192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  6  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 05:53 am
The Dutch secret service AIVD (Algemene Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdienst) seems to have made a special coup in 2014.
According to the daily newspaper "de Volkskrant" and the tv program Nieuwsuur, its computer experts have penetrated the network of the Russian hacker unit Cozy Bear, alias APT29, and have been able to monitor its activities for years.

The findings of the AIVD are said to have helped US authorities to uncover Russia's attempted influence on the US presidential elections in 2016.
The investigation of special investigator Robert Mueller into Russia's interference in the election was also based on these findings.

(English) Report in de Volkskrant:
Dutch agencies provide crucial intel about Russia's interference in US-elections

(Dutch) Report in NOS - nieuwsuur:
Hackteam AIVD gaf FBI cruciale info over Russische inmenging verkiezingen
[That's a rather long and detailed report with a lot of detailed infos and the related tv-program as video.]
hightor
 
  4  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 06:10 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
Is this comment from the NYT being offered as evidence that liberals are delusional?

No.
Quote:
The Democrats ended any possibility of that sort of investigation when they hijacked the issue and used it solely as a means to try to harm Trump.

That is an inaccurate characterization of the investigation so far. Sure, it's time to circle the wagons and assume a defensive posture, but your insistence that Trump operates with impunity, that he's "above the law", makes a mockery of the Constitution you claim to support.
Brand X
 
  0  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 06:24 am
@hightor,
There's no need to circle any wagons, all Trump has to do is say he wanted to stop the Russia investigation because he thought it was silly. That would be from the standpoint, in his mind, that it affected the election, and that notion is not criminal intent.
revelette1
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 07:21 am
@Brand X,
"all Trump has to do is say.."

Which might fly with another President more disciplined than Trump even if it is erroneous.

I think the less Trump says the better for him in how the public perceives him in relation to the Russian investigation. But of course we are talking about Trump. Slick Willy he ain't.
revelette1
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 07:24 am
The immigration deal Trump’s White House is floating, explained(Vox)
0 Replies
 
thack45
 
  3  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 07:43 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:
Just another case of the MSM working feverishly to give citizens the notion that Trump is a liar.

Here's a master class for the MSM on how to do news..
http://uproxx.com/news/fox-news-trump-fire-mueller-sean-hannity/

Note how Hannity calls out the supposed attempt to "change the story" with reports of Trump trying to fire Mueller. And after those reports are confirmed? Hannity literally changes the story. What a pro!
hightor
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 07:50 am
@thack45,
Hannity...
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  3  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 08:17 am
Quote:
Why Did Don McGahn Save Bob Mueller’s Job and Why Did We Learn About It Now?

One day after this testimony, Trump told reporters that Comey was lying under oath to Congress and that he’d “be glad” to tell the real story to Mueller’s investigators. Lying to federal investigators—or Congress, as Comey was accused of doing—would of course be a crime. (Flynn himself has since pled guilty to lying to investigators probing the Trump campaign’s possible connection to Russian interference in the 2016 election.)

Three days after Trump promised to talk to Mueller, his pal Chris Ruddy floated the possibility that the president might actually just want to fire the special counsel instead. Now we’ve learned that this was around the time that Trump was making plans in private to do exactly that, a proposal that was reportedly only foiled by McGahn.

Why is this timeline relevant? Well, for one, the news broke one day after Trump again told reporters that he “would love” to speak with Mueller “as soon as possible.” Again, lying to a federal investigator, particularly about something like alleged obstruction of justice, is a crime.

Which brings up a few theories for why this story was leaked when it was, several months after the incidents in question allegedly happened.

1. Maybe this leak is part of McGahn’s effort to again prevent Trump from firing Mueller. Under this reasoning, perhaps our Wile E. Coyote president has once again panicked after his latest headline-generating promise to speak with Mueller—a promise it seems he doesn’t actually want to fulfill—and is looking for a way out. If he were again talking behind the scenes about firing Mueller, floating this story might be one way for McGahn to attempt to again put a cork in it.

2. Another theory put out on Twitter is that McGahn leaked the story as a way of publicly floating to Mueller that he wants to cooperate with the investigation. Under this premise, a leak would be McGahn’s way of lessening any possible culpability for potential obstruction of justice in his own role in the firing of Comey and his effort to block Jeff Sessions’ recusal from the Russia investigation. This seems implausible to me, because why wouldn’t he just do that through his lawyers directly to Mueller?

3. Someone other than McGahn has leaked this story either to punish the White House, or perhaps to again try to save Mueller under the rationale of theory No. 1. The Times story is sourced to four people who were told about it. There’s no indication one of them was definitely McGahn. Steve Bannon, who recently had a high-profile falling out with the White House, might have reason to spill such news at this point. He has also come under scrutiny in recent days from both Congress and Mueller and could have reason to try to protect himself.

All of this raises another interesting question. Why would McGahn try to save Mueller’s job in the first place? A few more theories:

1. Maybe he thought it would be politically catastrophic to Trump’s presidency to (again) patently obstruct a criminal investigation into his campaign, associates, and administration. Mueller is after all a long-respected Republican public servant who was first appointed head of the FBI by the last Republican president, George W. Bush. Perhaps McGahn believed firing him would be a step too far, even for previously loyal Trump Republicans.

2. Maybe McGahn felt firing Mueller would spark a constitutional crisis and he didn’t want that. Hypothetical mass protests over the head of state claiming essentially authoritarian powers to end criminal investigations into himself and his associates would not be inconceivable, nor would an eventual impeachment controversy.

3. Maybe the lawyer McGahn actually appreciates the rule of law and didn’t want to go down in history as one of the men who helped bring about making it subordinate to the will of Donald Trump.

4. Maybe McGahn believed that this president and anyone who might help him obstruct a criminal investigation will eventually have to face the retribution of a true prosecutor such as Mueller.

Ultimately, maybe McGahn was just looking to cover his own ass.


Slate
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 08:28 am
@oralloy,
There are definitely delusions here, but it isn't liberals who have thejm.
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 09:52 am
@izzythepush,
Quote:
I always transpose those letters and see Prince Reibus, but he's just another frog.
Took me a few seconds...
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 09:54 am
@hightor,
That's a great comment. Particularly this...
Quote:
you don't have the right to treat the FBI and the Justice Department like your personal lawyers.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 10:05 am
And once again, when #45 is outside of the US, the way he speaks is different. Not the words - his actual way of speaking. Fascinating.
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 10:06 am
@Walter Hinteler,
That's amazing! Thanks Walter.
Quote:
They've become increasingly suspicious since Trump was elected president
And for damned good reasons.
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 10:17 am
@thack45,
Definitely a Must Read
Quote:
Here's a master class for the MSM on how to do news..
http://uproxx.com/news/fox-news-trump-fire-mueller-sean-hannity/

And TPM has this piece on it as well
Quote:
Behold, Hannity’s About-Face On Report That Trump Tried To Fire Mueller


This really is a perfect example of how Fox behaves. It is a propaganda operation rather than a news or reporting business.

One dangerous failing of the mainstream media has been to regard (or act as if they regard) Fox to be a news entity.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 10:24 am
@ehBeth,
Yes it is. He has at least a rough idea of how different audiences will respond to different presentations. But that is a salesman's or a conman's expertise, after all.
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 10:41 am
One thing we can count on up the road a bit is that the GOP's standard line that they are the Law and Order party is going to come under some stresses when (as is looking more likely) Trump is indicted for obstructing justice.

But it is not as if this morphing of principle is uncommon to many of them. We'll surely all recall the "moral relativism" charge right wingers have made as regards liberal culture and Dem politicians over the last couple of decades. And now, Trump bragging about grabbing women's pussies, humping a porn star while married to his present wife (probably true) and his daily deceits are of no real importance.
ehBeth
 
  2  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 11:05 am
@blatham,
Not different presentation - a difference in the mechanics of his speech. The same thing that happened when he travelled to the east. I think it's more than problems with his teeth as was speculated at one point.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  0  
Fri 26 Jan, 2018 11:11 am
@BillW,
Quote:
I heard today that America needs 5 million people to fill needed jobs. Most of these jobs are middle income, high tech jobs. The Republicans would rather import those jobs. Then, not educate USA lower income youth to these levels (read non white principally); therefore, trapping them in substandard jobs in the slums.

It's not the GOP who is doing this, the liberals run the public school system, what are they teaching them? How about the colleges? They are more concerned with pumping out SJW's then actually educating people in careers that matter. I've pointed out several times, I was at the UW, University of Wisconsin 2016 graduation, there were several hundred if not close to 1000 students who graduated with degree's in Sociology, and maybe 200 of any type of engineer. Do sociology students have the skills or education to fill these tech jobs?

Quote:
Why do we need these immigrants, the USA is a non growth nation due to low birth rates.

Did you stop and wonder why the birth rates are low in the US? I'm sure it has nothing to do with abortion or promoting healthy families... I'm not against abortion but this has to have had a major impact on our birthrates.

Quote:
In conclusion, tRump and Republicans want to accept whites that have merit; ie, education and high technical skills only.

Do you work in the computer engineering field? I do, and the majority of the "imports" for jobs have been from India or Pakistan. When companies off shore jobs for tech, where do those jobs get exported to? It isn't "white" countries.

When it comes to immigration, we should only want the best of those who want to come here. Why would we want people who are going to be a drain on society, getting social welfare benefits, instead of those who would be a net add to the economy. We have enough citizens on welfare already, we don't need to import more welfare recipients.

Quote:
No chain migration or unskilled works. Farmers, construction, restaurant, janitorial and other lower skill businesses are worried big time.

This is were we should not allow able bodied people to collect any social welfare. If there are jobs, they should have to work them, if they don't want to work, they we should have no obligation to provide for their welfare. This is the same with low-skilled workers, why bring more in, when we have plenty here who don't work. It does no good for those people or US citizens.

Quote:
There's nothing wrong with chain migration, it is just another thing that the USA has become great from. Whether it be the blacks, Chinese, Irish, Germans, Slavs, Jews, Vietnamese, Indians, Muslims, etc. When you bring in families you create loyalty. I see nothing wrong with chain migration.

This was fine 100 year ago when we needed people to fill in a nation, we now have enough people in the US, we no longer need mass migration and it doesn't benefit anyone. Have you seen the gumball immigration video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE

Quote:
Virtually every line of my family goes back to the 16-1700s in America. Up until the early 1900's, if you follow census records you can see familyvlines following each other from one state to the next. I am a direct product of chain migration and proud of it.

I'll say again, this was fine when we were a new and growing nation, we no longer need mass migration, that not to say we need no migration. We will always have a need for "fresh blood" so to speak, but we are in a position where we can now be picky on who we allow in. We are best served by allowing migration of only the best people and I don't care where they come from, migration should be on an individual basis, not just because someone thinks we need more of x color of people because the US is overly white, that is just racism of another kind.
 

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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.45 seconds on 11/04/2024 at 09:52:36