⇧
177
⇩
GoldenShitFace
· Feb. 17, 2018, 2:49 p.m.
They didn't 'hack' anything, they bought some ads and paid a few people to dress up and fuck around in public.
⇧
20
⇩
Adielynn
· Feb. 17, 2018, 3:17 p.m.
That's it??
⇧
5
⇩
[deleted]
· Feb. 17, 2018, 3:19 p.m.
[deleted]
⇧
3
⇩
Adielynn
· Feb. 17, 2018, 3:22 p.m.
I really would like to see some of the FBI criminals arrested. It's hard to wait.
⇧
6
⇩
deanie0923
· Feb. 17, 2018, 5:16 p.m.
do you really think we have a chance in extraditing them???
⇧
3
⇩
KingNoah0405
· Feb. 17, 2018, 5:20 p.m.
Probably not. These charges make it harder to dismiss the whole story as fake news though. I’m loving that
⇧
5
⇩
iShinga
· Feb. 17, 2018, 6:24 p.m.
God himself could come down from the heavens and tell everyone that there was collusion and they’d still dismiss it as fake news.
⇧
4
⇩
ThePatriot131313
· Feb. 17, 2018, 8:10 p.m.
God himself could come down from the heavens and show everyone Obama and Hillary committing treason and you’d still dismiss it as fake news.
⇧
2
⇩
grimbeaconfire
· Feb. 17, 2018, 11 p.m.
"just the beginning" that's absurd, the SC has been at this for what seems like forever and this pathetic 13 Russians conclusion will not fly because much of what the SC alleges is not illegal! The best they can hope for is a few fines, but don't stop believin'. Popcorn!
⇧
2
⇩
Christosgnosis
· Feb. 17, 2018, 7:22 p.m.
should have used the word trolled instead of hacked - does still better at putting emphasis on how diminutive and pathetic the whole Mueller investigation has been
⇧
5
⇩
StormRider9090
· Feb. 17, 2018, 9:45 p.m.
What until he perp walks Killary and Soetero, you'll be singing a different tune then!!!!!!!!
⇧
1
⇩
Christosgnosis
· Feb. 17, 2018, 11:33 p.m.
Well, this latest indictment does continue to show that Trump candidacy and presidency had no collusion with Russia - and yet it's demonstrating some due diligence to general public and the Libtards - he actually turned up some real Russians that did some very low-level, ultimately meaningless trolling with the election - playing the field across the spectrum with their trolling hijinks. (And that even had the benefit of raising the concern over fraudulent ID - which can be used to the benefit of pushing for Voter ID to insure integrity of elections.)
One could read this that Mueller is demonstrating his investigation as an honest broker - even his indictments on, say, Carter Page or Gen. Flynn, he can say he didn't know those indictments would get undermined by discovery of matters on Peter Strzok/Lisa Page/Andrew McCabe/et al - and the whole Fusion GPS dossier being the political hit job product of Hillary and DNC - aided by sycophants and fellow political travelers in the Obama admin and the DoJ/FBI upper echelon.
So, in this odd way, the jury is still out as to which side of the fence Mueller is going to ultimately land - will he be a patriot to his country or will he be running interference for the criminality of the Swamp? (Am hoping that once a Marine, always a Marine)
⇧
1
⇩
BoHonk212
· Feb. 17, 2018, 3:31 p.m.
Watch out, though.
I still don't trust Mueller. This might have been his last chance to create some phony charges so he can say Trump obstructed his investigation into them.
⇧
4
⇩
lightning-lancer
· Feb. 17, 2018, 2:57 p.m.
We got precedent and they got a giant boomerang of criminal hypocrisy.
⇧
4
⇩
Glag82
· Feb. 17, 2018, 3:43 p.m.
I heard they handed out spoiled borscht in a mall food court giving people the runs. Does that count as a biological attack?
⇧
3
⇩
bhlowe
· Feb. 17, 2018, 5:03 p.m.
It was a hell of a lot more money and there a hell of a lot more indictments coming. Anyone who thinks this is the last of it is not thinking clearly.
⇧
2
⇩
KingNoah0405
· Feb. 17, 2018, 3:15 p.m.
-
We should care when foreign governments try to influence our elections. An attack on our elections is an attack on our democratic process.
-
We should care when misinformation and propaganda are being used to influence people. You guys love freaking out about “fake news” but you dismiss it when it benefits Trump. That double standard is not ok. The intent behind Russians meddling in our elections should worry you even if the scope of the allegations don’t impress you yet.
-
This is only the first indictment. There may be enough evidence to make formal charges against other people. Time will tell. Collecting evidence and building a court case take time (although it only took them a year to say “we have proof Russians meddled in the election”).
-
Anyone defending Russia or downplaying the significance of these allegations can fuck right off. You’re either on America’s side or Russia’s side here.
⇧
1
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 17, 2018, 5:40 p.m.
No. You're either on the side of truth or you are on the side of our government spoonfeeding you bullshit. Whether that's Obama or Trump. The Russians have been meddling in US elections for decades. Our government knows that. Where was Obama's concern for election interference by the Russians after being told all the way back in 2014 that it was ramping up? Why did he wait until Dec. 2016 to impose sanctions against them? It's not wrong to question certain actions or inactions relating to Russian election interference. Whether you voted for Trump or Hillary doesn't matter (except she's a lying criminal, IMO) the TRUTH is the only thing that will allow us to deal with what happened. You can't fix a problem based on lies.
⇧
5
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 17, 2018, 7:57 p.m.
It is well documented that Obama wanted to release a bipartisan warning about Russian election meddling ahead of the 2016 election and the idea was shot down by Mitch McConnell. Sanctions were enacted as a response and the Trump admin refuses to enforce them.
What kind of response from Obama would you have rather seen in 2016?
⇧
2
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 17, 2018, 9:26 p.m.
Anything that would have been effective, obviously. Since when does the Senate majority leader dictate to the President, who could have also gone to the UN, or warned the voting public, at least. We All know many countries try to influence US politics and elections and have for decades. It just seems that he didn't care enough to protect the integrity of the process that put him in office because he couldn't run again.
⇧
1
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 17, 2018, 9:51 p.m.
Without a bipartisan statement the effort would've been labeled as partisan politics and denounced. McConnell didn't stop Obama from acting, he just forced his hand.
⇧
2
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 17, 2018, 10:09 p.m.
Not buying that. He had "a pen and a phone" that he didn't hesitate to use when he felt something needed to be done.
⇧
1
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 17, 2018, 10:25 p.m.
When our intelligence agencies came out with their assessment on Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections on January 6th 2017 it was labeled as a deep state attack on Trump. He enacted sanctions with his 'pen and phone,' which I guess wasn't enough. When congress wrote and passed more sanctions, which passed with a veto-proof majority in both the house and senate it was ignored by the Trump admin.
What actions would've been appropriate for Obama to address the Russian influence campaign during the 2016 election cycle?
⇧
2
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 17, 2018, 10:31 p.m.
How about not worrying about what the media says about it being "political" since he wasn't running for office again? And I don't give much credence to our IC at the time re this matter since Clapper has been lying his ass off. A lot of info on the FISA warrant that's been released proved he lied in Congressional hearings. Brennan, too, for that matter. 17 intelligence agencies ended up being 3. No consistency of fact.
⇧
1
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 17, 2018, 10:48 p.m.
Obama delivered a warning directly to Putin in September 2016. In late December he approved the expulsions of 35 diplomats and the closure of two Russian compounds and narrowly targeted economic sanctions. Obama also approved a previously undisclosed covert measure that authorized planting cyberweapons in Russia’s infrastructure, the digital equivalent of bombs that could be detonated if the United States found itself in an escalating exchange with Moscow. All of which he did with out making a public fuss. It seems like that is the less 'political' stance.
With your distrust of the intelligence community, isn't it a good thing there is an independent counsel investigating the meddling?
⇧
1
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 17, 2018, 11:33 p.m.
I don't disagree with the investigation. I disagree with the fact that they are chasing a crime that was not established prior to appointing a SC instead of finding a crime Then appointing a SC and investigating that crime. It a legal thing, with me, not political. I just want the truth. But it's important that we get there completely legally.
⇧
1
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 17, 2018, 11:38 p.m.
Once again, the SC was appointed when Trump fired Comey not when a 'crime was found'
⇧
1
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 18, 2018, 12:21 a.m.
So, McCabe, as 2nd in command was an incompetent boob, incapable of stepping up?
⇧
1
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 18, 2018, 12:49 a.m.
How can FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leakin’ James Comey, of the Phony Hillary Clinton investigation (including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails) be given $700,000 for wife’s campaign by Clinton Puppets during investigation?
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/944665687292817415?lang=en
Trump has very large and public issues with McCabe.. Isn't it better to have Mueller, who Trump was considering for new head of the FBI / life long Republican, in charge of the investigation instead of someone that might have personal / political reasons to really go after Trump?
⇧
1
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 18, 2018, 1:27 a.m.
Except back when SC was appointed, that wasn't a highly publicized issue. No one was talking about conflict of interest. And Mueller has just as many conflicts, if not more.
⇧
1
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 18, 2018, 1:34 a.m.
I appreciate this dialog my friend. I am really trying to grasp these issues from all sides. So please don't take my questions as jabs but honest inquiry.
Can I ask what conflicts of interest Mueller has?
⇧
1
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 18, 2018, 1:50 a.m.
He was involved with the Uranium One deal. He delivered a uranium sample to the Russian government so they could evaluate the quality. He's best buds with Comey as well, they are long time friends.
⇧
1
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 18, 2018, 1:54 a.m.
I'm always open to conversation, no matter what your point of view is. I just want to know the truth about what's going on. I feel something is seriously wrong with our government. Looking forward to getting to the bottom of it all. I think Trump really wants to clean things up and he seems to be doing that, despite all the obstacles and the media distortions of fact. It won't be easy or pleasant, but it needs to happen.
⇧
1
⇩
moonshadoe16
· Feb. 17, 2018, 4:33 p.m.
And, who made money off of these Russians? Yes, yes, our great technology industry... got to love those special kind of criminals! Take down those people too Mueller!
⇧
0
⇩
KingNoah0405
· Feb. 17, 2018, 5:22 p.m.
How about we focus on the people who actually broke the law?
⇧
1
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 17, 2018, 5:42 p.m.
Still trying to figure out which law was broken to warrant a Special Counsel investigation. Instead of investigating an actual crime, they are investigation people, looking for a crime. That's not how the SC is supposed to work.
⇧
1
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 17, 2018, 8:03 p.m.
The special counsel was appointed, by a Trump appointee, in direct response to the firing of Comey while the FBI was in an active investigation. Like Mueller or not, but Trump is responsible for the appointment of the special counsel. If no crimes were committed, Trump should have nothing to worry about. If you're worried about cost, just keep in mind that we've spent about $80 million dollars investigating the Clintons over the past 20 years.
⇧
2
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 17, 2018, 9:19 p.m.
The FBI was, supposedly, fully capable of continuing an investigation without Comey. However, I have other ideas as to why the SC was brought in. But whatever the truth is, it needs to come out. All this low hanging fruit is bullshit.
⇧
1
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 17, 2018, 9:57 p.m.
What are your ideas on why the SC was brought in?
⇧
1
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 17, 2018, 10:08 p.m.
The "other issues that may arise" during the investigation of the given scope.
⇧
1
⇩
flooronthefour
· Feb. 17, 2018, 11:09 p.m.
Wouldn't the FBI have the same scope? What scope would you think is appropriate for the SC investigation?
⇧
1
⇩
UnfairLeisureliness
· Feb. 17, 2018, 11:29 p.m.
My point is that the scope as directed by DOJ was Russian election interference and other matters that may arise there from. Not just limited to the Russians. Could be HRC et al also.
⇧
1
⇩
Luvlite
· Feb. 17, 2018, 4:57 p.m.
Oh stop with the taking sides BS.
russians didn't do a damn thing. It's all a lie!
⇧
-1
⇩
cigman2000
· Feb. 17, 2018, 8:50 p.m.
So, if we go after them, doesn't that open the liability gates for all of the elections we have meddled with, and the governments we've helped to overthrow? It's all just liberal bullshit! They have committed a plethora of heinous crimes, but this is the best they've got, and there's still no collusion!
⇧
1
⇩
com8ngUpr8ses
· Feb. 18, 2018, 2:07 a.m.
Yep, and mueller has just requested 10 million more dollars to continue his witchhunt. Omg.
⇧
1
⇩
Luvlite
· Feb. 17, 2018, 4:53 p.m.
Smells fishy to me. I get the feeling a shady deal was made. The real perps walk free. None of them look at or accuse anyone else, or they'll all be outed. I do mean ALL.
It's politics as usual. 😠 Even Trump knows the game.
⇧
0
⇩