RussiaGate

[laughing dog]

Ah, the voice of experience.

Just Russian and Polish ancestry. Part of being smart can mean playing dumb. Anyway I worked in Hong Kong and China for some years. Pretending not to understand is an old trick to have the opportunity to listen to your foreign partners talking amongst themselves after a lot of baijiu.

Even in business the Chinese will use a lot of baiting to ensure a meeting with the other parties but the agenda could be different.

Thanks for the confirmation.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Ah, the voice of experience.

Just Russian and Polish ancestry. Part of being smart can mean playing dumb. Anyway I worked in Hong Kong and China for some years. Pretending not to understand is an old trick to have the opportunity to listen to your foreign partners talking amongst themselves after a lot of baijiu.

Even in business the Chinese will use a lot of baiting to ensure a meeting with the other parties but the agenda could be different.

So your daughter you keep forgetting about is no longer 100% Chinese?
At least you are better than grouchy whichphilosphy who is probably in the Hole.

 

[ZiprHead]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia...ontact-with-top-russian-prosecutor-1500063809
So she says her "dirt" on Clinton was actually Browder tax evasion and then donating to Democratic Party. She is clearly more interested in Magnistky case than in Trump winning.

The explanation is meaningless - it doesn't matter if she only offered erotic cakes shaped in the likeness of Clinton during the meeting. The emails where a promise was made of an exchange of something of value with foreign nationals for election purposes is enough to implicate Trump Jr, as well as Kushner, and Manafort. The only question that remains is how aware Trump was of the meeting - and considering the ties he seems to have with these individuals it's pretty unlikely he knew nothing of a meeting that happened with his inner circle, in his building, with the knowledge of his personal assistant.

Considering how much you're wrapping yourself around the axle on trivialities, at this point I'm beginning to wonder if this last exchange is you just projecting onto Veselnitskaya...

My guess is that Jr. immediately told daddy about the offer. Proving it is another matter.

- - - Updated - - -

The Russians tend to like large buns rather than cake.

You would know, Boris.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Just Russian and Polish ancestry. Part of being smart can mean playing dumb. Anyway I worked in Hong Kong and China for some years. Pretending not to understand is an old trick to have the opportunity to listen to your foreign partners talking amongst themselves after a lot of baijiu.

Even in business the Chinese will use a lot of baiting to ensure a meeting with the other parties but the agenda could be different.

So your daughter you keep forgetting about is no longer 100% Chinese?
At least you are better than grouchy whichphilosphy who is probably in the Hole.

My daughters are Filipina, Russian, Polish, Scottish and Portuguese due to my parents Mongrel mix. I'n not in any holes today or anywhere else where the sun don't shine. Having said that, it's seems rather dark at the moment.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Just Russian and Polish ancestry. Part of being smart can mean playing dumb. Anyway I worked in Hong Kong and China for some years. Pretending not to understand is an old trick to have the opportunity to listen to your foreign partners talking amongst themselves after a lot of baijiu.

Even in business the Chinese will use a lot of baiting to ensure a meeting with the other parties but the agenda could be different.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Your welcome. A lot of experience dealing with government corporations in China, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Russia and Hong Kong

 

[whichphilosophy]

The explanation is meaningless - it doesn't matter if she only offered erotic cakes shaped in the likeness of Clinton during the meeting. The emails where a promise was made of an exchange of something of value with foreign nationals for election purposes is enough to implicate Trump Jr, as well as Kushner, and Manafort. The only question that remains is how aware Trump was of the meeting - and considering the ties he seems to have with these individuals it's pretty unlikely he knew nothing of a meeting that happened with his inner circle, in his building, with the knowledge of his personal assistant.

Considering how much you're wrapping yourself around the axle on trivialities, at this point I'm beginning to wonder if this last exchange is you just projecting onto Veselnitskaya...

My guess is that Jr. immediately told daddy about the offer. Proving it is another matter.

- - - Updated - - -

The Russians tend to like large buns rather than cake.

You would know, Boris.

Do you mean Boris Johnson? Did he mention anything about big buns?

 

[RavenSky]

The Americans had two bad choices and it's a matter of opinion who the worst one is.

Yes... Trump or Pence. Both YUGE Bigly bad choices. It is a matter of opinion which would be a worse president for the US

The Choice was between Hilary Clinton and Trump to see who would win the unpopularity contest.

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by about 3 million.

 

[RavenSky]

I don't see any Russia apologists, stooges, or shills thanks to the ignore feature.

It's hardly a debate if everyone agrees with each other. It's a bit like opening a debating society in North Korea.

You aren't "debating".

 

[RavenSky]

Remember back in 2000 when the Gore campaign received tapes of Bush rehearsing debate answers and comebacks from an anonymous source? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Republicans said the materials -- which included a videotape of Mr. Bush practicing with top advisers and more than 120 pages of strategies, facts and ''comeback responses'' -- would prove invaluable to Mr. Gore. Some Democrats speculated that the incident had been engineered by Republican strategists.

The materials never made their way into Mr. Gore's hands. Tom Downey, a Gore adviser and former congressman, received them by mail at his Washington offices on Sept. 13. He turned them over to the F.B.I.

View attachment 11815

I see we are back to the "all sides do it" fallacy.

They do.

They don't, as the previous post shows.

Fuck your false equivalences and phony background

 

[TV and credit cards]

Caught a bit of this writer on the MSNBC endless loop. What she was saying caught my attention. She speaks to how I've felt about Trump & Co since last summer.
Who is speaking up? Those who don't know? Those who don't care? Those who are waiting for every last scrap of evidence and a smooth copy of the report? My hope is that Mueller has enough evidence to sound the alarm to congress long before his investigation is complete. My further hope is that they listen.

Sarah Kendzior

But what Trump is doing is very different, and it is much worse.

Trump and Russian officials collude brazenly, and then they lie brazenly, and that audacity, paradoxically, is why I think a lot of Americans had trouble accepting that this is really happening.

We know that you know what we did, and we do not care, because there is nothing you can do about it.

What they are really hoping for is that we will be complacent, that we not defend the honor of our country or the sanctity of our laws, that we’ll just stand by silently and let them get away with it.

Trump is under investigation. Does that signal his end? Not so fast

It is possible that the President will fire Mr. Mueller... Pundits who speculate that the optics of this decision will hold Mr. Trump back are still mired in the presumption that the President respects democratic norms and rule of law, which he does not.

...in Donald Trump and his backers, who dress up their power grab as a persecution, presenting themselves as victims of a conspiracy even as they boast of their own crimes.

...with President Trump. He will never admit to destroying himself; he will destroy everything else in his path first to avoid recrimination. That shamelessness, that blatant disregard for either norms or laws, spells dark times ahead.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The Americans had two bad choices and it's a matter of opinion who the worst one is.

Yes... Trump or Pence. Both YUGE Bigly bad choices. It is a matter of opinion which would be a worse president for the US

The Choice was between Hilary Clinton and Trump to see who would win the unpopularity contest.

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by about 3 million.

Trump was least unpopular with the electoral college; does the US need this institution . Also if voting is done state by state a person can still win with the least votes if they secure the most states. If the goal is on the number of votes or proportional representation, a lot of reforms would need to be made.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's hardly a debate if everyone agrees with each other. It's a bit like opening a debating society in North Korea.

You aren't "debating".

Maybe I can join; but I would have to be a supporter of Kim.

A debate in such instances would be who can grovel the most to their leader.

There is something murky going on but I doubt if the Russians had anything serious on Clinton and wanted to use this to entice a meeting. This is just an opinion without facts but in that part of the world, this is how they deal with Western Nations (and each other).

 

[whichphilosophy]

Remember back in 2000 when the Gore campaign received tapes of Bush rehearsing debate answers and comebacks from an anonymous source? Pepperidge Farm remembers.



View attachment 11815

I see we are back to the "all sides do it" fallacy.

They do.

They don't, as the previous post shows.

Fuck your false equivalences and phony background

The bottom line is politicians in the different parties are essentially sticking their snouts in the same trough. This is where they will be the same.

Now the question is whether Russia interfered in the US election and the Trump campaign colluded. This is different but still foraged out of the same universal trough.

The unclassified report issued by the intelligence agencies involved does not give any conclusive statement to this effect even where it states 'Highest Level Of Certainty.' I referenced this before.

The problem lies in the poor level of investigation and not whether the parties are guilty or not. Indeed if you release information too early to public media, it can give the other party more time to take evasive action. That does not diminish the right of the accused party to respond when the evidence does turn up on their desks.

PS: the debate on affordable healthcare is also a farce. The US could look to Cuba for a well run system despite shortages of medical supplies caused by years of embargoes.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

So your daughter you keep forgetting about is no longer 100% Chinese?
At least you are better than grouchy whichphilosphy who is probably in the Hole.

My daughters are Filipina, Russian, Polish, Scottish and Portuguese due to my parents Mongrel mix. I'n not in any holes today or anywhere else where the sun don't shine. Having said that, it's seems rather dark at the moment.

Congratulations on having more daughters.

The Hole, as you know, is the Scientology prison.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I see we are back to the "all sides do it" fallacy.

They do.

They don't, as the previous post shows.

Fuck your false equivalences and phony background

The bottom line is politicians in the different parties are essentially sticking their snouts in the same trough. This is where they will be the same.

There is a big difference on opposition research and colluding with a hostile foreign government to influence an election.

Now the question is whether Russia interfered in the US election and the Trump campaign colluded. This is different but still foraged out of the same universal trough.

No that's like saying you want someone to be quiet is the same think as murder. Not the same.

The unclassified report issued by the intelligence agencies involved does not give any conclusive statement to this effect even where it states 'Highest Level Of Certainty.' I referenced this before.

The unclassified report states that Russia interfered with the US election. Donald Trump Jr. has admitted the colluding with the Russians.
Your "highest level of certainty" is just an ever moving goalpost.

The problem lies in the poor level of investigation and not whether the parties are guilty or not.

You do NOT know the level of investigation. If so prove it by identifying yourself as part of investigative team. If not please provide the names of the people involved in the investigation have passed on such information. Of course we know you have no inside information of the quality of the investigation. If you did, you wouldn't be posting it here, but reporting it to your masters.

Please post you attempted healthcare derail in the proper forum.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I see we are back to the "all sides do it" fallacy.

They do.

They don't, as the previous post shows.

Fuck your false equivalences and phony background

The bottom line is politicians in the different parties are essentially sticking their snouts in the same trough. This is where they will be the same.

There is a big difference on opposition research and colluding with a hostile foreign government to influence an election.

Now the question is whether Russia interfered in the US election and the Trump campaign colluded. This is different but still foraged out of the same universal trough.

No that's like saying you want someone to be quiet is the same think as murder. Not the same.

The unclassified report issued by the intelligence agencies involved does not give any conclusive statement to this effect even where it states 'Highest Level Of Certainty.' I referenced this before.

The unclassified report states that Russia interfered with the US election. Donald Trump Jr. has admitted the colluding with the Russians.
Your "highest level of certainty" is just an ever moving goalpost.

The problem lies in the poor level of investigation and not whether the parties are guilty or not.

You do NOT know the level of investigation. If so prove it by identifying yourself as part of investigative team. If not please provide the names of the people involved in the investigation have passed on such information. Of course we know you have no inside information of the quality of the investigation. If you did, you wouldn't be posting it here, but reporting it to your masters.

Please post you attempted healthcare derail in the proper forum.

Many thanks. I'm sure when checking Kushner there will be a lot of sewage but seeing which garbage fits collusion is another thing.

The unclassified report provides this:

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

The fact that we may or not know what information is available does not mean there is necessarily anything of value at this point.

As defined in page 23 of the report


High Confidence generally indicates that judgements are based on high-quality information from multiple sources. High quality confidence in a judgement does not imply that the assessment is a fact or a certainty; such judgements may be wrong.

Nowhere in the report does it mention anything above High Confidence.

The report focuses on RTV and pretty much reports the obvious.

We are talking about colluding with the Russians to influence the elections. Kushner and co responded to a source that revealed nothing of value.
As I mentioned there are a lot of reasons for baiting and attracting attendees to a meeting.

Until an investigation establishes a chain of events and times that suitably fits the claims, then we cannot make any conclusions though we can form personal opinions.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Until an investigation establishes a chain of events and times that suitably fits the claims, then we cannot make any conclusions though we can form personal opinions.
[/I]

So nothing new has come forward since the January 6th report? Or are we safe to assume the evidence of collusion that is not being disputed which came forward in the last 10 days is invalid?

I wonder why this thread was created on Feb 23rd?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I wonder why this thread was created on Feb 23rd?

I am the one who created the thread and I couldn't even remember! I mean, we've had what, 89 scandals since then. So, anyway, I had to go back to post#1.

From that, I found this odd tidbit:

The FBI rejected a recent White House request to publicly knock down media reports about communications between Donald Trump's associates and Russians known to US intelligence during the 2016 presidential campaign, multiple US officials briefed on the matter tell CNN.

Wow. Now I gotta wonder. Did Donald Trump know about this meeting way back then? Maybe he was confused because there were so many meetings going on with the Russians, it's hard to know which is which.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Until an investigation establishes a chain of events and times that suitably fits the claims, then we cannot make any conclusions though we can form personal opinions.
[/I]

So nothing new has come forward since the January 6th report? Or are we safe to assume the evidence of collusion that is not being disputed which came forward in the last 10 days is invalid?

I wonder why this thread was created on Feb 23rd?

A lot of things will come forward and have done. The chain I mentioned would be required. At the moment someone claiming to have information on corruption on Clinton in Russia but produced nothing is insufficient to show collusion and an effect.

 

[ZiprHead]

A lot of things will come forward and have done. The chain I mentioned would be required. At the moment someone claiming to have information on corruption on Clinton in Russia but produced nothing is insufficient to show collusion and an effect.

It's like a fucking broken record...