46
   

Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

 
 
Blickers
 
  6  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2018 10:14 pm
@glitterbag,
Can you imagine any other president sending people to secretly ask Russians to set up a line to the Russian leader that nobody on the US side can know what's going on?

And who also has his Attorney General meeting with the Russian ambassador and then lying about it to the Senate?

And whose national security advisor just got done working for Putin and lied to the FBI about talking to the Russian ambassador. And then was found out lying about it again?

And whose other "national security advisor", Carter Page, was hanging out with his best friends who just happened to be a Russian spy ring which got busted a short time later? This is one of Trump's "national security advisors".

And whose campaign manager wasn't paid by Trump but was paid by a Russian oligarch close to Putin during the campaign?

Good Lord, can this guy Trump be any more of an obvious Russian puppet?
Blickers
 
  5  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2018 10:18 pm
@oralloy,
Quote oralloy:
Quote:
Back channel communications between governments are normal, and are hardly treason.
Baloney. Name ONE president who had a back channel set up with a hostile foe that the intelligence agencies didn't know about or agree to.
Blickers
 
  5  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2018 10:21 pm
@Brandon9000,
Quote Brandon:
Quote:
the president-elect has every right in the world to set up communications with foreign governments.
He was already in office. And that's all you have to say about Trump saying to the Russians, "Hey guys, will you please help me set up a communications channel so I can wheel and deal with your leader and not have the damn FBI and CIA find out and screw the deal?

Name ONE president who even came close to trying to do this.
coldjoint
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2018 10:21 pm
@Blickers,
Quote:
And whose other "national security advisor", Carter Page,

The guy who has not been charged with anything?

Quote:
And who also has his Attorney General meeting with the Russian ambassador and then lying about it to the Senate?

You mean the one he never talks to?
What an absolutely meaningless post.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  7  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2018 11:07 pm
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

Blickers wrote:
Why did Trump's son-in-law ask the Russians' help in setting up a communications network for Trump to talk to them? That ain't "flexibilty" in negotiations-whatever that is-that's out and out subterfuge. If that ain't treason, it's getting damn close to it.

If this even actually happened, the president-elect has every right in the world to set up communications with foreign governments. And, by the way, if he had already conspired with them to rig the election, would he not already have a communications channel with them?


Are you going to stick with that story??? No, no president-elect has ANY right to set up Secret Comms with foreign governments. Our government is geared for transition every 4 to 8 years, and there are career employees who keep the machine running and are familiar with the changing of the guard. What other nonsense do you think is the Devine right of a President.....how about the new CINC desires he/she wants to move the White House to Tennessee or New Jersey, then all the National Monuments should be put on wheels so each new resident can have thmoved into a position or site they prefer. This isn’t Ancient Rome, and we are not going to be building pyramids like the ones in Egypt or Peru. How about the new pres wants a niftier flag, or wants new words composed for the National Anthem......I don’t give a crap if you think Trump is the second coming.....great..,...but he didn’t buy a company, he was elected to a four term. He doesn’t get to just tinker with frivolous ****....he’s supposed to serve and protect......not be served and worshipped.
coldjoint
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2018 11:14 pm
@glitterbag,
Quote:
He doesn’t get to just tinker with frivolous ****....he’s supposed to serve and protect......not be served and worshipped.

Like Obama saying we were not a Christian nation? Get out of town, Obama had kids singing to him schools. Class A hypocrisy.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  6  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2018 11:15 pm
@Blickers,
No I can’t, furthermore, I’m shocked that a few posters seem to be appallingly devoid of any sense of our government. Maybe that’s why they dream up these convoluted plots political rivals MIGHT attempt, apparently because they would do it and now it’s just a moron race to become the first president for life.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  7  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 06:07 am
https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/c237301/2147483647/resize/1200x%3E/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.beam.usnews.com%2Fc5%2F5c%2F8bd1ee604940991f9bb6a2ef21ea%2Fthumb.jpg
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  5  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 06:32 am
What Friday’s Indictments Mean

The allegations of subverting American democracy are troubling in themselves. They also spell trouble for the president.

By Norman L. Eisen and Noah Bookbinder
July 13, 2018

Today we learned that the special counsel, Robert Mueller, has obtained indictments charging that 12 Russian military intelligence officers engaged in a conspiracy to subvert our democracy. The indictments demonstrate that Mr. Mueller, the Department of Justice and a federal grand jury agree with a conclusion that the intelligence community, the Senate Intelligence Committee and a majority of Americans long ago reached: The Russian government was unambiguously responsible for the attack on our election. The direct and specific evidence of Russian interference laid out in the indictment — both by hacking into Democratic Party accounts and into actual state election commissions — is immensely significant.

Any other president would seriously consider canceling Monday’s summit with the Russian leader Vladimir Putin. One of us is a former American diplomat in the region, but you don’t need to be an expert to understand that it is unlikely the official Russian conduct Mr. Mueller has unearthed could have occurred without Mr. Putin’s blessing. To confer legitimacy on the man who was part of an assault on our country is reprehensible.

Unfortunately, we have no expectation that Mr. Trump will cancel. If he proceeds, the indictments must be the first point of reference for the president as he meets next week with the leader — and former intelligence chief — of the country that orchestrated this attack. In previous statements, President Trump has at times said that he takes Mr. Putin at his word that Russia did not interfere in the 2016 presidential election. To put it bluntly, the evidence collected by the Department of Justice further demonstrates that Mr. Trump’s trust in Mr. Putin is horribly misplaced. He must now tell Mr. Putin he knows that he is lying.

The indictments — like others that preceded them — also have important domestic implications. Already some of the president’s defenders are using these latest indictments to suggest that they exonerate the president’s campaign. No Americans were alleged to have participated in this hacking, except perhaps unwittingly, the argument goes, and therefore the Mueller investigation has definitively found no collusion.

That is precisely the wrong reading of this latest development. As is Department of Justice policy, when Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced this complaint, he stuck to the facts alleged in the complaint but repeatedly emphasized that no Americans were charged with crimes “in this indictment.” Media reports indicate that the investigation is wrapping up its look into possible obstruction charges and now moving toward collusion. As criminal law experts (one from the prosecution side and one from the defense camp), we believe that Mr. Mueller is moving steadily toward the Trump campaign.

The signs are many, including the fact that numerous high-level individuals in and around the campaign have not yet been interviewed, as far as we know. (They include Roger Stone, Donald Trump Jr., Brad Parscale and, of course, Michael Cohen.) We do not know whether Mr. Mueller will ultimately find that those around Mr. Trump — or the president himself — knowingly participated in illegal efforts to influence the election or otherwise violated the law. But it would be recklessly premature for the president or anyone else to conclude that today’s filing absolves the Trump campaign and its associates of any wrongdoing.

Quite the contrary. After today’s indictments, investigators will be scrutinizing the widely reported contacts between Mr. Stone and Russian hackers and between another Trump associate, Rick Gates and a former Russian intelligence officer during the campaign. The indictment also alleges that the Russian conspirators targeted Clinton campaign email accounts with phishing emails on July 27, 2016 — the same day that President Trump called on Russia to hack the Clinton campaign. The two events could of course be nothing more than a coincidence. But it is hard to imagine that the special counsel hasn’t wondered whether it could be more.

If there was catastrophic wrongdoing closer to home, we are confident Mr. Mueller will find it and will charge it if the law and the facts allow. He is moving effectively and, for an investigation of this breadth and complexity, extremely quickly. If others in this country broke the law in connection with the last election, now is not the time for them to rest easy. The decision to allow the national security division of the Department of Justice to assume responsibility for this prosecution of Russian officials allows Mr. Mueller’s team to focus on investigating other issues here at home.

At today’s news conference, Mr. Rosenstein poignantly emphasized the need for the American people to view these indictments in patriotic terms. The victims, he said, were not one side or one party, but rather the American people. This is of course true, though one wishes that the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, could have had the same perspective before the 2016 election when he rejected an opportunity to sign on to a bipartisan statement about Russia’s election interference. Other Republicans — including those who have supported the work of the Senate Intelligence Committee — have put country first.

Still, many Republicans, and House Republicans in particular, have so far seen too much to be gained by obscuring the truth and revisiting irrelevant disputes about Hillary Clinton — rather than uncovering the truth about Russia and possible cooperation by the Trump campaign.

Meanwhile, while evidence of Russian interference mounts, bipartisan efforts to protect the special counsel investigation and to better secure our election infrastructure have also stalled — in no small part because there is no support from Mr. McConnell and the speaker of the House, Paul Ryan.

With the 2018 midterm elections approaching, the hour for protecting the rule of law and the sanctity of our elections is already late. Mr. Rosenstein’s call for patriotism and the indictment he unveiled is therefore a reminder more than anything that we must do more. Mr. Mueller will continue his march toward accountability for wrongdoing related to the last election. But if Russia is permitted to interfere in our elections again, or if the President is permitted to interfere with this investigation, the impact on our democracy, and Americans’ faith in it, could be catastrophic.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/13/opinion/mueller-indictments-12-russians.html?action=click&module=Ribbon&pgtype=Article
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  5  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 06:43 am
How Do You Say ‘Witch Hunt’ in Russian?

It sure is strange that Donald Trump is so angry at American justice for the indictment of 12 Russian military officers.

By The Editorial Board
July 13, 2018

You might expect that an American president, presented with the indictment of a dozen Russian military officers for engaging in a concerted, yearslong cyberattack on American democracy, would be outraged and demand justice.

Donald Trump is outraged, all right. But his anger is directed at his fellow Americans. He shows no sign of canceling his meeting scheduled for Monday with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, or insisting on, say, the extradition of the defendants to stand trial. He is instead reserving his fire and fury for the investigation itself — which he prefers to call a “hoax” — and for the American law-enforcement community that has been working to protect the nation ever since it first became aware of the Russian interference more than two years ago.

That’s been Mr. Trump’s reaction almost every time he’s been confronted with evidence showing that the Russian government undertook a coordinated campaign to help swing the election in his favor. In July 2016, then-candidate Trump wrote on Twitter, “The new joke in town is that Russia leaked the disastrous DNC emails, which should never have been written (stupid), because Putin likes me.”

Mr. Trump, who was notified of the coming indictment earlier this week, kept up his mockery before it was announced, calling the special counsel’s investigation a “witch hunt” on Friday morning.

So who are the witches this time? Twelve Russian military intelligence officials who, according to the indictment, hacked into the computer systems of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, the computer systems of the Democratic National Committee, and state voter rolls and voting software, stealing emails and other documents and then posting them online under false identities, including Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks, to hide their Russian origins.

The hackers used familiar techniques, like spearphishing (which tricks unwitting users into sharing personal information) and installing malware to monitor specific computers and steal their data. The hackers transferred those stolen documents to another organization that the indictment does not name. But it appears to be WikiLeaks, which was the source of many of the leaks of Democratic emails during the 2016 campaign, and was in regular contact with Mr. Trump’s advisers.

The hackers also infiltrated state-level election systems, including the computer networks of state election boards and of a company that supplies software used to run elections. In one state, they stole half a million voters’ personal information, including their names, addresses, birth dates and partial Social Security numbers.

Friday’s indictment does not allege that any Americans knowingly broke the law or that the conspiracy changed the outcome of the election. Nor does it allege that the unnamed Americans it referred to were aware that they were corresponding with Russian officials — a straw that Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, grasped as though his life depended on it. “The Russians are nailed. No Americans are involved,” Mr. Giuliani tweeted in a message as predictable as it was premature. A former federal prosecutor himself, Mr. Giuliani is well aware that the details of any specific indictment — especially one that is part of a complex, long-running investigation — have little bearing on what future indictments might bring.

In fact, there are already piles of evidence that Mr. Trump and top officials in his campaign were not only aware of the Russian hacking at the time, but were encouraging it. Remember the July 2016 news conference where Mr. Trump asked Russia to hack Mrs. Clinton’s emails? “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said. Another “joke,” his defenders claimed at the time. On or about the same day, according to the indictment, the Russians tried to hack into multiple email accounts used by Mrs. Clinton’s personal office, as well as dozens more associated with her campaign.

And then there was Donald Trump Jr.’s response to a June 2016 email offering “dirt” on Mrs. Clinton from a Russian government official. “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” the message said. Donald Jr., who was one of his father’s top campaign aides, immediately replied, “If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”

Friday’s indictment included more than a few hints about the next targets of Mr. Mueller’s investigation. For example, in August 2016, a candidate for Congress requested stolen documents from Guccifer 2.0, who sent documents related to that candidate’s opponent.

On the same day, Guccifer wrote to a person “in regular contact with senior members” of the Trump campaign, apparently Roger Stone, “thank u for writing back … do u find anything interesting in the docs I posted?” A couple of days later, Guccifer wrote, “please tell me if i can help u anyhow … it would be a great pleasure to me.”

Don’t forget that Mr. Mueller has already secured guilty pleas showing ties between Mr. Trump’s campaign and the Russian government, including from one foreign-policy adviser to the campaign who lied to authorities about his communications with a professor who offered damaging information on Mrs. Clinton — a professor he knew was linked to Russian officials.

Responding to this shouldn’t be difficult. Russian officials attacked American democracy in 2016, and the intelligence community has warned us that they’re coming back for more. But Mr. Trump seems incapable of perceiving the threat, while Republicans in Congress spend their time fulminating not about the assault on American sovereignty, but about the private text messages of an F.B.I. agent investigating that attack.

As Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein rightly said after announcing the indictment, in the face of such an assault, “it’s important for us to avoid thinking politically, as Republicans or Democrats, and instead to think patriotically as Americans.”

Good advice. If only Mr. Trump and his servile defenders in Congress would heed it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/13/opinion/editorials/mueller-indictment-trump-russia-hacking.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region
0 Replies
 
Region Philbis
 
  6  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 07:37 am

https://i.imgur.com/9gd0lOt.jpg
0 Replies
 
Region Philbis
 
  5  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 07:59 am

https://i.imgur.com/SdZpZzw.jpg
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 08:00 am
The whole continent is a Pink Floyd concert.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 10:01 am
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:
Baloney. Name ONE president who had a back channel set up with a hostile foe that the intelligence agencies didn't know about or agree to.
There is no requirement that they be informed of everything or agree to anything. They serve the government, not the other way around.

I don't know about back-channel communications that our government sets up with other governments, as they tend to be kept secret.
firefly
 
  5  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 11:36 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
They serve the government, not the other way around

Sorry, oralloy, they don't "serve the government", THEY ARE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT .
firefly
 
  4  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 11:38 am
http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/properties/peters/art_images/cg5abdc1e2abe07.jpg
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 11:47 am
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
Sorry, oralloy, they don't "serve the government", THEY ARE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT .
The President is the government. People who work in the executive branch, work for the President. Their job is to do what he tells them to do.
firefly
 
  4  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 12:06 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
The President is the government. People who work in the executive branch, work for the President. Their job is to do what he tells them to do.

Boy, you really have been besotted with Trump propaganda. Laughing

THE PRESIDENT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT!

The government has three branches. Together they comprise "the government".

People who work in the executive branch do not work for the president. The executive branch is not like a family owned real estate company. Those who work in the executive branch work to preserve, protect, and defend, the constitution of the United States, and they are paid by the United States--Trump does not sign their pay checks. They do not have to do what he tells them to do--that's Trump's main beef with A.G. Sessions, he recused himself rather than do Trump's bidding.

And any hint that the president is still disregarding evidence that the Russians interfered with our last election, and prefers, instead, to cozy up to Putin, in a private meeting with him on Monday, so that he can enjoy "good chemistry" with him, rather than defending the United States from further attacks by Russia, should set off ear-blasting alarm signals across the country.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 12:13 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
Boy, you really have been besotted with Trump propaganda. Laughing
THE PRESIDENT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT!
The government has three branches. Together they comprise "the government".
I was referring to the executive branch.

firefly wrote:
People who work in the executive branch do not work for the president. The executive branch is not like a family owned real estate company. Those who work in the executive branch work to preserve, protect, and defend, the constitution of the United States, and they are paid by the United States--Trump does not sign their pay checks. They do not have to do what he tells them to do--that's Trump's main beef with A.G. Sessions, he recused himself rather than do Trump's bidding.
That is incorrect. Everyone who works in the executive branch of the federal government, works for the President. They have to do what he tells them to do, and he has the authority to fire them for any reason that he wants.
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2018 12:42 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
Everyone who works in the executive branch of the federal government, works for the President.
Really? Don't for instance Congress or the courts manage their own personnel?

oralloy wrote:
Everyone who works in the executive branch of the federal government, works for the President. They have to do what he tells them to do, and he has the authority to fire them for any reason that he wants.
And what about the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act?
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 05/02/2025 at 10:44:49