Author Topic: United States of Russia?  (Read 191611 times)

turketron

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 340
  • Age: 32
  • Location: WI
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1400 on: February 23, 2018, 09:20:37 AM »
https://slate.com/technology/2018/02/paul-manafort-couldnt-convert-pdfs-to-word-documents.html

Quote
So, here’s the essence of what went wrong for Manafort and Gates, according to Mueller’s investigation: Manafort allegedly wanted to falsify his company’s income, but he couldn’t figure out how to edit the PDF. He therefore had Gates turn it into a Microsoft Word document for him, which led the two to bounce the documents back and forth over email. As attorney and blogger Susan Simpson notes on Twitter, Manafort’s inability to complete a basic task on his own seems to have effectively “created an incriminating paper trail.”

Truly "the best people."

bacchi

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2761
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1401 on: February 23, 2018, 09:53:55 AM »
https://slate.com/technology/2018/02/paul-manafort-couldnt-convert-pdfs-to-word-documents.html

Quote
So, here’s the essence of what went wrong for Manafort and Gates, according to Mueller’s investigation: Manafort allegedly wanted to falsify his company’s income, but he couldn’t figure out how to edit the PDF. He therefore had Gates turn it into a Microsoft Word document for him, which led the two to bounce the documents back and forth over email. As attorney and blogger Susan Simpson notes on Twitter, Manafort’s inability to complete a basic task on his own seems to have effectively “created an incriminating paper trail.”

Truly "the best people."

Hahahaha. Is that for real? It's the 1st result at google.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+to+edit+a+pdf

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1402 on: February 23, 2018, 09:56:06 AM »
https://slate.com/technology/2018/02/paul-manafort-couldnt-convert-pdfs-to-word-documents.html

Quote
So, here’s the essence of what went wrong for Manafort and Gates, according to Mueller’s investigation: Manafort allegedly wanted to falsify his company’s income, but he couldn’t figure out how to edit the PDF. He therefore had Gates turn it into a Microsoft Word document for him, which led the two to bounce the documents back and forth over email. As attorney and blogger Susan Simpson notes on Twitter, Manafort’s inability to complete a basic task on his own seems to have effectively “created an incriminating paper trail.”

Truly "the best people."

Hahahaha. Is that for real? It's the 1st result at google.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+to+edit+a+pdf

Reader (the free Acrobat) can't edit PDFs. The full version is paid and far less common.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

turketron

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 340
  • Age: 32
  • Location: WI
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1403 on: February 23, 2018, 10:07:55 AM »

Hahahaha. Is that for real? It's the 1st result at google.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+to+edit+a+pdf

haha I work in IT support- about half of my job would be unnecessary if everyone could be relied upon to google things before contacting us.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1404 on: February 23, 2018, 10:17:51 AM »

Hahahaha. Is that for real? It's the 1st result at google.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+to+edit+a+pdf

haha I work in IT support- about half of my job would be unnecessary if everyone could be relied upon to google things before contacting us.

This is a screen grab from an actual Slack message my wife got. From a developer.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

jimmymango

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1405 on: February 23, 2018, 12:45:41 PM »
When will Adobe be outed as a pillar of the Deep State and a hotbed of liberal Clinton supporters? /s

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1682
  • Age: 186
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1406 on: February 23, 2018, 01:59:27 PM »
When will Adobe be outed as a pillar of the Deep State and a hotbed of liberal Clinton supporters? /s

PDF has long been known as the Portable Democrat Frame (/s). But this is seriously keystone cops level stuff. Hey, let's not spend $120 to prevent a paper trail on tens of millions in tax fraud. Totally worth it!
No, really. I spend a lot of time thinking about rocks.

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1407 on: February 23, 2018, 02:01:42 PM »
Oh look - you can open a PDF in free LibreOffice Draw and edit the PDF. Imagine that.

Software probably written by a bunch of free software hippies gets the job done. 

You know, the GOP ought to outlaw free and open source software like LibreOffice and Linux and all those folks...

Inaya

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Chicago, IL
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1408 on: February 23, 2018, 02:04:59 PM »
Oh look - you can open a PDF in free LibreOffice Draw and edit the PDF. Imagine that.

Software probably written by a bunch of free software hippies gets the job done. 

You know, the GOP ought to outlaw free and open source software like LibreOffice and Linux and all those folks...


Didn't you know that open source software is a threat to national security? It's pretty much the same thing as cryptography.
My Cleverly Titled Journal: http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/cleverly-titled-journal/
My Cat's Facebook Page (yes, really): www.facebook.com/chicagotau
Tau now has an Instagram: www.instagram.com/chicagotau or #chicagotau
Discover Card referral ($50 now and $50 after your first year! and free credit monitoring): https://refer.discover.com/s/gv3ma

DoubleDown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1994
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1409 on: February 25, 2018, 11:29:13 AM »
Gates may be pleading guilty soon. He's under indictment on new charges of money laundering and fraud during the campaign (vs years before) and felt the pressure.

I was actually kind of worried to see the news of the new indictments, because it means they're bringing charges instead of working a deal.  If he was being fully cooperative with the investigation, and giving them everything they wanted, they shouldn't need new charges.  Bringing new charges probably means the Mueller team is pissed, because this is them using their leverage against him.  I'd much rather see all mention of the charges against Gates and Manafort go quiet.

I really really hope that Donald Trump is just an idiot who is being played by the Russians instead of being a Russian mole turned wildly successful.  I hope he's a narcissistic grifter who is so insecure that he only cares about maintaining the illusion of wealth, and so took deals with the Russians and the mafia to finance his brand and not because he actually hates America and wants to tear it all down.  I hope that his campaign staff were bought and paid for by the Russian government, instead of being true believers, and can thus be bought back.  I hope that his affection for Soviet women is just a weirdly coincidental personal fetish, and not a sign of his affection for Mother Russia.  I hope that his pro-Russia positions during the campaign were just poorly conceived rally lines designed to get crowd reactions, and are not reflective of an underlying affinity for the actual ideas he has espoused.  I hope his plutocratic tendencies are genuinely homegrown American Reaganism style excesses, and not taught to him by Russian oligarchs.  I hope, but I also fear.

I realize you're making a (fun) point I agree with by posing things as "either Trump is just an idiot beholden to the Russians or he's an actual Manchurian Candidate," but I did want to address the issue of being concerned about additional charges being a sign of weakness in the investigation. I'd say there's a strong case to be made for the opposite conclusion: bringing the additional charges with substantially more prison time involved (a de facto life sentence at least for Manafort) upped the pressure, got Gates to fold, and he is now a willing and highly damaging witness against Manafort. Manafort, in turn, now has lots of incentive to be a prime witness against the next guy above him. And there's only one guy above him.

I'd say there's a 90% chance or greater that Manafort will turn on Trump, and has something valuable to offer the prosecution.
"Not all quotes on the internet are accurate" -- Abraham Lincoln

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1410 on: February 25, 2018, 01:17:37 PM »
Let's parse this out for a moment. 
For context:
In the summer of 2016 virtually every pollster and political analyst predicted that HRC would likely defeat DJT, and that DJT's path to the WH was extremely narrow and would involve winning virtually every battleground state. At the time the Trump campaign was being led by the volatile Cory Lewandowski

Now - this is when Paul Manafort actively pushed to take over the Trump Campaign, a job which he offered to do without pay and seemed destined to fail.  Further, we know from the Mueller indictment that Manafort was in deep financial trouble, securing $20MM in loans against his US properties.

So - why on earth would a man in questionable financial standing take a job without pay to lead a campaign which seemed destined to fail?

Manafort seems too much of a bottom-feeding self-promoter to have done this because he truly believed in DJT's message or out of some patriotic duty.
From the indictments we know he had extensive dealings in Ukraine (which he lied about and ommitted on his declarations). Did he join the DJT for the business connections Trump Inc had been developing in Russia for over a decade? Or alternatively was he nudged into that spot by the oligarchs he was in bed with?
Conversely, why did the Trump campaign take him on?  Was it to really to give the campaign some semblance of 'professionalism' (an image DJT was actively assailing at every campaign rally)? Are we to believe that they were so completely incompetent that the campaign somehow didn't know this man had spent the better part of a decade snuggling with Ukraine & Russia (something that Gates and Manafort really didn't hide)?  Assuming they knew - that means they either didn't care (which would be shocking), or that the *did* care... in the sense that they cared and the fact that Manafort/Gates were all busy in Ukraine was somehow either a non-issue or a plus in their eyes.

... regardless of which line you take down the decision tree, it always winds up at a shocking conclusion.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

bacchi

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2761
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1411 on: February 27, 2018, 10:14:00 PM »
And this, folks, is why the President (and his senior advisers) should use a blind trust. And be financially solvent.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/27/politics/jared-kushner-manipulation-mexico-israel-china-uae/index.html

Quote
Officials from at least four countries have discussed ways they could use Jared Kushner's intricate business arrangements, lack of experience and financial woes to manipulate President Donald Trump's son-in-law and senior White House adviser,


nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1412 on: February 28, 2018, 06:02:41 AM »
NSA director Rogers' testimony on Russian interference was enlightening. 
tl/dr; the NSA has been given no new authority or directives to combat future Russian meddling in upcoming elections.

Quote from: Rogers
What I see on the Cyber Command side leads me to believe that if we don’t change the dynamic here, that this is going to continue, and 2016 won’t be viewed as isolated. This is something that will be sustained over time.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/02/27/nsa-director-mike-rogerss-careful-indictment-of-trumps-anti-russia-efforts/?utm_term=.0327854fa0b4
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

Malaysia41

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3115
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Verona, Italy
    • My mmm journal
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1413 on: February 28, 2018, 06:37:06 AM »
NSA director Rogers' testimony on Russian interference was enlightening. 
tl/dr; the NSA has been given no new authority or directives to combat future Russian meddling in upcoming elections.

Quote from: Rogers
What I see on the Cyber Command side leads me to believe that if we don’t change the dynamic here, that this is going to continue, and 2016 won’t be viewed as isolated. This is something that will be sustained over time.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/02/27/nsa-director-mike-rogerss-careful-indictment-of-trumps-anti-russia-efforts/?utm_term=.0327854fa0b4

Here's the c-span video if you've got the time:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?441677-1/nsa-chief-testifies-fiscal-year-2019-budget

jump to 1:30 for the start, to 4:30 for the first question.  ... 9:30 is where Gen Rogers begins talking.

36 minutes - he answers about needing a policy decision from the white house.

43 minutes - Jeanne Shaheen asks directly and he says no he's not received any commands or instruction from the white house.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2018, 07:21:19 AM by Malaysia41 »
Last one to panic wins!

Outlaw political corruption:  Join or start a represent.us chapter

My Rohingya Refugee Charity (It's Tax Exempt!)

Privately funded political systems are just WRONG.

jimmymango

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1414 on: February 28, 2018, 08:07:01 AM »
Rogers' testimony highlights, I think, the essential dynamic at play here:

  • Trump's withholding orders because the administration is working with the Russians; or
  • Trump's withholding orders because he's so insecure, he doesn't want to admit they helped him win

Either answer is extremely troubling, but the collective burying-of-heads in the sand on the part of Republicans, no matter the reason why Trump isn't ordering counter-intelligence measures, is the most baffling/disheartening/infuriating aspect of all. I'm not a defender of the Surveillance State by any means and feel it has been much much much too intrusive since 9/11, but I wouldn't doubt the sector's abilities. If the assessment of multiple, separate agencies is that Russia interfered in the election, I think it's hard to argue against that conclusion.

So what gives? Even if Russia interfered, the Republican nominee won the presidency and the party has reaped the spoils so far (Gorsuch, tax cut, travel ban, DACA ending, etc.). I can see them not wanting Mueller to indict Trump, but why are they either on the fence or downplaying Russian election interference, and the continued threat that such interference continues to pose? That I cannot understand for the life of me.

jimmymango

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1415 on: February 28, 2018, 08:30:49 AM »
Quote
So - why on earth would a man in questionable financial standing take a job without pay to lead a campaign which seemed destined to fail?

nereo,

I've been thinking about your question a bit, and I wonder whether there aren't multiple corrupt threads interweaving in all this.

  • Corrupt financing/money laundering related to Trump's international real estate deals
  • Russian gov't possession of kompromat on Trump related to god knows what (or possibly just the Russians hating Clinton and wanting to reassert their power on the international stage)
  • Manafort scheming to use his position to financially gain/repay debts to his Ukranian business partners as well as sell influence to other nefarious characters

They may all be active, but uncoordinated efforts?

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1416 on: February 28, 2018, 08:38:22 AM »
Open question: Will Trump lose the support of the military high command?

Since his days as a candidate Trump has surrounded himself by high-ranking military brass, and now the executive branch is filled with them.
Traditionally the military are the most loyal group of people to the office of the President - so it's struck me how many seem to be at odds with DJT and, worse, how many have permanently tarnished their professional reputations serving in his administration. If McMasters goes back to the Pentagon and Kelly leaves as WH Chief of Staff will other generals step in, especially after seeing how they were treated by this administration? Or will the 'call of duty' for these lifetime military men be too hard to break?
As examples:
Flynn permanently tarnished his reputation and plead guilty to lying under oath to the FBI

Rogers gave a rather candid report yesterday that the WH continues not to take the Russian threat seriously

McMasters was called out publicly by Trump after confirming Russian interference

Kelly is tied up with Kushner's loss of security clearance (and at odds with the Trump children in general) and tarnished his reputation being forced to defend Rob Porter.

Mattis seems perpetually trying to prevent the DJT from attacking North Korea, and quickly walks back every inflammatory tweet DJT makes.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3033
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1417 on: February 28, 2018, 09:13:13 AM »
Open question: Will Trump lose the support of the military high command?

Since his days as a candidate Trump has surrounded himself by high-ranking military brass, and now the executive branch is filled with them.
Traditionally the military are the most loyal group of people to the office of the President - so it's struck me how many seem to be at odds with DJT and, worse, how many have permanently tarnished their professional reputations serving in his administration. If McMasters goes back to the Pentagon and Kelly leaves as WH Chief of Staff will other generals step in, especially after seeing how they were treated by this administration? Or will the 'call of duty' for these lifetime military men be too hard to break?
As examples:
Flynn permanently tarnished his reputation and plead guilty to lying under oath to the FBI

Rogers gave a rather candid report yesterday that the WH continues not to take the Russian threat seriously

McMasters was called out publicly by Trump after confirming Russian interference

Kelly is tied up with Kushner's loss of security clearance (and at odds with the Trump children in general) and tarnished his reputation being forced to defend Rob Porter.

Mattis seems perpetually trying to prevent the DJT from attacking North Korea, and quickly walks back every inflammatory tweet DJT makes.

It's certainly possible. I've read in a number of sources that the rank and file tend to support Trump (this support varies by branch), while the high-ranking military tended to have a higher opinion of Obama.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1418 on: February 28, 2018, 09:29:02 AM »
Quote
So - why on earth would a man in questionable financial standing take a job without pay to lead a campaign which seemed destined to fail?

nereo,

I've been thinking about your question a bit, and I wonder whether there aren't multiple corrupt threads interweaving in all this.

  • Corrupt financing/money laundering related to Trump's international real estate deals
  • Russian gov't possession of kompromat on Trump related to god knows what (or possibly just the Russians hating Clinton and wanting to reassert their power on the international stage)
  • Manafort scheming to use his position to financially gain/repay debts to his Ukranian business partners as well as sell influence to other nefarious characters

They may all be active, but uncoordinated efforts?

This, to me, remains the great unknown. 
We know from the indictments, federal declaration forms and public testimony that quite a bit of 'below grade' crap (some of it illegal) has been going on with entities of this administration and foreign persons, particularly Russia and the Ukraine. Much of it can be explained away by this being a bunch of international businessmen motivated by greed or the need for debt-financing, but without the guidance of a moral compass.

There's also the omissions, serial-updates and stonewalling on federal declaration forms and in committee hearings. One explanation is (again) that this is a bunch of greedy people from the private business world who don't comprehend that "it's none of your business" is not permitted in their new government positions.  Their collective knee-jerk reaction to any questions about their business dealings may be to lie and obfuscate.  Obviously that gets them in a lot of hot water, but the question remains... is this a coordinated effort? Is there some deeper plot left to uncover? Or is this all just a long, endless stream of relatively minor crimes motivated by greed committed more-or-less independently by a dozen or more people unaccustomed to the public scrutiny over a period of many years?

Or put another way, is this all coordinated conspiracy & collusion, or just a bunch of unrelated illegal idiocy?

again... time will tell.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

jimmymango

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1419 on: February 28, 2018, 02:15:24 PM »
Quote
Or put another way, is this all coordinated conspiracy & collusion, or just a bunch of unrelated illegal idiocy?

I'd bet some of it is unrelated, but as many people have said, there's a Russian under every overturned stone. I think a lot has to do with Russia's influence in Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics. So while some oligarch may be pillaging the nation's coffers of his own volition and using Trump real estate to launder the proceeds, there's always that tie back to Putin/Russian government because these corrupt leaders share the same circle of influence.

I think the situation could very well be as you describe...light is shining upon all of this shadiness because of these peoples' new positions in government. If that's the case, then I think it's even more important that we counteract Russian influence (like yesterday) because if the skeptics and people on the fence are waiting for the Collusion Smoking Gun to convince them of the seriousness of the situation, then that day may never come. Trump and Co. might have charges brought against them for any number of white collar crimes while the Intelligence community has to sit on their hands.

That's what still gets me...why hasn't/won't Trump give the order?

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1420 on: February 28, 2018, 02:52:26 PM »
Hope Hicks resigns from her position as White House communications director the day after testifying (and essentially refusing to answer all questions) to the House Intelligence Committee and its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

... can't tell if this is a coincidence or related.  If it's related, what could it mean?
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

Norioch

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1421 on: February 28, 2018, 03:08:42 PM »
It means she's getting off of a sinking ship.

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1458
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1422 on: February 28, 2018, 03:16:32 PM »
It means she's getting off of a sinking ship.

+1
Getting harder and harder to defend the indefensible. But damnit they sure are trying.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1423 on: February 28, 2018, 03:23:40 PM »
It means she's getting off of a sinking ship.

Yeah, but willingly?  Or is she being pushed from those still on the ship or pulled by those awaiting on the other side?

Some possibilities...
1) She wants to get away from this circus and its bright lights and noises.  Honestly I think this is very likely and who could blame her? I wouldn't want to work under this intense spotlight either

2) She's got some dirt (e.g. knows about the Trump Tower meeting and the drafting of the fire-Comey memo) on her hands and hopes by exiting the West Wing she'll stop being a person of interest. The standard Trump Non-Disclosure should be a nice blanket for her, preventing/protecting her from ever having to talk about what happened in the WH.

3) Mueller got to her when he interviewed her a few weeks ago. This seems more far-fetched, but if she's been coerced into cooperating it would presumably follow that she'd no longer be in the WH.  But the statement by DJT and Kelly were positive, so if this is the case they don't know about it (which seems more and more doubtful).
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6646
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1424 on: February 28, 2018, 03:30:12 PM »
Hope Hicks resigns from her position as White House communications director the day after testifying (and essentially refusing to answer all questions) to the House Intelligence Committee and its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

... can't tell if this is a coincidence or related.  If it's related, what could it mean?

Hicks is in a difficult spot.  I haven't seen any reporting that she's personally tied to the Russians, but she's certainly been asked to lie to cover up Russia-related misdeeds and her personal life significantly complicates her professional roles.  She's been romantically involved with like four different senior white house staffers.  It's like a high school in there, and that's got to engender some complicated allegiances.  And anti-allegiances.

She's had a an incredible rise up from the ranks of obscurity to one of the most powerful jobs on the planet, and I wouldn't be surprised if she wants out because she doesn't like the stress.  I can imagine she might be the kind of person who misses the days when powerful men treated her nicely solely because she was a well spoken and attractive young woman, and not because they needed her to cover up treason.  Being a swimsuit model has got be easier than working in the Trump whitehouse, right?

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1425 on: March 01, 2018, 07:23:32 PM »
And now Jared Kushner is getting loans for business ventures, right after meeting with the lenders in White House meetings.
This is just a grotesquely corrupt administration.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1426 on: March 02, 2018, 06:04:45 AM »
The Senate Intelligence Committee believes it was house Republicans who leaked a Dem's text messages seeking the author of the Steele dossier back in 2016.

With friends like these, who needs [Russian] enemies?

Speaker Ryan's response?  Go deal with it among yourselves. The speaker will not get involved.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/senate-intelligence-leaders-suspect-republicans-leaked-a-top-democrats-text-messages/2018/03/01/eba80e2c-1d89-11e8-b2d9-08e748f892c0_story.html?utm_term=.21ac68b60213
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3244
  • Location: Avalon
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1427 on: March 06, 2018, 02:43:28 AM »
Here's the link to the New Yorker article which goes into the background on the published Steele dossier and gives details about the second Steele dossier which passes on an allegation that Putin vetoed Romney as Secretary of State because he had been hawkish on Russia, and wanted someone who would not interfere with Russia's actions in Syria and would lift sanctions.


https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/12/christopher-steele-the-man-behind-the-trump-dossier


It's a single accusation from a single source, but all the circumstantials support it.

I mean, what the everlasting fuck.
Be frugal and industrious, and you will be free (Ben Franklin)

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1428 on: March 06, 2018, 05:52:21 AM »
I mean, what the everlasting fuck.

Somewhere in the last week or two this investigation made a hard turn into bizarro-world.
Former Trump aide Sam Nunberg is refusing to go in front of a grand jury after being subpeonaed.  Not just refused to answer questions or claimed executive privilege as others have done, but he's refusing to go.  And he went on national TV to thumb his nose at Mueller.

Oddly, he says "no one hates Trump more than me" and alternatively praises him and calls Trump "an idiot".
I mean, WTF?? This guy is literally daring Mueller to toss him in jail for contempt (which every judge would agree with).

Add this to a week where we've seen his personal executive picks thumb their noses at him, his long-time assistant resign, and the speaker refute his tariffs (which he basically dropped on them like a bad Friday surprise).

Each week seems weirder than the last.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1429 on: March 06, 2018, 06:07:37 AM »
Oddly, he says "no one hates Trump more than me" and alternatively praises him and calls Trump "an idiot".
I mean, WTF?? This guy is literally daring Mueller to toss him in jail for contempt (which every judge would agree with).

Maybe the contempt time is less than whatever he would get for what he really did? Just spitballing here.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1430 on: March 06, 2018, 06:14:59 AM »
Oddly, he says "no one hates Trump more than me" and alternatively praises him and calls Trump "an idiot".
I mean, WTF?? This guy is literally daring Mueller to toss him in jail for contempt (which every judge would agree with).

Maybe the contempt time is less than whatever he would get for what he really did? Just spitballing here.
As i understand it, you can be held in contempt indefinitely - so he'd just stay in prison until everything ended or he decided to testify.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1431 on: March 06, 2018, 06:38:28 AM »
Oddly, he says "no one hates Trump more than me" and alternatively praises him and calls Trump "an idiot".
I mean, WTF?? This guy is literally daring Mueller to toss him in jail for contempt (which every judge would agree with).

Maybe the contempt time is less than whatever he would get for what he really did? Just spitballing here.
As i understand it, you can be held in contempt indefinitely - so he'd just stay in prison until everything ended or he decided to testify.

Maybe he's worried the Russians will sprinkle some Polonium on his pizza.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/05/salisbury-hospital-police-fire-crews-attend-major-incident
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Alexander_Litvinenko
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

turketron

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 340
  • Age: 32
  • Location: WI

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1433 on: March 06, 2018, 07:06:59 AM »
Apparently he's a close ally of Roger Stone... so that explains a bit...
Quote
“Roger is my mentor. Roger is like family... I’m not going to go in there for them to set up a case against Roger. Roger did not do anything. Roger and I were treated like crap by Donald Trump, okay?”

so I guess he really likes Roger.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

jimmymango

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1434 on: March 06, 2018, 08:01:07 AM »
Nunberg: I'll never testify!
Nunberg's lawyer: Bro, how long do you want to sit in prison?
Nunberg: I'll testify but I won't like it!

OurTown

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 796
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1435 on: March 06, 2018, 08:04:15 AM »
Classic case of drunk dialing.  Back in my drinking days, I did that too, but I only made an ass of myself to ex-gfs, not to all of the USA.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6646
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1436 on: March 06, 2018, 08:51:11 AM »
Here's the link to the New Yorker article which goes into the background on the published Steele dossier and gives details about the second Steele dossier which passes on an allegation that Putin vetoed Romney as Secretary of State because he had been hawkish on Russia, and wanted someone who would not interfere with Russia's actions in Syria and would lift sanctions.

America!  We're number 1!  We're number 1!  We're number 1!    <a bald eagle cries in the distance, before dying of sadness>

Are we tired of all the winning yet?

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1458
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1437 on: March 06, 2018, 06:37:55 PM »
Well, Trump and his ilk constantly pushed "drain the swamp" and that is exactly what Mueller is doing.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1438 on: March 06, 2018, 06:49:09 PM »
Here's the link to the New Yorker article which goes into the background on the published Steele dossier and gives details about the second Steele dossier which passes on an allegation that Putin vetoed Romney as Secretary of State because he had been hawkish on Russia, and wanted someone who would not interfere with Russia's actions in Syria and would lift sanctions.


https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/12/christopher-steele-the-man-behind-the-trump-dossier


It's a single accusation from a single source, but all the circumstantials support it.

I mean, what the everlasting fuck.

It's an incredible article, and there is an interview with the journalist on Fresh Air.
https://www.npr.org/2018/03/06/591130207/journalist-charts-the-bizarre-twists-and-turns-of-the-trump-russia-dossier

One interesting point is that Christopher Steele had a 30 year working, trusting relationship with the FBI doing investigations both from when Steele worked at MI-6 and then later when Steele started his own private company. Steele is an expert on Russia's innerworkings - and the FBI would hire him for research. So when the Republicans try to discredit Steele it's clearly phony and political.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1439 on: March 07, 2018, 05:50:39 AM »

One interesting point is that Christopher Steele had a 30 year working, trusting relationship with the FBI doing investigations both from when Steele worked at MI-6 and then later when Steele started his own private company. Steele is an expert on Russia's innerworkings - and the FBI would hire him for research. So when the Republicans try to discredit Steele it's clearly phony and political.
Honestly, this is what pisses me off about politics in general and this threat in particular, and both parties do it. Instead of dealing with the issue at hand the first response is always to criticize the opposite party and insinuate that they are trying to intentionally destroy America.

So we get this - the GOP rips away at Steele and Mueller as if they were Judas reincarnate, while the Dems use the moral failings of DJT as the primary attack against any policy he proposes.  Both are so laser-focused on the individuals and spinning their own narrative about the person that we get so little dialogue about what is true, what is actually being proposed and what is likely to happen from those proposals.

tl/dr; we're a bunch of schoolyard brats too busy trading insults to actually try to move the football one way or another.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1128
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1440 on: March 07, 2018, 07:27:55 AM »
while the Dems use the moral failings of DJT as the primary attack against any policy he proposes.

I'm not sure what you're reading/hearing, but I see plenty of counter-arguments to Trump's proposal that are policy-based.
The Chase Trifecta:
Earn 50,000 Ultimate Rewards points with Chase Sapphire Preferred - $4k spend in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/6/2MOVOLZCEJ
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom Unlimited - only $500 spend needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/18/ENYF0FTS66
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom - only $500 spend needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/2/DBOP9XI9XT

Southwest Cards - Earn 50k miles for $2k spend in 3 months.
Premier -
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/224/JY2BMSDZJ2
Plus -
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/223/F3ZW8H140N

Recommended Cell Service - Google's Project Fi: https://g.co/fi/r/THK0WX

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1441 on: March 07, 2018, 07:39:59 AM »
while the Dems use the moral failings of DJT as the primary attack against any policy he proposes.

I'm not sure what you're reading/hearing, but I see plenty of counter-arguments to Trump's proposal that are policy-based.

There are plenty of policy counter-arguments to DJT's proposals, but they often get lost in the drumbeat of social criticism/outrage over the man himself.  Which is a good argument to make, but when every response is "he's unfit!" and rejection seems to come from abhorence to the man instead of rejection of the policy it reinforces this "us-vs-them" mentality which dominates our politics.

Example:
News - DJT announces a new controversal executive action
Dem response: Trump knows nothing and doesn't bother to learn, he just made this to satisfy his shrinking base, this will only help the wealthy and hurt us overall.

That's how I see almost every action he does play out in the media.  Note that only 1 of the 3 knee-jerk responses in that hypothetical had anything to do with the policy itself, and while there *is* analysis on the policy, much of the outrage is still focused on DJT and his lack of knowledge/fitness/compassion.

It certainly occurs the other way, too
News - Mueller indicts a new person and subpoenas someone else
GOP response - Mueller is out-of-bounds! he hired people who have a political opinion so its all biased! These latest charges have nothing to do with the administration!
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1442 on: March 07, 2018, 09:21:53 AM »
I don't think the "both sides argument" is true. I think the Republicans truly expend a lot more energy attacking the person, whereas the Democrats are much more policy oriented. And unfortunately, low info. type voters care more about the personalities and drama, and less on the policy issues which directly impact their lives in dramatic ways.
We have to have a crisis before the voters wake up and vote out the Republican party - Watergate, or a recession caused by a war, or a recession caused lack of financial regulation/enforcement.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1443 on: March 07, 2018, 09:32:09 AM »
Watergate, or a recession caused by a war, or a recession caused lack of financial regulation/enforcement.

We tried all of those, what else do you have?
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1444 on: March 07, 2018, 09:57:36 AM »
I don't remember if it was this thread or another one that discussed Hamilton 68, but Taibbi's take is interesting (he's pretty credible, and spent significant time reporting in Russia).

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/taibbi-russiagate-trump-putin-mueller-and-targeting-dissent-w517486
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1445 on: March 11, 2018, 09:52:23 PM »
Watergate, or a recession caused by a war, or a recession caused lack of financial regulation/enforcement.

We tried all of those, what else do you have?

Would nuclear war get their attention? /s

jimmymango

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1446 on: March 13, 2018, 08:16:56 AM »
So what does it mean that the administration is jettisoning Tillerson and replacing him with Pompeo? There have been rumors of conflict between Tillerson and Trump for a while now, but the timing is interesting considering the recent diplomacy talks announced between the U.S. and North Korea.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1447 on: March 13, 2018, 08:56:58 AM »
So what does it mean that the administration is jettisoning Tillerson and replacing him with Pompeo? There have been rumors of conflict between Tillerson and Trump for a while now, but the timing is interesting considering the recent diplomacy talks announced between the U.S. and North Korea.
By most accounts Tillerson has been absolutely awful as the head of the state department, and regardless of your political leanings its never ideal when the SoS and the President do not see eye to eye on things.   Pompeo has been much friendlier to Trump than Tillerson.
Looks like the CIA is hiring from within, promoting deputy director Haspel to director. My guess is that means as little disruption to the CIA as possible.

Of course this just continues the spinning of hte revolving doors of the executive branch. Its hard for any institution to function well when so many of its leaders keep changing.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

lbmustache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 894
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1448 on: March 13, 2018, 09:51:42 AM »
So what does it mean that the administration is jettisoning Tillerson and replacing him with Pompeo? There have been rumors of conflict between Tillerson and Trump for a while now, but the timing is interesting considering the recent diplomacy talks announced between the U.S. and North Korea.

My guess is/was - and Trump mentioned it - the Iran deal, and probable trade deals are on the chopping block. Tillerson was more "establishment," if you want to use that term. Pompeo seems a bit more "extreme" aka more in line with what Trump thinks - cut trade deals, cut the Iran deal, etc. Obviously Pompeo needs to be confirmed, but I don't see why he wouldn't be, unfortunately.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: United States of Russia?
« Reply #1449 on: March 13, 2018, 10:13:58 AM »
So what does it mean that the administration is jettisoning Tillerson and replacing him with Pompeo? There have been rumors of conflict between Tillerson and Trump for a while now, but the timing is interesting considering the recent diplomacy talks announced between the U.S. and North Korea.

My guess is/was - and Trump mentioned it - the Iran deal, and probable trade deals are on the chopping block. Tillerson was more "establishment," if you want to use that term. Pompeo seems a bit more "extreme" aka more in line with what Trump thinks - cut trade deals, cut the Iran deal, etc. Obviously Pompeo needs to be confirmed, but I don't see why he wouldn't be, unfortunately.

Dems will certainly use this as a way of highlighting Pomeo's connection with torture and extreme interrogation techniques.  They wil do this to further paint this administration as one which violates common decency (even though Pompeo's been through multiple administrations). The hearings will be in the headlines for a while and make a bunch of people squeemish about this man leading the bureau which deals with all foreign nations... but yeah, in the end he'll most likely get confirmed unless he withdraws his name and/or DJT falls out of favor with him (either of which is possible with this administration).
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"