So yous guys don’t even believed your own leaders?If Trump admitted he loved pretty Russian women, I would accept his admission as true.
What is Trump came out and admitted it himself? Would he lying, or would yous?
You poor buggers got caught in your own vicious cycles.
Sad for yous.
LLING! Originally Posted by HoeHummer
If you really want to know what started all this ; Our intel community listens to foreign diplomats (many of whom are spies).you are talking about Flynn's call to Sergey Kislyak. and the fact that Flynn "committed clear treason" by discussing sanctions or some other nonsense. it was no such thing and the transcript shows that Flynn did not make any offers or promises to Kislyak, he only asked that Russia refrain from any retaliatory sanctions until Trump took office.
They were listening to one such diplomat and were surprised that on the other end was someone from the Trump campaign.They were not tapping the phones of or spying on the Trump campaign. Another thing ; Some contact between the newly elected administration and foreign nations is customary and expected. But intel was shocked in that the amount of Trump interaction with Russia was Off the Charts. It was way more than previous presidencies. Originally Posted by sportfisherman
If you really want to know what started all this ; Our intel community listens to foreign diplomats (many of whom are spies).So, talking with foreign governments is expected but too much of such perfectly legal and customary talk is treason?
They were listening to one such diplomat and were surprised that on the other end was someone from the Trump campaign.They were not tapping the phones of or spying on the Trump campaign. Another thing ; Some contact between the newly elected administration and foreign nations is customary and expected. But intel was shocked in that the amount of Trump interaction with Russia was Off the Charts. It was way more than previous presidencies. Originally Posted by sportfisherman
you have to realize that your logical and well presented arguments aren't going to sway the TDS sufferers. even if Shifty Schiff himself admitted he never had any evidence of collusion (he didn't, he doesn't, he never will) the howlers on the left wouldn't believe it.
they'd scream for his head on a pike. hmm .. that's actually a good idea. maybe Evil Lord Trump the emperor will execute him.
BAHHAAAAA Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
Someone posted above that the list of "AntiTrump Republicans is Endless" in order to discredit this report and the fact that the committee was comprised of and controlled by Republicans.Senate committees are Chaired by the Majority Party in power there ; right now that is Republicans.A chairman's authority on his committees is all powerful.
True, the Chair gets to decide who is called and writes the report. So why sign it if you don't believe every word of it? Where is the Democrat report that refutes everything the "Republicans" say? Why didn't Mueller indict Manafort, Stone and P for conspiracy to interfere in the election?
Also as to no proof of one vote changed ; What that speaks to in the report is that there was no evidence that the Russian interference was such that they could access our voting machines and change votes.
True.
But with a dis-information campaign by Russia that disparages Hillary and promotes Trump ; There is no way to Prove that any votes were changed. How could you do it retrospectively ? Call every voter and see if they changed their voting choice in the last week ? No way. But it certainly didn't help Hillary and probably did help Trump some.
You wouldn't have to call anybody. The media could have simply asked if there was anybody in America that was swayed by the Russian propaganda. How did it help Trump unless somebody changed their mind? You are assuming at least 8,000 people did that. Surely at least one person would come forward and say I hate to admit it but I was fooled into voting for Trump because of all the Trump hatred that transpired. Absent proof, you can't assume a wrong and expect it to stick.
So we are speaking of and concerned with Republicans in The Senate.There are few AntiTrump Republicans in the Senate. Mitt Romney could be considered one.Probably a few others. But they mostly all go along with Trump. They confirm his Judicial appointees. They passed his Tax Break for Corporations and the Rich.
OK, you are saying you would expect all the Republicans to sign the report. Why would the Democrats not write a separate report like the House Democrats. Remember all the fighting between Nunes and Schiff? The House Democrats never accepted a single thing that Nunes said and guess what, Nunes was right all along about the FBI and FISA abuse which to this day, with al the released information, Schiff still won't admit to.
So it is significant that this committee made this report.
Which Democrats apparently didn't strenuously oppose.
I am for constitutional government and representative government.A voting democracy.
That's exactly what we had. In every single election we have ever had, there was false information about both candidate out there. Doesn't really matter who it comes from, it is up to educated Americans to filter through the crap and vote for the person that most represents what they want to see done and I believe that is exactly what happened. You don't seriously believe after everything we have learned about the Steele dossier, that there wasn't damaging information about Trump floated do you?
I don't like or trust those Russian bastards.I'm all for,up to a point,having a modern outlook with them as far as trade and economic issues.And I don't want to revert back to the Cold War days and have an antagonistic attitude towards them.
You mean like when Obama refused to supply Ukraine with Russia tank killing javelin missiles because he didn't want to antagonize them but Trump, Putin's puppet, does supply them, does keep sanctions on. Or you mean like when Obama told Medvedev to relay a message to Putin to not do anything to undermine his re-election and then he could have more "flexibility in dealing with Russia. It's amazing how you guys on the left just want to gloss that over as if it never happened. If Trump was caught on a hot mike saying that, he would be impeached. Oh, wait, he already was for asking for an investigation into a former VP who made a quid pro quo deal for a billion dollars while his son worked for a corrupt Ukrainian oil company but of course there is no evidence that either did anything wrong because there was no investigation. Isn't that how you find evidence of corruption, with an investigation?
But I remember that fuckin' monster looking Kruschev banging his shoe on the desk at the UN saying "We will bury you !" Originally Posted by sportfisherman
If you really want to know what started all this ; Our intel community listens to foreign diplomats (many of whom are spies).
They were listening to one such diplomat and were surprised that on the other end was someone from the Trump campaign.They were not tapping the phones of or spying on the Trump campaign. Another thing ; Some contact between the newly elected administration and foreign nations is customary and expected. But intel was shocked in that the amount of Trump interaction with Russia was Off the Charts. It was way more than previous presidencies. Originally Posted by sportfisherman
The effort began only days after Paul Manafort resigned as chairman of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in August 2016.
Manafort faced scrutiny for accepting millions in off-book payments from pro-Russian Ukrainian officials — an uncomfortable situation for the longtime lobbyist, since accusations were then emerging that Russia was interfering in the White House race to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton.
According to a new bipartisan report by the Senate Intelligence Committee released Tuesday, Manafort began quickly working with a Russian employee based in the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv on a counternarrative — that it was the Ukrainians who were actually interfering in the U.S. election, not Russia, and that they were framing Manafort to help the Democrats.
That claim has persisted ever since, even after U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials said it had no merit — promoted by Russian President Vladimir Putin abroad and President Trump himself at home.
It has been embraced by Trump’s allies in conservative media and in Congress. It was touted on the right during Trump’s impeachment last year and has carried into the present as the backdrop to an ongoing GOP effort to use Ukraine to attack Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.
In fact, the idea that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 campaign began as a Russian influence operation designed to distract attention from the Kremlin’s own activities that year, the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded after an exhaustive three-year investigation.
It was advanced for years by Manafort’s employee, Konstantin Kilimnik, whom the committee identified as a Russian intelligence officer who, among other things, used a false persona on Twitter to circulate and promote the Ukrainian counternarrative, the report found.
Manafort was personally involved in promoting the disinformation, as well, the committee found, strategizing with Kilimnik in secret meetings in Madrid in early 2017 and pushing the idea with the president’s son Donald Trump Jr. around the same time.
Kilimnik’s role — and his influence in getting Trump and his supporters to seize on the propaganda — shows how the interests of the president and the Kremlin have aligned, long after the 2016 election.
Trump and Republican senators said Tuesday that the most important takeaway of the new Senate report is that there was no evidence of “collusion” between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Indeed, the panel did not conclude that Trump entered into a knowing conspiracy with the Kremlin to win the election.
But the bipartisan investigation — like the report by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III before it — did find that Russia engaged in an aggressive, multifaceted effort to affect the outcome of the election and that the Trump campaign sought to benefit from those efforts. The panel also concluded that a number of key campaign aides were vulnerable to Russian influence, sometimes unwittingly.
Manafort, who was convicted in 2018 of financial crimes related to his work in Ukraine, in particular posed a “grave counterintelligence threat” to the country, the committee found.
Sen. Mark R. Warner of Virginia, the ranking Democrat on the committee, said its report should be seen as a warning to members of Congress and all Americans.
“This report was not fundamentally about trying to write the history of 2016,” he said in an interview Wednesday. “It was trying to say: How do we prevent it from happening again in 2020?”
Asked about the committee’s findings on Ukraine, White House spokesman Judd Deere did not directly respond. Instead, he said in a statement that the committee’s report “affirms what we have known for years. There was absolutely no collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia.”
An attorney for Manafort did not respond to a request for comment. Kilimnik, who was charged in 2018 with obstruction of justice and is believed to be in Russia, also did not respond to an email requesting comment. He has previously denied ties to Russian intelligence.
In its nearly 1,000-page report on Russian counterintelligence threats released Tuesday, the committee said Russia’s influence operation included “overlapping false narratives which sought to discredit investigations into Russian inference in the 2016 U.S. elections and spread false information about the events of 2016.”
The committee said the disinformation campaign claiming Ukraine’s role began in late 2016 and continued until at least January 2020 and was promoted not just by Manafort and Kilimnik but by “numerous Russian-government actors,” including an oligarch named Oleg Deripaska who had business ties to Manafort.
The committee wrote that “similarities in narrative content, the use of common dissemination platforms, the involvement of Kremlin agents Kilimnik and Deripaska” led them to conclude that “the influence efforts were coordinated to some degree.”
The bipartisan finding was released at a key moment, just weeks after the country’s top counterintelligence official described Russia’s efforts to again try to shape public opinion in the United States before a presidential vote — and named a Ukrainian lawmaker as a key participant.
Earlier this month, William Evanina, director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, publicly asserted that Russia is using a “range of measures” to denigrate Biden and said that Kremlin-linked actors are working to boost Trump’s reelection bid.
Evanina cited the recent release by pro-Russian parliamentarian Andriy Derkach of leaked phone calls dating to 2016 between Biden and the former Ukrainian president as part of a Russian effort to hurt Biden.
The new Senate Intelligence Committee report also identified Derkach as a figure who played a role in promoting the false narrative that Ukraine interfered in the U.S. election to help Democrats.
Earlier this week, Trump retweeted an account promoting snippets of one of the recordings promoted by Derkach to his more than 85 million Twitter followers. The account has since been suspended by Twitter for violating the site’s policies on “platform manipulation and spam.”
The White House did not respond to questions about the tweet.
Derkach, the son of a KGB officer who also attended a school associated with the former Soviet intelligence service, has met at least twice in the past year with Trump attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani.
In a statement to The Washington Post earlier this year, Derkach said allegations that he is working in the interests of foreign intelligence services are attempts to pressure him into stopping his activity. “There is not a single confirmed or reliable fact of my illegal activity or wrongful connections,” he said.
Derkach also said that he had provided information to two Senate committees investigating Biden and the 2016 Russia probe. Spokesmen for those committees, led by Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) deny that they received information from Derkach.
In the wake of the report by the Senate Intelligence Committee, Democrats renewed their calls for Johnson and Grassley to end their ongoing probes.
“The findings of this bipartisan report are yet more evidence that their investigation is giving credibility to disinformation pushed by Russian intelligence,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said in a statement.
“The bottom line is that Senate investigations must not be based on conspiracy theories propagated by Russian intelligence officers and discredited foreign nationals,” he said. “This one is, which is why Republicans should abandon it immediately.”
Johnson has forcefully denied Democratic claims that he is promoting Russian propaganda.
A spokesman for Johnson’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee rejected the Democratic criticism Wednesday, calling it “yet again another false claim from Democrats as they try to politicize foreign election interference and discredit our investigation.”
The spokesman, Austin Altenburg, said in a statement that the panel “has never received nor taken information from Kilimnik or Derkach, and it’s shocking that Democrats continue peddling Derkach’s conspiracy theories even after the intelligence community has communicated that Derkach is spreading Russian disinformation. It’s simply a pathetic attempt to mislead the American people and only leaves us with one question: what are they afraid we’ll uncover?”
Taylor Foy, a spokesman for Grassley, said that the Senate Finance Committee he chairs has not received, requested or made use of anything provided by Derkach and that Kilimnik has nothing to do with its work.
“Unsupported innuendo that our work is somehow inspired or orchestrated by foreign actors, or anyone else for that matter, is simply untrue, and very likely the product of a foreign disinformation campaign,” he said in a statement.
Trump has repeatedly claimed that Ukrainians interfered in the 2016 election to help Clinton. “They tried to take me down,” he told advisers in an Oval Office meeting in May 2019, according to testimony during the congressional impeachment inquiry.
FBI Director Christopher A. Wray has said there is “no evidence” to support the theory. Fiona Hill, who served on Trump’s National Security Council, told Congress last year that it was a “fictional narrative” advanced by the Russian security services.
The Senate Intelligence Committee found that Kilimnik was probably behind some of the first public suggestions that Ukrainians were interfering in the election to help Democrats. Behind the scenes, he pushed the claim that the “black ledger” that tracked Manafort’s payments as a private consultant in Kyiv before he went to work for Trump — the document that led to Manafort’s ouster from the campaign — had been forged and leaked by Clinton allies, the report said.
According to the committee, Manafort and Kilimnik were in close contact during the campaign and after the campaign. Manafort on “numerous occasions” shared with Kilimnik internal information about the Trump campaign, including polling data and its battleground strategy, the committee wrote.
The panel said it had difficulty discerning why Manafort passed along the material or with whom Kilimnik shared the information. But the committee noted that the two took steps to hide their communications by using encrypted apps and a burner phone and by saving their most sensitive conversations for in-person contact.
One key meeting between the two took place at a Manhattan cigar bar while Manafort was still leading Trump’s election effort, according to the report.
According to the committee, Kilimnik privately promoted to journalists the idea that Ukraine interfered in the U.S. election — not Russia — as early as August 2016. He later helped ghostwrite a February 2017 opinion piece that argued that pro-Clinton Ukrainians had “manufactured” a case against Manafort, the report found.
The column, which ran under the byline of a Ukrainian parliamentarian in U.S. News & World Report, also dismissed possible ties between Trump and Russia.
For his part, Manafort pressed the same theory with Trump Jr. in February 2017, the committee found, citing an email Manafort wrote the president's son. It linked to a Politico report that Manafort claimed laid out “the conspiracy to implement the disinformation campaign on me between the DNC/Obama Administration and the Govt of Ukraine.”
Starting later that year, other “Russian-government proxies and personas” were echoing the same “false narrative” online, according to the report.
One cyber-persona the committee said was controlled by Russian military intelligence alleged in July 2017 on its blog that Ukraine had interfered in the U.S. election. A day later, a Twitter handle the committee said was operated by a company with ties to the Russian government tweeted that Clinton and her campaign colluded with Ukraine.
Nine days after that, Derkach sent a formal letter to Yuri Lutsenko, then serving as Ukraine’s top prosecutor, asking him to investigate Ukrainian interference in the U.S. election.
By the following month, Manafort and Fox News host Sean Hannity were exchanging text messages about “Ukraine interference,” according to messages made public by prosecutors in Manafort’s criminal case.
In spring 2019, the theory that Ukrainians had worked to help Democrats in 2016 gave way to a separate assertion that Biden, then rising in the polls as a 2020 candidate, had used his role as vice president to protect his son, who served on the board of a Ukrainian gas company.
Giuliani has said that his efforts to uncover information about Biden in Ukraine began when he set out to explore the idea that Ukraine had interfered in the 2016 election. Acting as Trump’s defense attorney, Giuliani has said he thought he could help Trump face down the Mueller investigation.
“I knew they were hot and heavy on this Russian collusion thing, even though I knew 100 percent that it was false,” Giuliani told conservative broadcaster Glenn Beck last year. “I said to myself: ‘Hallelujah. I’ve got what a defense lawyer always wants. I can go prove someone else committed this crime.’ ”
Giuliani has said he consulted with Manafort about the theory that it was Ukraine that interfered in the 2016 race. In a text message to The Post on Wednesday night, Giuliani wrote that “none of the information I received over a year and half ago had any connection to Russia.” He called the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report a “one side inquiry,” adding that “people who wrote this report never contacted me, or my witnesses or asked to see the documents I have or tapes.”
By summer 2019, the two ideas had become fully fused for Trump, who pressed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to open investigations of both subjects on a July 25 phone call.
“They say a lot of it started with Ukraine,” Trump told Zelensky in the call, pressing him to work with Giuliani or Attorney General William P. Barr to “get to the bottom of it.” Trump also pressed Zelensky to investigate Biden and his son Hunter.
The call prompted a whistleblower complaint that led to Trump’s impeachment.
Portions of the Senate report that appear to deal with some of these topics were redacted from public view.
But the evolution of the Ukraine-related claims could be seen in messages posted by a Twitter handle used by Kilimnik, the committee found.
In 2017 and 2018, the onetime Manafort aide used the handle @PBaranenko to promote the idea that Ukraine interfered in the last U.S. presidential election.
By 2019, Kilimnik had moved on. In that year, the committee wrote, the alleged Russian intelligence officer “repeatedly tweeted information related to the Bidens and Ukraine.”
So the FBI started an investigation and after about 6 months I think it was, Strzok reported back to James Comey that they had found no illegal contact and no conspiracy.
You seem to have missed the memo that it was Papadopolouses lose lips that started "all this".
We now know through recently de-classified files that Flynn was set up. How else would you explain a hand written note from the head of the FBI's Counter Intelligence unit asking if the purpose of interviewing Flynn in the White House, was to get the truth or get him to lie so that he could be prosecuted and or fired? Would anybody like to comment on that because I haven't read a sole comment on that. And Flynn did absolutely nothing wrong or illegal in the phone call. Why he would lie about that, I hope one day he will tell us in the book he will surely write to get back some of that 6 1/2 million he spent in his defense.
Anybody want to comment on the recently indicted Council to the FBI for altering documents, destroying Carter Pages life, all because the FBI didn't like Trump being elected? In one of the e-mails by said Council, he said "Viva the Resistance" in reference to doing everything they could to stop Trump from being elected and when elected, everything they could to get him removed.
Funny how the left isn't at all concerned about that interference huh? Originally Posted by HedonistForever
This report was generated by a Republican predominant bi-partisan Senate committee. Not "radical liberals and the media".What has Trump done for Russia that makes him a Russian Agent? Did he supply Russia with Uranium? Oh that's right that was the Obama Administration, lol. The Democrats are more involved with Russia than Trump could ever be. You Democrats will cling to your fantasy's for dear life, it's getting pathetic.
It detailed,affirmed,and actually expanded upon much of what the Mueller report found.In other words it validated the Mueller report findings.
Even if one questions some of what led to the Mueller investigation,both Mueller and the mainly Republican Senate Committee found a bunch of sketchy shit.
They found evidently no "provable" case of collusion to an extent necessary to charge and convict a sitting president,which is a pretty high legal bar.
In other words they did not find a written signed contract between Trump and Putin stating Trump would help Putin on sanctions if Putin would help him win election.
There is a "theory" out there.I don't know enough to comment either way about it.But I was going to look into it.
But it's out there ; That Trump is a Russian agent. Originally Posted by sportfisherman
Donald Trump boasted about meeting semi-naked teenagers in beauty pageantsOriginally Posted by dilbert firestorm
Former Miss Vermont Teen USA, Mariah Billado, told Buzzfeed: "I remember putting on my dress really quick because I was like, 'Oh my god, there's a man in here."
Three other girls chose to remain anonymous, but told the publication it was "creepy" and "shocking".
Mr Trump said on the Howard Stern radio show in 2005 that he was “allowed”, as the owner of the pageant, to go backstage while the contestants were getting dressed.
Donald Trump boasted about meeting semi-naked teenagers in beauty pageantsSo what. He wasn't president and it's kind of normal to boast about shit like that. You need to find something to boast about, it might do wonders for your low self esteem.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a7357866.html