Beren wrote:Here is the real crisis.
Putting an exclamation point after the word Russians doesn't make the article even remotely more interesting.
Fake News wrote:And sharing poll numbers with a Russian isn't direct collusion -- although the timing of Manafort's conversations, which came shortly before Russia hacked into the Democratic National Committee servers and extracted emails that were eventually posted on the WikiLeaks website, is suspicious, to say the least.
America is a country of 300M people. Russia is a country of 190M people. Plenty of Russians and Americans spoke to each other prior to the Wikileaks leak. Conversations by themselves are not suspicious.
Fake News wrote:The broader point here is that the news earlier this week about Manafort's conversations with Kilimnik changed the game. No longer is this about what Manafort did prior to ever even entering Trump's orbit. Now the conversation is about what Manafort did WHILE he was serving as the top official of Trump's campaign.
It never should have been what Manafort did prior to entering Trump's orbit. The entire thing was supposed to be about the idea that Trump asked Russians to hack the DNC server, Hillary Clinton and John Podesta. There isn't a shred of evidence that this ever occurred. It's nice that they are finally--after two fucking years--focusing on the relevant time in question. That, however, isn't all that interesting of a game changer. Apparently, we're supposed to imagine that the scenario looks like this: "Hey Russian dude!" "Da" "Take a look at these polls." "Wow! I think I will go and hack server and leak contents to Wikileaks" "You do that Russian dude!" These people are frigging delirious.
One Degree wrote:You lost me. I was not even aware there was a discussion about a connection.
If you had a conversation with a Russian in 2016 before the DNC server was hacked, you are suspicious according to these knuckleheads.
Being on the special counsel must be a fat paycheck.
jimjam wrote:In the days after President Trump fired James B. Comey as F.B.I. director, law enforcement officials became so concerned by the president’s behavior that they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests, according to former law enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation.
Really? Who? Rosenstein recommended that Comey be fired. Are you talking about Peter Strzok? Lisa Page? Andrew McCabe?
The one thing consistent about Trump confrontations is that the people who take him on usually seem to be the ones that are on the way down and out.
jimjam wrote:The inquiry carried explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.
The explosive implication is that a bunch of counterintelligence douche bags think they can decide what constitutes national security on their own and act independently of the president. In the law of Principal and Agent, Trump is the principal. They are the agents. What we have here is essentially a case of insubordination. Nothing more.
Trump was right. The only valid criticism of Trump is that he hasn't fired more people.
"If anyone is looking for a good lawyer, I would strongly suggest that you don’t retain the services of Michael Cohen!"
-- Donald J. Trump