Bombshell: Opposition research memos (not yet substantiated) discuss compromising Russian info on Trump

[whichphilosophy]

You know how to conduct investigations so I will explain this further.

We can be influenced by our own bias but what you have raised are leads

1. Why is Trump wanting to improve relations with Russia?
2. Why has he not sent in his taxes?

It's not possible to answer until evidence is clear (established beyond speculation),

One does not sit on evidence and fail to develop hypotheses in an investigation. As evidence is received and analyzed the likelihood may rise and fall that any of various hypotheses in hand might explain that evidence. The hypothesis that Cheato is compromised by his relationship with Russian - whatever it may be - continues to rise with every new bit. The corroboration of parts of the dossier under discussion is just another piece that fits. There is no competing hypothesis that in my opinion explains the facts without contradictions. You certainly have not offered any, beyond a left-wing/media conspiracy telling everybody lies.

Your model is correct or you have to develop a hypothesis to commence an investigation. There has to be a starting point. Indeed each piece of evidence can lead to different directions. Some are dead ends and some are not.
For the last bit you can eliminate (or sometimes show) any left wing conspiracy theories using the model you have just used.
One problem because we are all human is bias. We all are to a certain degree. If you notice I haven't said any of it is untrue because there is no conclusion yet.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Why would the IRS care if a non-President received money from Russians or gave them money?

If?

Yeah

 

[Elixir]

The hypothesis that Cheato is compromised by his relationship with Russian - whatever it may be - continues to rise with every new bit.

If you notice I haven't said any of it is untrue because there is no conclusion yet.

I figure that right now there is about a 90% chance +/- 5% with a 95% confidence interval, that Cheato is compromised by the Russians. Maybe a 65% +/- 5% chance with a 95% confidence interval that the salacious stories in the "dossier" are related to HOW Cheato is compromised by the Russians.

Of course my percentages and confidence intervals are just guesses. But those who are privy to all the available evidence (and that's NOT you, WP) will have their own estimates.
My question for you is - at what level of confidence should such people start "concluding" that Uncle Vlad has dirt on Trump, and at what point should they start "concluding" that it's likely that Vlad has film or other evidence of the rumored pissing party? Do you think it requires a full confession by Cheato, and should therefore never be said? Is 99% good enough to start sounding the alarm? 80%?

I think that if there's even half a chance, an alarm should sound, as the POTUS needs to be held to a higher standard than does Joe citizen whose sexual proclivities have little or no potential effect on the populace at large.

 

[whichphilosophy]

If you notice I haven't said any of it is untrue because there is no conclusion yet.

I figure that right now there is about a 90% chance +/- 5% with a 95% confidence interval, that Cheato is compromised by the Russians. Maybe a 65% +/- 5% chance with a 95% confidence interval that the salacious stories in the "dossier" are related to HOW Cheato is compromised by the Russians.

Of course my percentages and confidence intervals are just guesses. But those who are privy to all the available evidence (and that's NOT you, WP) will have their own estimates.
My question for you is - at what level of confidence should such people start "concluding" that Uncle Vlad has dirt on Trump, and at what point should they start "concluding" that it's likely that Vlad has film or other evidence of the rumored pissing party? Do you think it requires a full confession by Cheato, and should therefore never be said? Is 99% good enough to start sounding the alarm? 80%?

I think that if there's even half a chance, an alarm should sound, as the POTUS needs to be held to a higher standard than does Joe citizen whose sexual proclivities have little or no potential effect on the populace at large.

I could not know the odds of this unless I knew what the indefeasible evidence is. You know investigation methods so i think you agree.

 

[Elixir]

I figure that right now there is about a 90% chance +/- 5% with a 95% confidence interval, that Cheato is compromised by the Russians. Maybe a 65% +/- 5% chance with a 95% confidence interval that the salacious stories in the "dossier" are related to HOW Cheato is compromised by the Russians.

Of course my percentages and confidence intervals are just guesses. But those who are privy to all the available evidence (and that's NOT you, WP) will have their own estimates.
My question for you is - at what level of confidence should such people start "concluding" that Uncle Vlad has dirt on Trump, and at what point should they start "concluding" that it's likely that Vlad has film or other evidence of the rumored pissing party? Do you think it requires a full confession by Cheato, and should therefore never be said? Is 99% good enough to start sounding the alarm? 80%?

I think that if there's even half a chance, an alarm should sound, as the POTUS needs to be held to a higher standard than does Joe citizen whose sexual proclivities have little or no potential effect on the populace at large.

I could not know the odds

Of course you couldn't - that's what I just said!

Once again you spectacularly failed to answer what I asked - How confident should a person who is in possession of all the evidence- i.e. NOT YOU - have to be before they raise the alarm?

100% certainty would require that that person was there at the pissing party, so that degree of certainty will never be attained. If that person has nothing but rumors and some paper from a dubious source, it would obviously be unwise/unfair/irresponsible to raise an alarm. But what if they have paper from a source universally considered credible, plus some transcripts of phone conversations corroborating parts of the paper? Still not enough in YOUR opinion. So what would be enough, in YOUR opinion? Transcripts of a call between Uncle Vlad and Cheato discussing the sordid details of the pissing party? Would anything less suffice?

I repeat: I think that if there's even half a chance that these stories are true and Cheato is compromised in any way by the Russians, an alarm should sound, as the POTUS needs to be held to a higher standard than does Joe citizen whose sexual proclivities have little or no potential effect on the populace at large.

 

[Elixir]

I could not know the odds

Of course you couldn't - that's what I just said!

Once again you spectacularly failed to answer what I asked - How confident should a person who is in possession of all the evidence- i.e. NOT YOU - have to be before they raise the alarm?

100% certainty would require that that person was there at the pissing party, so that degree of certainty will never be attained. If that person has nothing but rumors and some paper from a dubious source, it would obviously be unwise/unfair/irresponsible to raise an alarm. But what if they have paper from a source universally considered credible, plus some transcripts of phone conversations corroborating parts of the paper? Still not enough in YOUR opinion. So what would be enough, in YOUR opinion? Transcripts of a call between Uncle Vlad and Cheato discussing the sordid details of the pissing party? Would anything less suffice?

I repeat: I think that if there's even half a chance that these stories are true and Cheato is compromised in any way by the Russians, an alarm should sound, as the POTUS needs to be held to a higher standard than does Joe citizen whose sexual proclivities have little or no potential effect on the populace at large.

I guess WP ran out of diversions...

 

[Malintent]

I thought this 'blackmail material' was that Flynn had an illegal conversation with them. It is now exposed and Flynn ain't in anymore. The investigation into WHY Flynn was protected up until now, even after Trump was briefed on the issue, may lead to Impeachment... discussed here: Flynn Resigns - Impeachment proceedings begin

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Of course you couldn't - that's what I just said!

Once again you spectacularly failed to answer what I asked - How confident should a person who is in possession of all the evidence- i.e. NOT YOU - have to be before they raise the alarm?

100% certainty would require that that person was there at the pissing party, so that degree of certainty will never be attained. If that person has nothing but rumors and some paper from a dubious source, it would obviously be unwise/unfair/irresponsible to raise an alarm. But what if they have paper from a source universally considered credible, plus some transcripts of phone conversations corroborating parts of the paper? Still not enough in YOUR opinion. So what would be enough, in YOUR opinion? Transcripts of a call between Uncle Vlad and Cheato discussing the sordid details of the pissing party? Would anything less suffice?

I repeat: I think that if there's even half a chance that these stories are true and Cheato is compromised in any way by the Russians, an alarm should sound, as the POTUS needs to be held to a higher standard than does Joe citizen whose sexual proclivities have little or no potential effect on the populace at large.

I guess WP ran out of diversions...

More likely awaiting orders.

 

[whichphilosophy]

If you notice I haven't said any of it is untrue because there is no conclusion yet.

I figure that right now there is about a 90% chance +/- 5% with a 95% confidence interval, that Cheato is compromised by the Russians. Maybe a 65% +/- 5% chance with a 95% confidence interval that the salacious stories in the "dossier" are related to HOW Cheato is compromised by the Russians.

Of course my percentages and confidence intervals are just guesses. But those who are privy to all the available evidence (and that's NOT you, WP) will have their own estimates.
My question for you is - at what level of confidence should such people start "concluding" that Uncle Vlad has dirt on Trump, and at what point should they start "concluding" that it's likely that Vlad has film or other evidence of the rumored pissing party? Do you think it requires a full confession by Cheato, and should therefore never be said? Is 99% good enough to start sounding the alarm? 80%?

I think that if there's even half a chance, an alarm should sound, as the POTUS needs to be held to a higher standard than does Joe citizen whose sexual proclivities have little or no potential effect on the populace at large.

The main reason an investigation can fall down or get bogged down (even if what it is trying to prove is correct) is to making a conclusion and then trying to find bits and pieces to match it. This is a common error which can also affect police work and in our daily work and all out politicians do this.

The first step is to keep aside 'Reliable source.' A reliable person can provide good information but if his source turns out to be fault.

You can take a photo of someone shaking hands with a Russian spy. However if this turns out to be a party with 200 people there and they were introduced and momentarily greeted each other then went their ways.

Also someone can say X is a reliable source based on opinion.

Dump the reliable source if it failed to provide information and then start checking again. Sometimes an event that took place after such an investigation took place could indicate a line of investigation.

An investigation should start with something odd or a loose end.

Take China

While I was there, an official with a highly clean record was photographed with a telescopic camera from a distance.
This was a student who was aware corrupt officials liked expensive things.
Nothing seemed out of the ordinary except he was wearing a watch which was identified as an expensive Rolex.
However this was well out of his pay bracket.
His dealings were checked by state investigators. An odd expense here and there and I understand one company doing feasibility studies was traced to him.

You can see a few instances in recent press reports from 2011. This event goes back to around 2002.

We conceive any of our leaders need to be of a higher standard than Joe but that doesn't happen. Bill's incident was like water off a ducks back and didn't dent his popularity around the world. Likewise Trump's comments in 2005 didn't seem to backfire on him given he still got more votes than the polls were predicting.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I thought this 'blackmail material' was that Flynn had an illegal conversation with them. It is now exposed and Flynn ain't in anymore. The investigation into WHY Flynn was protected up until now, even after Trump was briefed on the issue, may lead to Impeachment... discussed here: Flynn Resigns - Impeachment proceedings begin

I think US politics is getting like third world politics. However though he opened his mouth off does not seem to have endangered US National security.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I thought this 'blackmail material' was that Flynn had an illegal conversation with them. It is now exposed and Flynn ain't in anymore. The investigation into WHY Flynn was protected up until now, even after Trump was briefed on the issue, may lead to Impeachment... discussed here: Flynn Resigns - Impeachment proceedings begin

I think US politics is getting like third world politics. However though he opened his mouth off does not seem to have endangered US National security.

Sure thing Vlad. The US has the conversation on tape. They know exactly what was talked about. The question is why was the FBI looking into this stuff, yet all we heard from Comey was about Clinton's email server.

You want to talk third world, the election was third world.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I thought this 'blackmail material' was that Flynn had an illegal conversation with them. It is now exposed and Flynn ain't in anymore. The investigation into WHY Flynn was protected up until now, even after Trump was briefed on the issue, may lead to Impeachment... discussed here: Flynn Resigns - Impeachment proceedings begin

I think US politics is getting like third world politics. However though he opened his mouth off does not seem to have endangered US National security.

Except for calling on a foreign government to steal damaging information on an opponent in a presidential election.
Except that they did just that and his campaign staff was directly communicating with this foreign government during this time.
Except that the FBI received a "new" dump of emails right before the election.
Except for the weird secure server in the Trump office that connected only to the Russian "Bank".

He's either completely insane or a fucking traitor. I believe it is a little of both.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I think US politics is getting like third world politics. However though he opened his mouth off does not seem to have endangered US National security.

Sure thing Vlad. The US has the conversation on tape. They know exactly what was talked about. The question is why was the FBI looking into this stuff, yet all we heard from Comey was about Clinton's email server.

You want to talk third world, the election was third world.

I am sure that if the FBI found something more than unauthorised calls to the Russians (which were not about National Security) but about sanctions, it would have acted immediately. A least logically it should have. I had dismissed the claims about Clinton's server quite some time ago (posted somewhere) because there was no evidence produced that she did any actual harm.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sure thing Vlad. The US has the conversation on tape. They know exactly what was talked about. The question is why was the FBI looking into this stuff, yet all we heard from Comey was about Clinton's email server.

You want to talk third world, the election was third world.

I am sure that if the FBI found something more than unauthorised calls to the Russians (which were not about National Security) but about sanctions...

You seem to think that this is relevant, but it really isn't.

... it would have acted immediately.

They are currently acting on it. Compiling communications betweens X's and Y's.

I had dismissed the claims about Clinton's server quite some time ago (posted somewhere) because there was no evidence produced that she did any actual harm.

That's nice.

 

[blastula]

WP is fake news. The DOJ told the White House about Flynn's lies and that it was a security issue since it compromised him.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

WP is fake news. The DOJ told the White House about Flynn's lies and that it was a security issue since it compromised him.

But once everybody knew, wasn't Flynn then no longer compromised? The entire point seemed to be that the Russians could blackmail him by threatening to reveal the contents of his discussions with the ambassador. If that was already revealed to everybody (except Mike Pence because nobody talks to Mike Pence), the blackmail threat seems to go away and Flynn's compromised position with it.

 

[Keith&Co.]

If that was already revealed to everybody (except Mike Pence because nobody talks to Mike Pence), the blackmail threat seems to go away and Flynn's compromised position with it.

But then he becomes infectious. His continued presence compromises the individuals who knew before Everybody knew.
So they amputate him before the infection spreads, and look straight into the camera and say, "And we got rid of the problem."

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

WP is fake news. The DOJ told the White House about Flynn's lies... Trump then fired the acting AG... and that it was a security issue since it compromised him.

Added something to the timeline.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

If that was already revealed to everybody (except Mike Pence because nobody talks to Mike Pence), the blackmail threat seems to go away and Flynn's compromised position with it.

But then he becomes infectious. His continued presence compromises the individuals who knew before Everybody knew.
So they amputate him before the infection spreads, and look straight into the camera and say, "And we got rid of the problem."

Yes, I get the political aspect. I'm talking specifically about the security threat of Flynn being compromised by the Russians. The thrust of the Justice Department's warning seemed to be that there was a disconnect between the recordings of what Flynn said and the alternative facts he told other people about what he said, so he was in a compromised position because he could be blackmailed by the threat of revealing that he'd lied about the call. Once the White House council told Shithead McDickwad about it, though, there was no longer any potential for blackmail against Flynn so he was therefore no longer a security threat.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But then he becomes infectious. His continued presence compromises the individuals who knew before Everybody knew.
So they amputate him before the infection spreads, and look straight into the camera and say, "And we got rid of the problem."

Yes, I get the political aspect. I'm talking specifically about the security threat of Flynn being compromised by the Russians. The thrust of the Justice Department's warning seemed to be that there was a disconnect between the recordings of what Flynn said and the alternative facts he told other people about what he said, so he was in a compromised position because he could be blackmailed by the threat of revealing that he'd lied about the call. Once the White House council told Shithead McDickwad about it, though, there was no longer any potential for blackmail against Flynn so he was therefore no longer a security threat.

I think if you exchange "compromised" with "we saw what you did you fucking unethical asshats" it makes a bit more sense as the DoJ was less warning of "compromise" and more saying "you fucking traitors".