anna wrote:Remember when Rush warned that if Obama was reelected, that it would trigger an economic collapse within 18 months?
I remember.
I hadn't figured you for one who listens to Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. Anyway, Obama had the lowest average GDP growth of any American president in the post-WWII era. Trump is already seeing 3%+ GDP. Obama never had a year above 3% GDP growth.
Hong Wu wrote:I guess I'm just disappointed that there's practically no intelligent discussion left on this forum.
I frankly am amazed at how much influence the media used to have, and now so many people just don't care anymore. I am surprised the revelation of the extraordinary degree of collusion between the DNC and the media leaves anyone with any doubt about the level of corruption in the DNC. Why would anyone hold out any hope for them?
Hong Wu wrote:I trawled through Obama's Presidency after I stopped supporting him and through supporting Trump when no one thought he would win, then after he wins everyone turns into a Special Olympian.
Well, it is very clear that they really didn't want Trump to win. However, early on, and that was clear from my mega Trump thread, they laughed at Trump.
Hong Wu wrote: I'm starting to feel like an idiot for taking people on here seriously, as soon as the rhetorical framework was damaged many of the posters on here just stopped making sense.
The DNC and Hillary campaigns had paid posters. So it's likely that they are no longer getting paid, and have thus stopped posting. Remember, for people like baltwade, working for the Clinton campaign was his job. They all expect something in the government sector after winning an election. Losing? Different story.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:So what? The bullshit was that it was the claim that the Steele dossier started the investigations into Manafort, and into Trump-Russia links. The timeline clearly shows that's impossible.
Trump's opposition to the neoconservative agenda doesn't mean he had ties to Russia. That was a generated story very obviously now.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:That's more bullshit, designed to distract attention from these charges. Who cares whether Trump knew that Manafort and Podesta new each other?
I care, and I'm sure Trump would have cared too. Why would you hire a business associate of your opponent's campaign manager? Trump and Manafort did not have any ties before. Apparently, it was Roger Stone who introduced Manafort to Jared and Ivanka Kushner, who then introduced him to Trump.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:Manafort was Trump's campaign manager - including at the time that the Republican party was changed to avoid support for Ukraine - because that's what Trump wanted, according to JD Gordon.
So? That is not illegal. If that's what Trump wanted, that's fine. Not wanting war in Eastern Europe is a reasonable position. If Manafort took money from Ukraine to push this position and didn't disclose it, that could be a problem for Manafort. There are still no ties between Trump and Russia.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:That's bullshit too. She didn't ; you just want to try and tie her name to it.
The funds were directed from the Hillary campaign and the DNC to their law firm--an incredible sum of like $10M--who then contracted Fusion GPS, who contracted the former MI-6 operative, who then assembled a dossier from salacious allegations by his former assets. The House Intelligence Committee subpoenaed the banking records after Fusion GPS personnel refused to testify before the House Intelligence Committee.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:It was added to the FBI investigation they had already started in late July into Russian interference in US elections (which you can call 'counter-intelligence') and the possible involvement of the Trump campaign (which is not 'counter-intelligence'; that's a criminal investigation. The Trump operation was not an intelligence organisation which you counter).
The DNC claimed that Russia hacked its server and hired a private firm to build a report on it. However, the DNC refused to turn its server over to the FBI for forensic analysis. Why were the Democrats unwilling to deliver the smoking gun for a criminal investigation to the FBI?
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:Manafort, along with Flynn, Page, Trump, Trump Jr., Ivanka ... they've all had business dealings with Russia, and Jr. has admitted he was desperate to get dirt on Hillary from the Russian government.
Hell, I have hired programmers in Russia. So what? It's not a criminal thing. Relations with Russia normalized in the 1990s. Flynn spoke with Kislyak. That's not a crime either. He lost Trump's confidence, because he lied to Pence about the nature of his call with Kislyak. However, deep state operatives leaked that call to the press, which IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE. I'm guessing Robert Mueller isn't interested in finding out who did that. Don Jr. fell for a honey trap, but it seems that even the bait, Natalia Veselnitskaya, wasn't clued in and just went on lobbying for a repeal of the Magnitsky Act. The point of setting up the meeting was to establish the appearance of ties between Trump and Russia.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:Link, please
I already provided it. If you don't want to watch SonofNewo's video, that's your choice. However, he clearly established that the same person who was providing info to the MI-6 guy as part of the dossier also stated that he was speaking regularly with George Popadopolous.
Prosthteic Conscience wrote:You are starting from the supposition that Trump is as innocent as a lamb, and so stories about him are 'manufactured'.
I never said any such thing. I just don't think he is some sort of Manchurian Candidate of Russia. Hillary Clinton fits that bill much better, as there are plenty of financial ties between the Clintons and Russia via the Clinton Foundation alone.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:This is just sickly hero worship on your part.
I'm tired of the establishment making war on the American people. Trump fights them. So I like that. That doesn't mean I think of Trump as heroic. He's one of the few politicians actually fighting against a corrupt establishment. So I do appreciate his efforts there.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:At last, something we agree on. Just a coincidence that Jr. is told there's more intel from Russia on Hillary available, and Trump Sr. says right after that there's dirt on its way? Just a coincidence that Manafort, hip-deep in money from the pro-Russian Ukrainians, becomes Trump's campaign manager, and the campaign then makes its one change to the Republican platform, in favour of the pro-Russian Ukrainians? Just a coincidence that Kremlin-linked Russians invest millions in Trump properties, pulling Trump out of a financial hole? Of course not.
Just a coincidence that Natalia Veselnitskaya had no information on Hillary Clinton, but was instead lobbying for the repeal of the Magnitsky Act? Just a coincidence that she had a history of working with the Podesta Group to that end, who has ties to Paul Manafort? Just a coincidence that Manafort and Veselnitskaya show up in the same meeting, but the pretense of the meeting was apparently a hoax and so they cut it short? This all points to Manafort. If Russians finance a Trump property, that is not illegal. Where is your smoking gun?
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:The ties are acknowledged by everyone who isn't a Trumpbot. When it became known the DNC and Podesta were hacked, an investigation was started, and it was quickly clear the Russians did it.
The FBI never had access to the servers. We haven't seen so much as an IP address or a trace route from the FBI, NSA or CIA. The DNC did not allow the FBI to conduct a forensic analysis on its servers. That's a pretty interesting fact by itself. If the NSA is spying on all of us, then they have this information already. Where is it?
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:Various members of the Trump campaign tried to get more from the Russians.
That is not illegal by itself. Trump's campaign did not pay any money to any Russians for information on Hillary Clinton. Through many layers of indirection, Hillary Clinton did exactly that to Donald Trump, and the House Intelligence committee is the source of this information, which they procured by subpoena of bank records when Fusion GPS refused to testify.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:This was before Steele talked to the FBI about what he had found.
That's not relevant, because there was no solicitation by the Trump administration to enlist Russia in any sort of hacking of DNC servers. There is simply no evidence of this. In fact, the evidence is that people with direct and indirect ties to the Clinton campaign solicited the meeting with the Trump campaign under false pretenses.
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:The question is whether Trump himself knew the Russians were interfering in the election on his behalf, or whether the campaign kept it from him because they know he's an idiot who blurts out secrets to brag.
That's a conclusion of fact not in evidence. It has never been established that the Russian government hacked the DNC server or Podesta's email. As I've said, we've never been treated to any government forensic analysis, because the FBI was not allowed to look at DNC servers. We would know from Google if the log in to Podesta's email originated out of Russia. We do not have this information. Google logs everything. There is ALWAYS an auth log, and Podesta's email hacking was a brute force attack made very easy because his password was a special character variant of the word "password."
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:You seem obsessed with who was paying for the dossier. It doesn't matter. Americans are allowed to pay for investigations into their political opponents - what they're not allowed to do is work with foreign governments to do it, which is what Trump's campaign did.
Clinton's campaign paid foreign entities to dig up dirt on Trump. Trump's campaign did not pay any foreign entities to do any such thing. If anything, the Trump campaign was notoriously cheap by Washington DC standards. Trump's campaign did not solicit information from Russia. Instead, information was offered to Donald Trump Jr. under false pretenses. Nataliya Veselnitskaya had ties to the Podesta Group, one of whose principals was Hillary Clinton's campaign manager. Nataliya Veselnitskaya did not work for the Russian government at the time as far as we know. However, her US visa application was rejected, and she had to get a immigration parole waiver from high levels in the DoJ to be in the United States.
Prosthteic Conscience wrote:Jesus Fucking Christ, this is paranoia gone mad. You think Clinton hacked the DNC and Podesta and then leaked their email?
No. I think Seth Rich or someone connected to him did it. Rich was going to talk to the FBI later in the day (he was killed after midnight, I believe). In fact, Rich was with Imran Awan, the Pakistani IT vendor of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the former chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee just hours before he was murdered. Imran Awan is under indictment now as well. There were a lot of DNC people who supported Sanders and were deeply disillusioned by the collusion between the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign. That is an established fact.
That is not to say that I don't think Russian intelligence hacked DNC servers. It's to say that intelligence services never reveal sources and methods. They simply wouldn't do that and release the information to Wikileaks. I am absolutely sure that they have all of Hillary Clinton's emails from that server. They would never clue you in to how they do it, so that they can maintain access. That is why I say that this notion that Russians did it, and with such carelessness that they didn't care if they were caught suggests that it wasn't Russians. It was Hillary Clinton's operatives trying to ensure that meetings like this one with Nataliya Veselnitskaya were discovered. In fact, that meeting was leaked to the press by government operatives. Trump Jr. didn't even recall the meeting until he dug through his emails.
The Immortal Goon wrote:He's the president now. I hate the Clintons, I didn't support Obama's imperialist wars or anything else. Did you think I should flip around and talk about how wise you are for having good feelings about a snake-oil salesman that told you he is going to protect you against China despite China's cock being balls deep in his mouth?
I for one don't think you were a Clinton supporter. I do think you demonstrating business ties between Trump and China is interesting, because that can be established as a fact. Yet, that's not where the establishment decided to go. They decided to go with Russia.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden