Utopia Talk / Politics / Mueller indicts 13 Russian Nationals

tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 12:13:42 for election meddling says they enlisted unwitting idiots to help them... could mean Don Jr. (breaking story)
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Feb 16 12:16:17 Could be every liberal in Congress.
Rugian Member	Fri Feb 16 12:18:20 How convenient that this is announced right as the FBI is taking flak for the Cruz fuck-up. Oh well, witchhunts always do require some witches to burn.
hood Member	Fri Feb 16 12:31:41 I look forward to the many bridges built out of these witches. Will we go through the ceremonial duck weighing, or just commence with the necessary construction projects?
Dukhat Member	Fri Feb 16 12:41:27 Rugian spewing nonsensical bullshit again. Cite your sources retard. Actually forget it. Go back to whining about getting stabbed in the back because you were a jerk to someone.
hood Member	Fri Feb 16 12:46:00 From Mueller's release: "Some Defendants, posing as US persons and without revealing their Russian association, communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign and with other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities." Uh oh.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Feb 16 12:47:21 Cuckhat really is a complete retard
Sam Adams Member	Fri Feb 16 12:50:48 Calling them "unwitting" is basically an exoneration though. Retarded though they be, if they didnt do it on purpose, politics is very forgiving of idiots.
Rugian Member	Fri Feb 16 12:54:38 Dukhat Member Fri Feb 16 12:41:27 Rugian spewing nonsensical bullshit again. Cite your sources retard. Uh, okay? "Florida school shooting: FBI failed to act on gunman concerns 16 February 2018" http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43090664 "Mueller Accuses Russians of Pro-Trump, Anti-Clinton Meddling February 16, 2018" http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-16/u-s-charges-13-russians-3-companies-for-hacking-election "A witch-hunt is a search for people labelled "witches" or evidence of witchcraft, often involving moral panic[1] or mass hysteria.[2]" http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt
Sam Adams Member	Fri Feb 16 13:07:21 Lol cuckhat is a real retard.
McKobb Member	Fri Feb 16 13:12:26 Bear season!
Dukhat Member	Fri Feb 16 13:21:38 Yes mueller timed these indictments to counteract the 24 hour news cycle and did it in such a way that annoys rugian the most. It must hurt to even pee when you cuckservatives have so few working brain cells.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 13:32:18 it is technically good news for Trump as it says no American knowingly helped these 13 people's efforts... although it doesn't mean there aren't more indictments where that's not the case the giant idiot blob may have to finally acknowledge Russian interference if he wants to brag about the unwitting part... he has been unwilling to do so as his tiny brain can't separate interference from collusion (and/or because he's Putin puppet)
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Feb 16 13:37:10 No indication of Trump's people, in this leg of the investigation, being involved with the Russians. BTW, the Russians favored Bernie Sanders too.
Forwyn Member	Fri Feb 16 13:48:39 Basically, Russians favored everyone but Hillary, then staged protests after the election to weaken Trump as well. No surprise there. Also, Cuckhat owned. kek
Paramount Member	Fri Feb 16 13:58:08 Trump is Netanyahu’s man. The FBI should investigate the Trump administration’s connection to Israel. That is where you should look.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Feb 16 14:07:22 And you should check under your bed for the boogie man.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Feb 16 14:10:54
Dukhat Member	Fri Feb 16 14:12:33 Its not good for trump at all. It say the americans duped by these specific russians didn't know. So much more in the woodwork especially jot that another trump lieutenant just struck a plea deal.
Forwyn Member	Fri Feb 16 14:14:35 Americans taking info from guys posing as Americans isn't Russian collusion. So, yeah...good for the admin.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 14:27:48 Trump finally expresses outrage at Russia! ... just kidding... " Russia started their anti-US campaign in 2014, long before I announced that I would run for President. The results of the election were not impacted. The Trump campaign did nothing wrong - no collusion! " ~idiot
Forwyn Member	Fri Feb 16 14:32:36 "Now, there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charge conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election."
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 14:33:03 "No indication of Trump's people, in this leg of the investigation, being involved with the Russians." i believe that's false... that's when he mentioned 'unwitting'... it was Trump campaign officials and other random activists
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 14:35:41 the next 13 indicted could be entirely w/ knowing Americans help... too soon to draw any collusion conclusions and was merely noting Trump's only concern is himself & his win, not suggesting his tweet misrepresents this particular indictment although 'no impact on election' is about votes being altered at ballot box, there's no way to judge how their actions, rallies, false stories, etc. effected opinions... a distinction Trump will never note
Dukhat Member	Fri Feb 16 14:36:00 Doesn't vindicate trump at all. Just doesn't reveal anything immediately incriminating. But in bizarro retard cuckservative land, this becomes vindication. Alt righters are so fuckng stupid.
hood Member	Fri Feb 16 14:41:04 It is rather impressive that this turned from a total nothing burger into simply no wrongdoing (yet) in the administration. Guess we can't use that "muh Russia" bit anymore, eh?
Sam Adams Member	Fri Feb 16 15:05:58 "unwitting" is a pretty massive blow against cuckhat and other extreme lefties. Its basically the same verdict against hillary for the emails. "Stupid but not criminal".
Forwyn Member	Fri Feb 16 15:19:42 "Guess we can't use that "muh Russia" bit anymore, eh?" As it appears that most of the charges revolve, much like the vaunted intel memo, around social media, don't see why that would be the case. Muh KGB facebookers doe
hood Member	Fri Feb 16 15:38:58 "Its basically the same verdict against hillary for the emails. "Stupid but not criminal"." So we should be able to milk it for a few years? I mean, if we're being reasonable and equal.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 16:26:12 Flynn was separate Gates & Manafort together as they were related Papadopolous was separate these 13 separate there can be no conclusion about the future... these don't involve the already known collusion of Don Jr. for example... and their total bullshit lies about that meeting, which Trump himself known to have helped write
Sam Adams Member	Fri Feb 16 16:37:14 "So we should be able to milk it for a few years? " Sure. Its probably worth a few % of voters.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Fri Feb 16 16:41:13 "Guess we can't use that "muh Russia" bit anymore, eh?" sure we can. still nothingburger. still no collusion. muh Russia
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 17:09:49 "the investigation is a hoax" ~liar we're now on 17th indictment
obaminated Member	Fri Feb 16 17:21:01 basically we got confirmation about stuff we already knew. Trump people had nothing to do with Russian election meddling. Also, has anyone ever been consistently wrong as Cuckhat? It is kinda depressing.
obaminated Member	Fri Feb 16 17:33:16 Side note.... is swordtail one of the russians indicted?
hood Member	Fri Feb 16 17:36:17 "Trump people had nothing to do with Russian election meddling." False. We know that Trump people didn't KNOWINGLY interact with these 13 Russians. They did actually interact with them, though.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Feb 16 17:58:04 How do you know that?
hood Member	Fri Feb 16 18:03:49 It was in the report, dufus. I quoted the relevant part in this very thread.
Rugian Member	Fri Feb 16 18:37:28 Cuckhat, who said anything about Mueller manufacturing a story? All I said was that the timing was convenient, and witchhunts need witches. I would appreciate it if you would retract your false claims against me and issue a formal apology.
Rugian Member	Fri Feb 16 18:37:47 obaminated Member Fri Feb 16 17:33:16 Side note.... is swordtail one of the russians indicted? Pretty sure you can't indict a bot.
obaminated Member	Fri Feb 16 18:40:38 Cuckhat would appreciate it if you stopped butt-fucking his wife.
Renzo Marquez Member	Fri Feb 16 19:02:24 tumbleweed the wanderer Fri Feb 16 17:09:49 ""the investigation is a hoax" ~liar we're now on 17th indictment" And 0 indictments related to collusion. And 0 credible evidence of collusion.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 19:06:35 so now we're finding proof of a coordinated effort by Russians to help Trump win as meaningless? also, Trump has clearly been calling the whole thing (including non-collusion interference) a hoax: " The Russia hoax continues, now it's ads on Facebook. What about the totally biased and dishonest Media coverage in favor of Crooked Hillary? " ~ the walking penis http://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/911179462745710593
Senor Marquez Member	Fri Feb 16 19:10:42 (((russian lawyer)))
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 19:16:02 and there isn't zero evidence of collusion Papadopilus had info on what Russians had before anyone else, haven't heard how that came to be... plus Don Jr DID collude with Russians, proof positive in his own emails and meeting and nowhere did the announcement suggest this round of indictments concludes the Mueller investigation
Senor Marquez Member	Fri Feb 16 19:23:37 Look I make up my own rules and own evidence, because I seen it remember I am a (((lawyer)))
Forwyn Member	Fri Feb 16 20:30:09 "so now we're finding proof of a coordinated effort by Russians to help Trump win as meaningless?" Coordinated effort, mostly on social media, to disparage Cruz, Rubio, and Clinton, and to help Bernie, Trump. Nothing to shrug at, but nothing to cry incessantly about, either. "plus Don Jr DID collude with Russians, proof positive in his own emails and meeting" Anti-Trump lawyer meeting under false pretenses, thrown out quickly. That's not collusion.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 21:33:48 they promoted Bernie & Stein to hurt Hillary... they opposed Trumps opponents to help Trump Russia helped Trump win not sure why calling that woman an antiTrump lawyer, plus she wasn't only Russian agent in the room... the ONLY thing Jr was told was that Russia wanted to help Trump win and had info for him, and he jumped all over it... the known liars claim no info was given, but still admit she was asking for them to support ending sanctions that Putin is particularly annoyed by (via the bullshit adoption story), so seems likely they were offering something in exchange for that
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 21:36:38 ...I hope you're not buying the ridiculous story that it was a setup meeting to make the Trump camp look bad.... as they then sat on it until AFTER election?
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 21:42:29 apparently after claiming Trump vindicated, Hannity found a way to make the nonsensical Uranium One 'scandal' important news today http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DWM9ldwVQAE3DZE.jpg
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Feb 16 21:51:20 Everyone that signed off on that uranium deal deserves to join Julius and Ethel.
Dukhat Member	Fri Feb 16 22:44:12 This is all the drip-drip-drip. Trump is so retarded that he thinks this vindicates him when it does nothing of the sort (and by the extension the cuckservatives repeating his dumb arguments here are extra retarded). Now he can't fire Mueller saying that Russia interference is a big "nothingburger" or a simple, retarded meme of "Muh Russia."
Forwyn Member	Fri Feb 16 23:04:55 "as they then sat on it until AFTER election?" rofl. Same reason Russia staged #resist protests right after election? Don't be a moron.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Feb 16 23:33:18 so you're saying Russia set up that meeting just to make Trump look bad AFTER the election if he happened to win? ...and the lawyer known for lobbying against Magnitsky Act, just happened to lobby against Magnitsky Act at that fake meeting? isn't the more obvious answer that it is what it seemed to be? plus doesn't change the fact Don Jr was all for colluding... nor the fact that Russia wanted Trump to win & helped him do so...
Forwyn Member	Sat Feb 17 02:42:38 "so you're saying Russia set up that meeting just to make Trump look bad AFTER the election if he happened to win?" Doesn't have to be Russia. Bait and Switch Veselnitskaya presents reason A for meeting, brings up reason B at meeting, then starts talking about meeting publicly for reason C. ait and Switch Veselnitskaya is about as trustworthy as the KGB. "plus doesn't change the fact Don Jr was all for colluding" He wanted opp. research from a private individual (granted visa multiple times by Obama DHS) who claimed to have opp. research proving criminal Clinton tax evasion. He announced this even before the meeting. Very little difference between this and Steele dossier - not collusion by legal or linguistic definition.
American Democrat Member	Sat Feb 17 05:15:11 "He wanted opp. research from a private individual (granted visa multiple times by Obama DHS) who claimed to have opp. research proving criminal Clinton tax evasion. He announced this even before the meeting. Very little difference between this and Steele dossier - not collusion by legal or linguistic definition." ...except for the detail that in the email exchanges it was indicated where this "opposition research" was coming from straight from a high level Russian official that is a representative of the Kremlin.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Feb 17 10:29:29 "He wanted opp. research from a private individual" i don't think Veselnitskaya was ever mentioned in the emails... he was told Russia wanted to help Trump win, and they have dirt on Hillary for him as part of the help Don Jr.: "I love it"... sets up meeting the very first meeting w/ these people & it's held at Trump Tower w/ Trump's campaign manager, son & son-in-law...
Dukhat Member	Sat Feb 17 11:02:11 Forwyb jumping through a bunch of logical loops again. Fucking retard. But you'd expect as much coming from a guy who thinks that brownback was a good governor of Kansas and that the shit sources he reads are superior to places like Vox.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Feb 17 16:09:01 Trump now has 6 tweets about this... w/ still not a single bad word for Russia
Forwyn Member	Sat Feb 17 20:46:57 "indicated where this "opposition research" was coming from" If it were to prove criminality, largely irrelevant. "But you'd expect as much coming from a guy who thinks that brownback was a good governor of Kansas" Literally never discussed Brownback on these forums. lawl Cuckhat. lawl Vox. lawl
American Democrat Member	Sun Feb 18 08:05:41 "If it were to prove criminality, largely irrelevant." No not 'largely irrelevant." This shows intention that Trump, Jr wanted to obtain information "things of value" which is prohibited by fed. law to obtain foreign citizens/governments that has anything to do with the American election campaign. That would be the argument.
UP Factcheck Member	Sun Feb 18 08:09:13 "Literally never discussed Brownback on these forums. lawl Cuckhat. lawl Vox. lawl " May have participated in a Brownback thread though. http://www...hread=69742&time=1410495645412
Renzo Marquez Member	Sun Feb 18 08:11:38 American Democrat Member Sun Feb 18 08:05:41 "No not 'largely irrelevant." This shows intention that Trump, Jr wanted to obtain information "things of value" which is prohibited by fed. law to obtain foreign citizens/governments that has anything to do with the American election campaign. That would be the argument." Is Christopher Steele a foreign citizen? Did Democrats try to obtain "things of value" (which you state include mere information) from him?
American Democrat Member	Sun Feb 18 08:23:18 "Is Christopher Steele a foreign citizen? Did Democrats try to obtain "things of value" (which you state include mere information) from him? " We aren't talking about Clinton and Clinton isn't the focus of the investigation. However, it would merit to be looked into. But, you can go back and play pseudo-laywer on the forums.
hood Member	Sun Feb 18 10:27:11 "Is Christopher Steele a foreign citizen? Did Democrats try to obtain "things of value" (which you state include mere information) from him?" Yes, no. Democrats hired an american firm to conduct opposition research. That firm hired Steele. That's a far cry from going directly to state actors of a foreign government. Did you ever learn analogy at devry law school?
Senor Marquez Member	Sun Feb 18 10:34:10 Hey!! I made fun of Dakyron for going to Devry. Low blow!!
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sun Feb 18 10:47:29 Dems hired a firm who hired an investigator who happened to be British to gather info Russia came to Don Jr ("This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump")... and Jr. said "i love it!", 'come meet the top people in our campaign!' )
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sun Feb 18 10:54:54 "I never said Russia did not meddle in the election, I said “it may be Russia, or China or another country or group, or it may be a 400 pound genius sitting in bed and playing with his computer.” The Russian “hoax” was that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia - it never did!" "Finally, Liddle’ Adam Schiff, the leakin’ monster of no control, is now blaming the Obama Administration for Russian meddling in the 2016 Election. He is finally right about something. Obama was President, knew of the threat, and did nothing. Thank you Adam!" "Now that Adam Schiff is starting to blame President Obama for Russian meddling in the election, he is probably doing so as yet another excuse that the Democrats, lead by their fearless leader, Crooked Hillary Clinton, lost the 2016 election. But wasn’t I a great candidate?" that's our president!
Renzo Marquez Member	Mon Feb 19 17:44:02 hood Member Sun Feb 18 10:27:11 "Yes, no." The info collected by Steele had no value? "Democrats hired an american firm to conduct opposition research. That firm hired Steele. That's a far cry from going directly to state actors of a foreign government." Steele previously worked for MI6. For all we know, he might have still been working for them in some capacity. You should post the section of the US Code you believe Don Jr. violated. I suspect you'll find that (1) it doesn't apply to Don Jr.'s conduct; (2) a broad enough interpretation to capture Don Jr.'s conduct would also ensnare whoever paid Steele; and/or (3) it's unconstitutional. tumbleweed the wanderer Sun Feb 18 10:47:29 "Dems hired a firm who hired an investigator who happened to be British to gather info" He just so happened to be a former intelligence officer of a foreign government. "Russia came to Don Jr ("This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump")... and Jr. said "i love it!", 'come meet the top people in our campaign!' )" See (1)-(3) in my response to Hood.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Feb 19 19:41:44 "Mueller indicts 13 Russian Nationals tumbleweed for election meddling says they enlisted unwitting idiots to help them... Must mean the fools that paid Millions for the dossier.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Feb 19 21:35:04 ...the dossier that has had parts verified, and has had no parts disproven And Steele was already a trusted FBI source on other matters as noted by Nunes himself, if anything improper of FBI relying on him it apparently goes well beyond this (although I doubt there is anything improper)
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Feb 19 22:03:14 as to Renzo's focus on actual laws... i don't know the laws... Mueller will let us know... if the campaign assisted Russia with it's interference it will be against the law, same as these 13 indictments i do know hiring a firm who hires an investigator who uses his old contacts to gather info is entirely different than Jr being told the Russian gov't wants to help Trump win & has info for him & him gleefully accepting & inviting the top campaign people and hopefully we'll learn why Trump was pro-Russia the entire campaign until this day, even after these revelations... still zero tweets critical of Russia and we have our officials having to tell foreign leaders to ignore his tweets... a total embarrassment to the nation
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Feb 20 03:13:36 "...the dossier that has had parts verified, and has had no parts disproven" The one that was used to get the warrant without being fully verified.
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 04:34:58 "The info collected by Steele had no value?" The problem is that what Fusian GPS had and that utilized what Steele had acquired as an employee is definitely a grey area in regards to if it qualifies under the FEC laws. "You should post the section of the US Code you believe Don Jr. violated." Actually, since you're the one that brought it up as a reference pseudo-lawyer; perhaps you should have relayed it to the rest instead of declaring we should go look it up. Since you want to play that role you of acting it would have behoove you to do so. Before we dig deeper into it we must play this game. What is Mueller thinking? We are not entirely sure what laws may be in violation possibly speculation. I did bring up the concept of the 'things of values' rules, the US campaign statues. Which points to a direction of Trump, Jr that may possibly be violated. However, you had to bring up Clinton for a completely irrelevant reason. What other possible law violations? Computer Fraud and Abuse act. If it is established that Trump, Jr knew Russian hacking to obtain the information he is seeking, then that would qualify. Actually I am literally laughing out loud because you wrote this pseudo-lawyer; "I suspect you'll find that (1) it doesn't apply to Don Jr.'s conduct; (2) a broad enough interpretation to capture Don Jr.'s conduct would also ensnare whoever paid Steele; and/or (3) it's unconstitutional" I mean, this is such a broad explanation without any background. Maybe you should take the time, oh that is right. You are not that type of poster. You are the "one-liner" type that posts something thinking it is of any relevance and then when typically challenged you give more "one-liners" then disappear thinking you had anything worth offering of substance. Would you give up the act already? "He just so happened to be a former intelligence officer of a foreign government. " Grey area. He was used by an American firm. And has been a source for the FBI. The argument goes that the Clinton campaigned used the same American Firm as did the Republicans. As it appears both established they didn't go seek any Foreign Nationals or any Foreign Govt. to solicit information to be used. Which would be a clear violation. Then you have to consider the "volunteer services." Which also hides itself in a grey area. Nonetheless, that is another debate. If we are going to play the game that he was a foreign national, and we are dealing with reality, unlike your lawyer persona. Research/Tracking firms such as Fusion GPS, would be disqualified and not allowed to be utilized by any political campaigns because they do use contractors and subcontractors that are not of US citizenship. Again, the argument would be that in more explicit grey area. "See (1)-(3) in my response to Hood. " LOL, oh you. "The one that was used to get the warrant without being fully verified. " False.
Renzo Marquez Member	Tue Feb 20 05:10:22 tumbleweed the wanderer Mon Feb 19 21:35:04 "And Steele was already a trusted FBI source on other matters as noted by Nunes himself," LOL@trusted FBI source. (A) he isn't anymore. (B) we've seen how well the FBI handled info from sources on Tamerlan Tsarnaev and NikoCruz. tumbleweed the wanderer Mon Feb 19 22:03:14 "as to Renzo's focus on actual laws... i don't know the laws..." LOL. So you're rooting for prosecutions under laws that probably don't even exist. "Mueller will let us know... if the campaign assisted Russia with it's interference it will be against the law, same as these 13 indictments" These 13 indictments appear to be completely unrelated to anything Don Jr. is even accused regarding the meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya. BTW, the info she provided during that meeting was given to her by Fusion GPS - same firm involved with the Steele Dossier. http://www...meeting-russians-trump-n819526 " In an interview with NBC News, Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya says she first received the supposedly incriminating information she brought to Trump Tower — describing alleged tax evasion and donations to Democrats — from Glenn Simpson, the Fusion GPS owner, who had been hired to conduct research in a New York federal court case. A source with firsthand knowledge of the matter confirmed that the firm's research had been provided to Veselnitskaya as part of the case, which involved alleging money laundering by a Russian company called Prevezon. This account casts Veselnitskaya's activities in a new light, challenging the notion that she was simply carrying talking points to Trump that originated with the Russian government." Also, many months into Mueller's investigation, he had not even tried to interview Veselnitskaya... "But she has not been contacted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, she said." If Mueller was building a case against Don Jr. based on anything about this meeting, you'd have to think interviewing the people there would be important. "i do know hiring a firm who hires an investigator who uses his old contacts to gather info is entirely different than Jr being told the Russian gov't wants to help Trump win & has info for him & him gleefully accepting & inviting the top campaign people" Yes, they are different. One involves actively paying a (former) spy from a foreign intelligence agency. The other apparently involves considering passively accepting information (which is not a crime - again, find the statute. If you can find one, it will probably also cover the Steele conduct and be unconstitutionally in breadth). "and hopefully we'll learn why Trump was pro-Russia the entire campaign until this day, even after these revelations... still zero tweets critical of Russia" Wasn't Russia opposed to U.S. military inventions in Kosovo, Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc.? Weren't all of those interventions retarded? Didn't all of those interventions make us less safe? "and we have our officials having to tell foreign leaders to ignore his tweets... a total embarrassment to the nation" Trump has committed impeachable offense in my opinion. But y'all niggas are too busy focusing on his fucking tweets and "muh Russia" nonsense to consider real issues. Lulz.
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 07:38:00 "LOL@trusted FBI source. (A) he isn't anymore. (B) we've seen how well the FBI handled info from sources on Tamerlan Tsarnaev and NikoCruz." Red herring. If you going to introduce mistakes by law enforcement as a way to discount or discredit from the point that is being made then this will be a long pointless debate if you are going to submit that criminal informants are pointless? Point is that Steele was reliable for the FBI.
Forwyn Member	Tue Feb 20 10:09:30 "perhaps you should have relayed it to the rest instead of declaring we should go look it up." Nonsense. You're asking him to prove a negative.
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 10:16:25 No. It was maneuver for him to actually point out the US code o law for him extrapolate as in how Trump, JR. May or may not violated since he is the "expert" playing the lawyer persona.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Feb 20 10:36:31 "LOL. So you're rooting for prosecutions under laws that probably don't even exist. " i said *i* don't know them... we've all heard collusion itself isn't a crime... i've heard various possible crimes just don't recall them all here, and all are dependent on what happened later, not holding the meeting in and of itself (we don't know what became of it, only their claim that nothing did... the claim of continuous liars, & criminals don't tend to admit to crimes... except when Mueller puts the screws to them apparently) ----- & i agree on the Red Herring analysis above, none of that matters as to whether it was wrong to use Steele's research ----- "Wasn't Russia opposed to U.S. military inventions in Kosovo, Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc.? Weren't all of those interventions retarded? Didn't all of those interventions make us less safe? " as if Trump noted any of those reasons... or even knows of them... he wanted to be friends w/ Russia the whole time, confusing even Republicans, he never had reasons... he defended them on the plane shoot down & Crimea... he repeatedly disagreed with our own intel agencies conclusions Russia interfered, even smearing them... he said he asked Putin & believed Putin's denial... Putin talked him into a joint cyber security plan, that Trump quickly abandoned upon being mocked... plus to this moment, not a bad tweet for Russia/Putin
Forwyn Member	Tue Feb 20 11:18:42 "It was maneuver for him to actually point out the US code o law for him extrapolate as in how Trump, JR. May or may not violated since he is the "expert" playing the lawyer persona." So...you're asking him to prove a negative.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Feb 20 11:22:58 and as to Veselnitskaya's claims her info was all from Fusion A) she's completely capable of lying about where all her info came from... she's a known advocate for Putin against the sanctions B) Trump camp said they got nothing, so someone IS lying C) Jr. email says clearly it's the Russian gov't wanting to help, & he's 'i love it'... total willingness to collude, who can say what happened for sure
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 12:48:35 No forwyn. I am asking him to reference what has already been referenced for him to support his opinion why he thinks Trump,JR. Didn't violate any laws. His claim that we will come to the same conclusion as him. I am challenging him on it.
Forwyn Member	Tue Feb 20 13:30:13 You're asking him to prove a negative, whether you want to call it a challenge or a reference doesn't change that. "Oh, you don't think he broke any laws? In that case, sift through the USC and list any possible violations, then explain why they aren't valid."
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 13:34:37 This his conclusion. The onus is for him to explain why he has that conclusion. No matter what you say forwyn, no matter how many times you claim about proving a negative. The laws were established. He concludes Trump, he didn't do anything illegal. He plays the lawyer persona. I want him to support his conclusion. Unless you are claiming he the opposite and Trump,JR. did violate laws pertain to FEC?
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 13:34:59 +was
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 13:37:27 Blah, typing fast on phone. *unless you are claiming that he believes the opposite and Trump, JR. Did violate laws pertaining to FEC.
Forwyn Member	Tue Feb 20 13:42:56 1. It is much easier to point to a law you believe he violated, than to preemptively point to dozens of laws and state why you believe he didn't. 2. The onus in the criminal justice system is to prove guilt, not to prove innocence. 3. If we're simply asking anyone here to back up any claims made, I'm curious as to why we haven't seen a link to USC prior to this regarding claims of illegality.
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 13:47:36 1. The laws were pointed out, genius. 2. The is correct, but we are on a forum discussing various topics ad expressing our opinions, sometimes our professionso opinions. And in this case includes a poster that plays a role of lawyer on the forums. 3. Who knows, forwyn, who knows. Nonetheless it was referenced and he actually directly responded to it.
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 13:50:34 I'm hating this autocorrect. *that is correct.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Feb 20 14:34:24 Sarah Sanders first example of Trump supposedly being tougher on Russia than Obama was by rebuilding our military...
Renzo Marquez Member	Tue Feb 20 16:54:04 tumbleweed the wanderer Tue Feb 20 11:22:58 "and as to Veselnitskaya's claims her info was all from Fusion" These aren't just her claims. The nbcnews article I linked references "a source with firsthand knowledge of the matter" who "confirmed that the firm's research had been provided to Veselnitskaya ..." The source is someone from Fusion or the Mueller team/intell community. As an aside, the author of that article, Ken Dilanian, was shitcanned by the LA Times for letting the CIA edit his articles. http://the...eared-stories-cia-publication/ Then, NBC hired him as a national security reporter. Lulz. But criticizing the press is an attack on the First Amendment. Congress shall make no law abridging the CIA stenographers. Forwyn, don't bother with the tranny multis. They can't cite anything specific because they are totally clueless. You'll just get some nonsense they heard on a Joy Reid segment.
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 18:04:59 What's the matter Pseudo-lawyer. How many times have you ran away from me now? You challenged once and then you ran away again. If you want to debate law, let's debate it. But I sure hate to embarrass you.
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 18:11:53 "They can't cite anything specific because they are totally clueless." Irony, I did twice. You ignored it. Yet you decided to reference, but then backtrack and act as it doesn't exist. Let me help you what was referenced again; FEC laws And computer fraud act. But go ahead and continue your role of playing lawyer.
Renzo Marquez Member	Tue Feb 20 18:18:12 "FEC laws" is not specific. By "computer fraud act", do you mean the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act? That's 18 USC 1030. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030 Subsection (b) deals with conspiracy. Do you think this applies to Don Jr.'s conduct?
Renzo Marquez Member	Tue Feb 20 18:20:59 We can rule out the CFAA and then we can discuss specific "FEC laws" if you can actually cite the particular ones you think might be applicable.
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 19:40:53 American Democrat Member Tue Feb 20 04:34:58 What other /possible/ law violations? Computer Fraud and Abuse act. If it is established that Trump, Jr knew Russian hacking to obtain the information he is seeking, then that would qualify. **(6) knowingly and with intent to defraud traffics (as defined in section 1029) in any password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization, if— (A) such trafficking affects interstate or foreign commerce; "You should post the section of the US Code you believe Don Jr. violated." Actually, since you're the one that brought it up as a reference pseudo-lawyer; perhaps you should have relayed it to the rest instead of declaring we should go look it up. Since you want to play that role you of acting it would have behoove you to do so. Before we dig deeper into it we must play this game. What is Mueller thinking? We are not entirely sure what laws may be in violation possibly speculation. I did bring up the concept of the 'things of values' rules, the US campaign statues. Which points to a direction of Trump, Jr that may possibly be violated. However, you had to bring up Clinton for a completely irrelevant reason. Oh look, Alexander, I mentioned that. Hmmm. Even before that I said this and you addressed specifically as I was responding to Forwyn. American Democrat Member Sun Feb 18 08:05:41 "If it were to prove criminality, largely irrelevant." No not 'largely irrelevant." This shows intention that Trump, Jr wanted to obtain information "things of value" which is prohibited by fed. law to obtain foreign citizens/governments that has anything to do with the American election campaign. /That would be the argument./ Points brought up...ball was in the court for quite a few posts now. Which I have challenged you as to why you think they do not apply. As I said before, the onus is on you big boy.
American Democrat Member	Tue Feb 20 19:41:58 Source demonstrating possible violation; http://law...d-law-cyber-crime-expert-says/
Senor Marquez Member	Tue Feb 20 19:47:42 I am a devry lawyer!!!!!! I went with Dakyron the one that I doxxed years ago!
Senor Marquez Member	Tue Feb 20 19:48:44 (((lawyer))
The Third Reich Member	Tue Feb 20 19:52:01 Renzo knows he struggle is real.
	show deleted posts