DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump-Russia

Not wanting other nations to interfere in our elections is a headlong plunge into globalism? Interesting hot take there, 40.

Twisting what is said is Trolling.

So is saying or insinuating that facts don't support Russia tampering with our elections.

Thanks for confirming, even though I can't believe you truly feel like that. You sir are no Patriot. You sir are about as UN-American as one can become when you continue to blindly defend possible treasonous acts due to partisanship. This is a time to unite America and find the facts. We can fight about partisan views afterwards.

Yes, it really is.


Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Private e-mail servers, revenge IRS targeting of opponents, polluting the Colorado river, having the head of your DOJ held in contempt of congress... all of this (and more) happened during Obama's "scandal free" presidency.. and democrats couldn't have cared less.. they defended, minimized, obfuscated, and MOCKED Republicans for acting like any of this is a big deal and in every case when they couldn't deny it any further, they deflected any blame away from Obama to subordinates who acted without his knowledge...

So, while I have a full appreciation for this opportunistic rediscovery of accountability and patriotism from the left.. in that they couldn't even feign outrage over anything that happened during the Obama administration, it seems, at the very least, COMPLETELY self-serving..

When democrats start calling out their own, when republicans start calling out their own, when moral, ethical, and legal standards stop shifting based on the letter beside the name.. then hopefully we will get somewhere, but I don't expect it to happen any time soon because I've been watching it shift back and forth for almost 35 years.. and it isn't slowing down, if anything it is increasing..

If Donald Trump committed treason, let it be investigated, let it be proven, let him be removed from office (or jailed) based on the severity... Just let justice be done. Nobody is above the law.

Here Here!

except we were outraged at a few things.

if you want to be taken seriously, you need to stop making things up. a lot of liberals were pissed at fast and furious, as well as benghazi.

but continue making stuff up. disappointing.

If by "a lot" you mean his approval rating went down by 2 whopping points at the height of the fast and furious news cycle, then yea, I suppose that's a lot.

His approval rating when Benghazi happened and hit the news was 50.. three months later as the story was really peaking, it was 57...

Maybe liberals just need to learn how to express themselves better when they are pissed off. Or my point remains, liberals may have been pissed that those things happened, but they didn't blame Obama for any of it.

so are approval ratings suppose to plunge for any reason?

and since when did polls matter? you were one of the guys making fun of the media for their polling when they got the trump election wrong, now all of a sudden it matters?

all this slamming of liberals you're doing, yet you can't even be consistent. i'mma need you to uphold some sort of standard. that would be nice.

Fast and Furious was a crapstorm. a lot of liberals expressed that. but there's a reason it wasn't all that big of deal once the dust settled.

The FF operation was suppose to help track bigger cartel members and bust them, which is why the guns were used.

it's one of those operations where if it works, it's a huge accomplishment. if it doesn't, it's a bust. unfortunately it went bust, and the administration got rightfully blasted for it.

liberals do express themselves just fine. maybe you should learn to broaden your news sources.

As Republicans are trying to show right now, you can approve of someone's overall actions and disapprove on specific ones.

Benghazi was horrible, but the 12 congressional committees was overkill. Also you didn't blame Obama for Benghazi, ya'll blamed HRC.

Fast and Furious and these deep cover set ups make a joke out of our justice system.

Yes, I was critical of the polls when they got the election so wrong.. everybody in the media spent weeks trying to figure out what happened. I wrote at length explaining why I thought they got it wrong.. there was an absolute answer, Trump votes vs Hillary votes..

Approval rating isn't as much about the number as it is about the trending direction... if people were so upset with the administration during these scandals, yes, I would expect his approval numbers to drop more than 2 points.. I certainly wouldn't expect them to go UP.


I know how F&F was designed to work.... These guns that we handed the drug cartels and then lost contact with.... they were used to kill innocent Americans along the border, innocent Mexicans in border towns, Mexican immigrants, and US border patrol agents... show me the list of who, in the administration, lost their job because of this boondoggle?

I'll help you, Eric Holder didn't.. but his chief of staff was forced to resign.. the head of ATF didn't, but the field operations guy was fired... Those are what we call SCAPEGOATS...

So as the thing between Trump and Russia heats up if there is more to it, I suspect you will find some Trump staffers and surrogates being fired or charged.. then everybody should be happy.

Your right nobody is above the law LAMO accept the WHITE PRIVILEGED CLINTONS.... ALL THREE OF THEM

Yes DC, you should accept the Clintons, except HRC, you don't have to accept her.

tell me about it dude. i hate having to accept white privilege. Especially when it's the Clintons.

I won't except any of them.. not a single won. There all crooks.

As names surface in hunt for Nunes’ sources, the White House says it isn’t going to help

https://www.yahoo.com/news/as-names-surf...-191837666.html

Man I really hope it wasn't the WH who is Nunes's "source".

That would look very, very bad.

Why?

If the White House comes across secret info pertaining to the subject while doing other work, they have to turn it over to somebody. Nunes is the head of the investigative committee and has clearance to see it.

Otherwise you would be crying cover up and hiding known information.

Oh boy......this isn't good.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/30/mike-flynn-willing-to-testify-in-return-for-immunity.html

Former National Security Advisor Mike Flynn has told the Senate Intelligence Committee he is willing to testify about the Trump campaign's possible ties to Russia in return for immunity from prosecution, a Congressional official told NBC News.

The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday that Flynn had told the FBI and Congress he was willing to be interviewed in exchange for a grant.

More from NBC News:
Michael Flynn Resigns as National Security Adviser Over Talks With Russia
Russians Paid Mike Flynn $45K for Moscow Speech, Documents Show
Official: Flynn Discussed Sanctions With Russians Before Taking Office

Flynn, a retired Lt. Gen. who headed the Defense Intelligence Agency before being pushed out by the Obama administration, advised the Trump campaign beginning in 2015. He served as President Trump's national security advisor for three weeks before resigning for what the Trump administration said was misleading Vice President Mike Pence about his contacts with Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak.


Flynn was paid $45,000 plus expenses to speak at the 10th anniversary gala of the RT television network in Moscow in December 2015, while he was already an advisor to Trump. The U.S. considers RT, which is state-sponsored, to be a propaganda outlet.

Prior to Trump's inauguration, on the day that President Obama announced sanctions against Russia as punishment for interfering in the U.S. election, Flynn spoke on the phone with Russian Ambassador Kislyak.

A U.S. intelligence official told NBC News that Flynn had discussed the hacking-related sanctions with Kislyak prior to Trump's inauguration. Flynn told the Washington Post he didn't discuss sanctions with Kislyak, then said he couldn't remember whether they had discussed sanctions.

No, this is perfect.

You sure about that, 40?

Immunity just isn't granted for the sake of granting it.


Link

Mar 31, 6:18 AM EDT



MICHAEL FLYNN IN TALKS WITH CONGRESS, WARY OF PROSECUTION

BY CHAD DAY, EILEEN SULLIVAN AND JULIE PACE
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is in discussions with the House and Senate intelligence committees on receiving immunity from "unfair prosecution" in exchange for agreeing to be questioned as part of ongoing probes into possible contacts between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Russia, his attorney says.

"General Flynn certainly has a story to tell, and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit," attorney Robert Kelner said Thursday.

Kelner said no "reasonable person" with legal counsel would answer questions without assurances that he would not be prosecuted, given calls from some members of Congress that the retired lieutenant general should face criminal charges.

Flynn's ties to Russia have been scrutinized by the FBI and are under investigation by the House and Senate intelligence committees. Both committees are looking into Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election and any ties between Trump associates and the Kremlin.

Since July, the FBI has been conducting a counterintelligence investigation into Russia's interference in the election and possible coordination with Trump associates.

Kelner released a statement after The Wall Street Journal first reported that Flynn's negotiations with the committee included discussions of immunity. The lawyer described the talks as ongoing and said he would not comment on the details.

A congressional aide confirmed that discussions with the Senate intelligence committee involved immunity. The aide spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

House intelligence committee spokesman Jack Langer said Flynn has not offered to testify to the panel in exchange for immunity.

Four other Trump associates have come forward in recent weeks, saying they would talk to the committees. As of Wednesday, the Senate intelligence committee had asked to interview 20 people as part of the probe.

In his statement, Kelner said the political climate in which Flynn is facing "claims of treason and vicious innuendo" is factoring into his negotiations with the committees.

"No reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, witch hunt environment without assurances against unfair prosecution," Kelner said.

In September, Flynn weighed in on the implications of immunity on NBC's "Meet the Press," criticizing Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and her associates in the FBI's investigation into her use of a private email server.

"When you are given immunity, that means that you have probably committed a crime," Flynn said during the interview.

Flynn was fired from his job as Trump's first national security adviser after it was disclosed that he misled Vice President Mike Pence about a conversation he had with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. during the transition.

In the weeks after he resigned, Flynn and his business registered with the Justice Department as foreign agents for $530,000 worth of lobbying work that could have benefited the Turkish government.

The lobbying occurred while Flynn was a top Trump campaign adviser. The Turkish businessman who hired Flynn, Ekim Alptekin, has told the AP that Flynn's firm registered under pressure from the Justice Department.
link

WASHINGTON MARCH 30, 2017 3:18 PM

Russians took Trump’s side in GOP primary, too, expert tells Senate panel

BY MATTHEW SCHOFIELD

mschofield@mcclatchydc.com

Before Russian propaganda and fake news targeted Hillary Clinton, it went after Republican opponents of Donald Trump, including Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. Lindsey Graham, as well as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, according to a cyber security expert who testified before the Senate Thursday.

Clint Watts, of George Washington University’s Center for Cyber and Homeland Security, said during a break in a rare Senate Intelligence Committee public hearing that the one constant of the Russian campaign was “pumping up Trump.”

Watts was one of six experts brought before the committee Thursday as Congress’ efforts to investigate Russian election meddling moved to the Senate after 10 days of drama and chaos in the House Intelligence Committee’s probe that appeared to freeze that investigation.

After a public hearing on March 20 where FBI director James Comey said his agents were investigating possible collusion between Russia and the Trump presidential campaign, the House committee’s momentum all but disappeared over the actions of its Republican chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes of California. Nunes announced that he had seen classified documents that suggested Trump transition figures’ names had been shared improperly by intelligence officials, then canceled a public hearing set to take testimony from former Obama officials.

On Thursday, Nunes and Rep. Adam Schiff, the senior Democrat on the committee, agreed to a new witness list. But a “dark cloud” still hung over the House committee, Schiff said, after the New York Times reported that Nunes had been given the classified documents by two White House officials.

Schiff said the White House had invited him and other senior House leaders to view classified documents to determined if the material had dealt properly with the names of Trump transition team members, but he did not know if they were the same documents Nunes had seen last week.

The leaders of the Senate probe had pledged to avoid similar tension in their investigation, and the first day of public testimony seemed intended to do that, offering testimony from experts to help define the history, scope and methods of Russian, or Soviet, efforts to interfere in U.S. politics.

Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., introduced the testimony as a way to help Americans “establish a foundational understanding” of Russian activities in the 2016 election.

Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the committee’s senior Democrat, said the Russians in 2016 hacked into Democratic emails, then used the information they obtained to attack Clinton. The also spread false news reports, often targeted to users of social media, to drown out legitimate coverage and “to diminish and undermine our trust in the American media by blurring our faith in what is true, and what is not.”

“This Russian ‘propaganda on steroids’ was designed to poison the national conversation in America,” Warner said. He said that Russian meddling included an intense effort to reduce turnout among likely Clinton voters in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

The experts said research on social media sites might be able to prove or disprove whether the Russian effort was successful in depressing turnout by Clinton voters, but that no one has undertaken such a study. Still, the experts agreed that Russia had attempted to swing the American election with a social media push aimed at hurting Clinton’s credibility.

During his testimony, Watts also said that the Russians had targeted Rubio, who is a member of the committee, in the first public reference to suggest that the meddling also had taken place during the hard fought Republican primary. Afterward, interviewed by reporters, he added that Bush and Graham were targeted in the same way.

Russia’s efforts, he said, were a combination of “pumping up Trump while tamping down the others.”

Watts said that he could not recall the dates and titles of specific propaganda pieces without referring to his records. But he said the other Republican presidential candidates were placed at a disadvantage by a constant flow of pieces that painted Trump in a positive light.

“Sure, the Russians put out some negative information on Trump as well, but it was 90 percent positive,” he said. “They had to put out some negative pieces to maintain credibility for the positive stories.”

Rubio declined to comment on whether he was targeted during the primaries. But he told the committee that in July 2016, after his presidential run had ended, he learned that “former members of my presidential campaign team had been targeted by IP addresses somewhere in Russia.”

He said the attacks happened twice and had been unsuccessful at penetrating their computers.

Kevin Bishop, a spokesman for Graham, who has often maintained that the Russian scandal should be viewed not as a partisan problem but an American one said the senator was “not surprised.”

“Senator Graham has long been one of Putin’s most vocal critics,” he said.

A spokeswoman for Bush, responding to an emailed request for comment, said the former governor had no knowledge of being targeted by a Russian campaign and had not been contacted by the FBI or the Senate committee.

During the hearing, the experts provided examples of the Trump campaign citing Russian propaganda or fake news.

One of those examples was a false report of a terror attack on the Incirlik Air Base in Turkey that Trump’s campaign manager Paul Manafort raised during an August interview on CNN. When asked about another topic, Manafort had tried to change the tone of the discussion. “You had the NATO base in Turkey being under attack by terrorists,” he said.

Trump later made a reference to the same false report at a campaign rally – a week after, Watts said, the reports had been disproved. There had been no attack, though there had been a small, non-violent, protest at the base.

When asked if he thought Trump knew he was quoting Russian propaganda when he talked about Incirlik, he responded “no,” but he had a caveat.

“What I don’t understand is the synchronization,” Watts said, who said he’d been the target of Russian cyber attacks in the past. “I don’t understand how his campaign manager after we had outed the Incirlik incident as fake, after the news had reported it as a fake campaign, one week later cites it on CNN. I don’t understand how he calls that a terror attack, I don’t understand how that ends up on stage.”

Eugene Rumer, an expert from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, testified that “selective naming and shaming – or targeting of political adversaries with false allegations of misconduct – has been used by Russian propaganda to discredit political adversaries in the West.”

“Russian propaganda, and Putin personally, has sought to deflect attention from the fact of the intrusion into the (Democratic National Committee) server and the top leadership of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign,” he said. And, he added, in the end, “Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election is likely to be seen as a major success, regardless of whether its initial goal was to help advance the Trump candidacy.”

Matthew Schofield: 202-383-6066, @mattschodcnews
link

Michael Flynn in September 2016: "When you are given immunity, that means that you've probably committed a crime."

This was the guy Trump picked to be head of our National Security? #Winning!

Latest WikiLeaks release shows how the CIA uses computer code to hide the origins of its hacking attacks and 'disguise them as Russian or Chinese activity'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...n-activity.html

-WikiLeaks published 676 source code files today which it claimed are from CIA

-It says the CIA disguised its own hacking attacks to make it appear those responsible were Russian, Chinese, Iranian or North Korean

By Mail Online Reporter
PUBLISHED: 07:02 EDT, 31 March 2017 | UPDATED: 07:20 EDT, 31 March 2017

WikiLeaks has published hundreds more files today which it claims show the CIA went to great lengths to disguise its own hacking attacks and point the finger at Russia, China, North Korea and Iran.

The 676 files released today are part of WikiLeaks' Vault 7 tranche of files and they claim to give an insight into the CIA's Marble software, which can forensically disguise viruses, trojans and hacking attacks.
WikiLeaks says the source code suggests Marble has test examples in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi (the Iranian language).

It says: 'This would permit a forensic attribution double game, for example by pretending that the spoken language of the malware creator was not American English, but Chinese.'

This could lead forensic investigators into wrongly concluding that CIA hacks were carried out by the Kremlin, the Chinese government, Iran, North Korea or Arabic-speaking terror groups such as ISIS.

WikiLeaks, whose founder Julian Assange remains holed up in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, said Vault 7 was the most comprehensive release of US spying files ever made public.

Earlier this month WikiLeaks published thousands of documents claiming to reveal top CIA hacking secrets, including the agency's ability to infiltrate encrypted apps like Whatsapp, break into smart TVs and phones and program self-driving cars.

It also claims the CIA can bypass the encryption of Whatsapp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloakman by hacking the smart phones the applications run on.

The CIA was also looking at hacking the vehicle control systems used in modern cars and trucks, WikiLeaks claims.

Wikileaks said the release of confidential documents on the agency already eclipses the total number of pages published over the first three years of the Edward Snowden NSA leaks.

Experts who've started to sift through the material said it appeared legitimate - and that the release was almost certain to shake the CIA.

Seems to me there are three stories here.

1- Did the Russians interfere or attempt to interfere in the election?

I would not be surprised if they did since they are our enemy and always looking for an advantage. Their people and ours have been going at it for my entire life.

2- Did Trump or persons in his administration collude with the Russians in their efforts to interfere in our election?

This I highly doubt.

3- Was there a concerted effort by the Obama administration and his Intelligence community to spy on Trump and his team to find any dirt they could, do as much damage to him as possible and prevent Trump from making a deal with Putin to back down from the hair trigger war footing the Democrat and Republican establishment were building against Russia?

Oh yea, I think this is where they are gonna find the bulk of illegal activity and heads will roll.

I can see where someone from Trumps team may have gotten word to the Russians that Trump did not support Obama's last minute sanctions against Russia just before leaving office. Trump himself said it publicly how he hoped the Russians would not retaliate but wait for a meeting with the new administration.
Trump does not want to fight WWIII over Ukraine.

it's obvious it's party over country when you take russia's side over our own country, and instead try to place the blame on obama.

but it makes sense. you conservatives have proven over and over again you will respect and listen to our greatest adversary over our own president, as y'all have questioned whether or not our president was even an American.

those Russian language courses must be paying off. Comrade Putin will be pleased.

I don't think heads will roll, not the higher ups. Perhaps lower on the totem pole? But I think Obama is protected, just like the Clintons. NWO prelude/shadow government. IMHO

it's funny watching Trump call this a witch hunt.

This guy was encouraging hacks and leaks on clinton, and now is pissed that it's happening to him.

dude was one of the main guys leading the pitchfork and torches crowd against hillary, and now is ticked off the heat is on him.

and Flynn..lmfao. dude was all for “lock her up” and talking about if someone ask for immunity that means they did something wrong.

and now this guy is asking for immunity. his words, not mine. his words said if someone ask for immunity that means they did something wrong.

welp….. LOCK HIM UP!!! LOCK HIM UP!!!

"If you're not guilty of a crime, what do you need immunity for?" -Donald Trump 2016

LMFAO

Adam Schiff‏ Verified account @RepAdamSchiff 1h1 hour ago
More
Adam Schiff Retweeted Donald J. Trump
The public should learn a lot more about WHY General Flynn wants immunity when Sally Yates testifies before the House Intelligence Committee
link

I hope Sally Yates has the necessary police protection, given the information she might be discussing.

This is what bothers me the most, I don't care who is in office, screw the party system; if Russia is messing with our country we need to do something.

You my friend seem ready for the Truth of what is happening in Washington today.

There is a war going on.

I would like you to watch it for you are ready to hear it but I urge the hysterical among us to avoid this Truth for you can not handle it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hkgoWXNh-8

Here's one explanation:

Liberals have been digging into this Russia thing for the last nine months and as far as I can tell, there is no solid evidence linking Trump to Russia in any damning way. It's all circumstantial, if you even want to call it that.

Yet time and time again, the worst possible spin is given to every coincidental meeting or phone call or marketing server sending out spam emails to a server located in a Russian bank, etc. It is confirmation bias at its worst.

Obviously Flynn knows this will continue and he wants protection from it. He probably did not do things by the book (indeed, he got fired because of this) and he probably wants protection from that as well.

I will laugh if he gets his immunity and then testifies that Trump and the administration did nothing wrong-- a big 'eff you' to everybody who has been chasing their tails on this story since the summer.

Or maybe the liberals are right and it is more sinister and goes much deeper than it it appears. We shall see.

You do realize it's not just liberals, right?

It's starting to become more and more bipartisan.

It's hislarious watching you guys defend Russia over your own fellow citizens. If that what patriotism is in conservative ideology, we have massive problems.

I didn't defend or acknowledge anything the Russians did in my post. Separate things into roughly two different issues:

1. Did Russia meddle in our election? What was the extent of it? What were the motivations?

2. If Russia did indeed meddle in our election, did Trump or people close to Trump have anything to do with it? If so, what? (Be specific.)

An affirmative on the meddling would not imply that Trump or his people were involved.

Since I had gotten tired of this story after the first eight months and have not really followed it these last couple weeks, maybe you can help me out.

What is the single worst thing that Trump has done that relates to Russia? Also please provide real evidence, like an audio tape, or video, bank transactions, etc. I'm tired of hearing about circumstantial meetings or the fact that this is being investigated (what happened to innocent until proven guilty? Rhetorical question... obviously this does not apply to political opponents.)

We will see once the investigation is concluded.

But all this certainly doesn't look good for you to just be causally blowing this off.

Two people got axed over this, an AG had to recuse himself. And now Flynn asking for immunity in order to testify, after he said, and I quote "if you're asking for immunity, that means you probably did something wrong ".

It's also funny how Nunes is trying to curb Yates from testifying. That doesn't look good. It also doesn't look good that nunes "sources" seem to be the WH, ya know, the same WH who tried to blame Fox News for Trumps wire tapping fiasco. The oval is using Fox News as a source, think about that. Trump has his own access to intelligence, and yet he's using Fox News?

If the trump administration isn't guilty, they sure as hell are acting like it. So we will see, but the Feds, led by a republican, said Russia was involved. We will see through testimonies and intelligence if that's indeed the case, and how many politicians were involved in this.

Cause it's clear that Flynn and manifort were.

We have no idea how much trump was involved. Is he being blackmailed? Did he take payments? Does he owe Russian's money?

Or is he just an gullible puppet who got played?

None of those scenarios are good.

Yes, we will see once the investigation is concluded. And I agree that it doesn't look good for me to just casually blow this off. Correction: it won't look good for me if what you think will happen does happen. If nothing major comes of it, it will make me look great.

In the meantime, I can't bring myself to care much about the topic. The first several months were enough.


I hate to use this phrase but the "battle lines" are not so clear cut as Democrat/Republican. There are some old guard Republicans who are obviously against Trump. And, I'd imagine, there are some Democrats who are actually with Trump, but we wouldn't know who because it would be political suicide to acknowledge it.


You're right. We have no idea how much Trump was involved. The rest is just framing things in such a way that one of the answers has to be bad, even if they're all just speculation.

The problem is, it's the White House building the frame.

I think that after nine months, the evidence should be overwhelming. Otherwise it's time to move on.

Maybe the FBI comes through for the left with some crushing allegations against Trump and the administration and rock solid proof to back it up. If that happens, so be it. If it doesn't happen-- if the investigation clears Trump and the investigation of all major crimes and issues, then what?

Are we going to hear widespread apologies from the Swishes, macs, CNNs, and Buzzfeeds of the world? Somehow I doubt that. I bet they'll just move onto the next controversy, real or otherwise. There's a large segment of people who are against Trump no matter what. They start with idea that he has done something terrible and he is guilty of whatever he is being accused of, then they work backwards to fit in their evidence.

Are we gonna hear an admittance of voting for a Russian puppet from the likes of Haus, 40, and Diam if this is indeed true?

Probably not, they will just move on to whatever is trending. Like trying to blame obama for the reason trump is corrupt.