- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Russian Interference in the election?
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:39 pm to Navytiger74
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:39 pm to Navytiger74
Oh sweet, Navy is now an ACJ professor.
0
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:39 pm to Navytiger74
If it wasn’t evident before, it is becoming crystal clear now that this board can not be taken seriously. These indictments are serious business.
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:39 pm to NIH
i mean assume the worst about the hacked emails
Russian agents speak to Trump himself and tell him they have hacked Hillary emails. that's knowledge. what COLLUSION is there?
Trump didn't even release the emails. Wikileaks did
ok so Trump didn't release them
so Trump gave Russia some great deal (or avoided exposure of his secrets) by giving them permission to release the emails? after what we find out today, does anyone think Russia gave 2 fricks about receiving Trump's permission?
other than Wikileaks, what else is out there? i'm talking strictly about the campaign. if Trump violated some law 10 years ago with shady deals with Russians then prosecute him for that, but that ain't collusion
Russian agents speak to Trump himself and tell him they have hacked Hillary emails. that's knowledge. what COLLUSION is there?
Trump didn't even release the emails. Wikileaks did
ok so Trump didn't release them
so Trump gave Russia some great deal (or avoided exposure of his secrets) by giving them permission to release the emails? after what we find out today, does anyone think Russia gave 2 fricks about receiving Trump's permission?
other than Wikileaks, what else is out there? i'm talking strictly about the campaign. if Trump violated some law 10 years ago with shady deals with Russians then prosecute him for that, but that ain't collusion
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:40 pm to VOR
They are. The language the indictment used re the Trump campaign is about as favorable as it gets.
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:41 pm to Navytiger74
quote:
They indicted these guys when they felt the case to indict was strong enough and when doing so wouldn't undermine or complicate some other part of the investigation.
these are Russian assets who will almost certainly never be prosecuted. this indictment is literally nothing more than symbolic/PR stuff
quote:
If there was any calculation, it would probably be just to show the public that a lot of work is being done behind the scenes. That indictment has a lot of information in it that represents thousands and thousands of man-hours
so...PR. gotcha
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:41 pm to VOR
quote:
These indictments are serious business.
for potential war with Russia? yes
for Trump? no
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:41 pm to VOR
quote:
If it wasn’t evident before, it is becoming crystal clear now that this board can not be taken seriously. These indictments are serious business.
I don't understand what your point is here or who this is directed to.
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:41 pm to VOR
quote:
If it wasn’t evident before, it is becoming crystal clear now that this board can not be taken seriously. These indictments are serious business.
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
The PR angle is hilarious. Mueller doesn't give a shite about the public
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:43 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:As relates to these particular indictments? There apparently wasn't. In total, though, I frankly think Trump Jr's response to the proffered meeting to discuss "the Russian government's efforts to aid [Donald Trump's] candidacy" (actual quote in the e-mail) is evidence of, at least, attempted collusion--which isn't necessarily a crime. Kind of speaks for itself, in fact.
i'd love to hear you string together a cogent argument to explain how there was actual collusion greater than knowledge
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:43 pm to Machine
quote:
You understand Russia is trying to divide us, right? They work both sides, this is much bigger than us vs them politics.
Just stop. The left's gleeful chants of "Russians" were not about unifying us. They were about making excuses for their terrible candidate losing to the Republican's terrible candidate.
No one really gives rat's arse about "being divided." Not Hillary, not the left, not the DNC.
And let's be honest about the effect of Russian action on division in this country. Russian internet trolls are like adding a match to 10 story inferno; sure it might add something to the fire but it is basically inconsequential.
This post was edited on 2/16/18 at 2:38 pm
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:46 pm to NIH
quote:I would tend to agree. I was actually contesting the suggestion that there is/should be some method to how the case proceeds and how its progress is revealed--with the biggest hooks coming first or at just the right time. I think they're revealing the indictments, primarily, as they're ready to file. My point was that if there were some theatrical piece to it (though I doubt there is), it would be to show that the work goes on.
The PR angle is hilarious. Mueller doesn't give a shite about the public
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:47 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
for whom? is he going to target Youtube next?
Anyone have the o/u for days before TD will be targeted?
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:48 pm to VOR
quote:
These indictments are serious business.
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:48 pm to Machine
quote:Thank God China is above all this.
You understand Russia is trying to divide us, right? They work both sides, this is much bigger than us vs them politics.
I mean, I haven't heard a word about them trying to influence the electoral process one way or another, so I assume they don't care who's in charge in the US. Likewise North Korea, Saudi Arabia or Israel. Think of all the havoc they could have caused if they weren't so disinterested in sowing political discord in the world's most powerful nation.
I guess we should consider ourselves lucky that only Russia is so underhanded.
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:50 pm to Navytiger74
quote:
I would tend to agree. I was actually contesting the suggestion that there is/should be some method to how the case proceeds and how its progress is revealed--with the biggest hooks coming first or at just the right time. I think they're revealing the indictments, primarily, as they're ready to file. My point was that if there were some theatrical piece to it (though I doubt there is), it would be to show that the work goes on.
I think I have a pretty decent understanding of litigation and wasn't trying to suggest this wasn't properly "theatrical." I just have a hard time seeing a case for holding back and trotting out a completely different set of actors who did the really bad stuff (collusion?) and what those actions that actually implicate people in the campaign might actually be, in the face of everything these guys apparently did as laid out here.
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:53 pm to Navytiger74
quote:
As relates to these particular indictments?
no. as it relates to everything else (since these indictments aren't related to any "collusion")
quote:
I frankly think Trump Jr's response to the proffered meeting to discuss "the Russian government's efforts to aid [Donald Trump's] candidacy" (actual quote in the e-mail) is evidence of, at least, attempted collusion
so we're going from serious crimes (treason) to wishful crimes (obstruction of justice) to non-crimes (collusion) to attempted non-crimes?
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:54 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
It is what it is: a hot pile of nothingness. I ask any rational person: How can the Russian government interfere with US elections to any significant degree?
It’s so absurd that this is the course the establishment has taken. It’s on the MSM 24/7 and people simply don’t buy it.
One can only hope they keep it up until October. And, please trot out Maxine & Hank. It’s gonna be a bloodbath.
It’s so absurd that this is the course the establishment has taken. It’s on the MSM 24/7 and people simply don’t buy it.
One can only hope they keep it up until October. And, please trot out Maxine & Hank. It’s gonna be a bloodbath.
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:55 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:If you're still neck deep in that part investigation and not yet prepared to draw firm conclusions, why would you roll out half-baked conclusions? And why would you hold off on revealing firm conclusions pertaining to other parts of the investigation just because they aren't as significant as the parts of the investigation that you aren't prepared to draw conclusions on?
I think I have a pretty decent understanding of litigation and wasn't trying to suggest this wasn't properly "theatrical." I just have a hard time seeing a case for holding back and trotting out a completely different set of actors who did the really bad stuff (collusion?) and what those actions that actually implicate people in the campaign might actually be, in the face of everything these guys apparently did as laid out here.
Posted on 2/16/18 at 1:57 pm to Navytiger74
quote:
If you're still neck deep in that part investigation and not yet prepared to draw firm conclusions, why would you roll out half-baked conclusions?
on the same token, why expose your hand and roll out unicorn defendants?
quote:
And why would you hold off on revealing firm conclusions pertaining to other parts of the investigation just because they aren't as significant as the parts of the investigation that you aren't prepared to draw conclusions on?
if you do reveal these crimes, you're basically admitting that they're completely separate from any ongoing investigation
that means that any association b/w Trump (and his campaign) and the "social media" stuff is effectively closed now
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News