early stages of the Russia investigation

Discussion in 'Politics and Current Events' started by cctxfan, May 16, 2018 at 11:08 PM.

  1. cctxfan

    cctxfan Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    bHero likes this.
  2. windycityhorn

    windycityhorn Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    It’s another remarkable story in a day of them.

    I don’t think it paints as rosy a picture of the FBI, though. Or of Comey. Neither come off as corrupt and manipulative as, say, Devin Nunes would have us believe. But they made a lot of unforced errors of judgment and process.
     
    Toadvine and bHero like this.
  3. bHero

    bHero Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Interesting read. Some of the dates are inconsistent with their previously reported dates and dates from the HIC, and there’s a fair bit of glossing over and rounding out edges. But one theme is an apparent start to de-politicize the investigation and recast all the players in a more pragmatic light.

    To me it seems a bit like they are trying to reset the table. This, along with the Senate’s opinion to not rock the boat, and the Mueller won’t indict the president rewash stories seems to suggest the IG report will have a mild tone.

    The Who Benefits conclusion here is definitely the FBI. Strzok and McCabe are getting a favorable light, Nunes and Schiff look like pundits.

    Overall it looks like a shift in the dialogue on both sides.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2018 at 12:19 AM
  4. jhablinski

    jhablinski Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Reads like a puff piece

    NYT trying to change the narrative. Trying to gloss over the fact that they are investigating a candidate

    If you think about the sheer time spent on this investigation it’s a joke. If they were investigating 100 days before he election and have continued for a year since then it’s pretty obvious what this is.

    Very interested in the IG report but I have a sneaky feeling that we are not going to get the truth. It would be out by now and something is holding it up.
     
  5. CaliHorniaBoy

    CaliHorniaBoy Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Tell me more.

    You seem pretty confident here. Please share “why” you think something would be out by now?
     
  6. mcb0703!

    mcb0703! Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Given what's already come out of the IG investigation, I'm not sure why others would think we're not gonna get the truth
     
    bHero likes this.
  7. cctxfan

    cctxfan Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

  8. Toadvine

    Toadvine Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Good article. Seems pretty obvious to me that the Trump campaign was fairly disorganized, as one would expect from a political outsider who has more or less shunned even by GOP operatives for most of the campaign, and that led to staffing with people who probably wouldn't have passed muster in a more organized campaign.

    I've been fairly certain from the beginning that Trump didn't actively collude with Russia (that's not to say that I don't think he would do favors for money, it's to say that I don't think he would do them for immediate political reasons -- I suspect he's retail-level corrupt). I think he attracted a bunch of corrupt worms who were more than willing to sell access and do dirt for personal enrichment. The fact that many of them were inexperienced opportunists likely brought them in the orbit of some actors who are affiliated with Russian security services. I don't think it impacted the campaign or the results of the election -- Trump won because the Democrats nominated a terrible candidate who ran a tone deaf and lazy campaign.

    The idea that the FBI is biased and should be rigorously investigated for political action is stupid too. Pretty clear that Comey did his little stunt because he was convinced Clinton would win and was worried the Bureau's political credibility would be seriously damaged by a Republican Congress questioning his announcement that the investigation was over when it was being reopened. I'm not sure he had a good play at the time, given the facts as he understood them.
     
    ole tnhorn and bHero like this.
  9. jhablinski

    jhablinski Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    That’s crazy.

    If your the president of an opposing party and you ok the FBI to surveil a candidate and then president elect then you better have some hard concrete evidence to support your claims.

    Obviously there’s not much or it would be out.

    This smells rotten
     
  10. T-Horn

    T-Horn Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    It really is amazing this turd sandwich won and is now the POTUS. If the Dems had nominated anyone but a douche nozzle, the turd sandwich would have lost. If the Dems would have nominated someone half way decent, the turd sandwich would have probably lost in spectacular fashion. Thanks a lot, Dems.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2018 at 10:06 AM
    JG, seanie punkin, ole tnhorn and 4 others like this.
  11. HornsUp

    HornsUp Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Not necessarily.
     
  12. SmackBrown

    SmackBrown Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Lock him up!
     
    bHero and HornsUp like this.
  13. cctxfan

    cctxfan Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Agree with most of this. Sure, *part* of the reason Trump won is on Hillary, but Trump also played in the fears of a bunch of stupid people claiming immigrants were stealing their jobs and promising manufacturing jobs that are never coming back. Coal baby! And let’s not forget any Russian effect in battleground states. Did it cost Clinton one vote or 10,000? No way to ever know.
     
  14. cctxfan

    cctxfan Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Republicans had every opportunity to nominate someone other than Trump. Blame the GOP for Trump being on the ticket in the first place.
     
  15. T-Horn

    T-Horn Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Okay, you ****ed up, Republicans. Thanks a lot, ****sticks. Better?
     
    HornsUp likes this.
  16. cctxfan

    cctxfan Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Hey, just wanting blame on both sides. I’ve never said Clinton wasn’t a terrible candidate.
     
  17. T-Horn

    T-Horn Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    I get it and I agree. Both parties really **** the bed with their nominees.
     
    windycityhorn, ole tnhorn and bHero like this.
  18. Toadvine

    Toadvine Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Clinton went to WV and told them they would lose jobs. Clinton never campaigned in Michigan or Pennsylvania. She's about as likable as a fruit cake and connects with the average American about as well as kimchi. She only won the general election bc Trump is a complete moron. The GOP has been trending towards worse and stupider candidates since Palin, so Trump shouldn't be that unexpected. The DNC hacks who set things up so that other viable candidates were scared out of the primary, and the raw ambition of a candidate who couldn't even pass the DC bar (FFS, even Duke managed that) and got where she was by appending herself to an actual politician (Bill).

    So I'm going to go ahead and blame Hilary and the Clinton infrastructure of the DNC. At least the GOP got a useful (to them) idiot out of it.
     
    UTGrad91, Duke Silver, T-Horn and 2 others like this.
  19. bHero

    bHero Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    The experienced operatives are there, just probably won't get caught, which is why they are experienced. The dumb dumbs Page and Papadopolus were low hanging fruit.
     
    jhablinski and Shane3 like this.
  20. ole tnhorn

    ole tnhorn Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Don't forget that Hillary's campaign worked to get Trump as the nominee.
     
    T-Horn, Duke Silver, Shane3 and 2 others like this.
  21. bHero

    bHero Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    That's some insipid post-election backwash that I'm surprised you still believe. At some point you'll need to step out of the silliness and grab some pragmatism.

    Trump won because he showed up, listened (or pretended to), and he engaged with people who felt ignored. He campaigned relentlessly and engaged directly on Twitter and Facebook. He made people feel like they have access to him or at least his campaign. Same reason Obama won. Campaign relentlessly, engage constantly, and sell the message of hope. Nothing unique about the approach. That's about 40% of why he won. Then Hillary sucking was 30%. Pubs sucking 25%. Everything else is 5%.

    You keep trying to paint this guys win on russian trolls, fear mongering and race baiting. That silly mentality is exactly why Trump beat the Dems and the Pubs. Either you are willfully ignoring the realities of the campaign, or just regurgitating talking points from Hillary's Jaded Tour.

    ProTip: If you don't want to get your ass kicked, stop downplaying the competition to suit your ego.
     
  22. ole tnhorn

    ole tnhorn Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Trump clearly was the first candidate ever to use fear to motivate the lowest common denominator in his base.
     
    msflash, T-Horn, Duke Silver and 3 others like this.
  23. bHero

    bHero Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    And thank god Hillary didn't do that.
     
  24. SmackBrown

    SmackBrown Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    I'm on the Trump Train. I may not like the conductor, but I like the direction of the train.
     
  25. T-Horn

    T-Horn Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    [​IMG]
     
    bHero, windycityhorn, cctxfan and 5 others like this.
  26. SmackBrown

    SmackBrown Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    [​IMG]
     
  27. Shane3

    Shane3 Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Two points for trashing Hillary and Duke in the same post. ;)
     
    futures2015 likes this.
  28. JG

    JG Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Trump won in a big part because he's a terrific salesman. He identified a target audience of disaffected voters and he designed the perfect sales pitch to them. It was masterful.

    And Hillary was also the perfect foil. Entitled, arrogant, utterly unlikeable. There is no way I am going to lose to this buffoon, so let's focus on the margin of victory. Except there was a margin of victory all right but it was his not hers.

    Do I think there was some skullduggery about? Yes. Especially in Wisconsin, the results didn't match the polls and prior elections. Michigan and PA were much closer to what was expected.

    But even with that she blew this election. Never should have lost it, but she managed to. Credit Trump for a winning game plan, but hers REALLY sucked.
     
    CaliHorniaBoy likes this.
  29. cctxfan

    cctxfan Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    True. I wonder how effective that was.
     
    SmackBrown likes this.
  30. SmackBrown

    SmackBrown Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    LOL!
     
  31. futures2015

    futures2015 Member Who Talks (A Lot!)


    Trump is #1 ... all others are #2 ... or lower.




    [​IMG]
     
    SmackBrown likes this.
  32. Duke Silver

    Duke Silver Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Wow. It’s almost like he was doing politics. That bastard!
     
  33. Duke Silver

    Duke Silver Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    No. Waived in.
     
    bHero and Toadvine like this.
  34. Duke Silver

    Duke Silver Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Boom.
     
    bHero and SmackBrown like this.
  35. cctxfan

    cctxfan Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    I don’t think these comments accurately reflect my sentiments regarding the election. Do I think the Russia trolling effort had a significant effect on the election? No.

    Did Trump engage people that felt ignored in key battleground states and outcampaign Clinton in those areas? Absolutely. But he also duped a bunch of people into thinking he was bringing their coal and manufacturing jobs back. I think we all agree here that they never were coming back.

    As to immigration, I know most conservatives don’t agree but some of it’s fear-mongering and some is race-baiting. Some people are afraid of the brown people coming in from Mexico or the Middle East. Then some believe that most immigrants are here to commit violent crime, steal our jobs, and live on welfare. The statistics just don’t bear that out. Look at that crazy kook in New York that went off on the Spanish speakers. Trump voter for sure.

    The point is that many factors went into a Trump victory not just Hillary being a bad candidate. That includes Trump running a better campaign in the swing states.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2018 at 7:08 PM
  36. scout3dave

    scout3dave Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Fear mongering in a campaign, shocking. Next thing you know the Dems will have ads showing the pub candidate pushing grandma off a cliff. I know, the Dems are above that sort of thing.
     
    msflash, bHero and SmackBrown like this.
  37. SmackBrown

    SmackBrown Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Of course. They always are.
     
  38. cctxfan

    cctxfan Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Death panels!
     
  39. UTGrad91

    UTGrad91 Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Trump is a venal man with a ton of character flaws but he does seem to get things done.
     
    SmackBrown likes this.
  40. windycityhorn

    windycityhorn Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Thanos Train!
     
    UTGrad91 and JG like this.

Share This Page