Slashdot Mirror
Ukraine Hacker Cooperating With FBI In Russia Probe, Says Report (thehill.com)
schwit1 shares a report from The Hill: A hacker in Ukraine who goes by the online alias "Profexer" is cooperating with the FBI in its investigation of Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election, The New York Times is reporting. Profexer, whose real identity is unknown, wrote and sold malware on the dark web. The intelligence community publicly identified code he had written as a tool used in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee ahead of last year's presidential election. The hacker's activity on the web came to a halt shortly after the malware was identified. The New York Times, citing Ukrainian police, reported Wednesday that the individual turned himself into the FBI earlier this year and became a witness for the bureau in its investigation. FBI investigators are probing Russian interference efforts and whether there was coordination between associates of President Trump's campaign and Moscow. Special counsel Robert Mueller is heading the investigation.
I guess John Podesta didn't fall for a simple phishing scam, the servers were hacked direct by some uber-Ukranian Evil Crime Lord sitting at a computer system that would make the one in Swordfish look like a Fisher-Price toy (blowjob under the desk by Halle Barry probably not included...) All done at the behest of Putin as he rode, magnificently and bare-chested, through the Siberian tundra aboard his chestnut colored steed, hunting wolves with a slingshot and pocket knife.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
So the Russian government is employing Ukrainian hackers. This doesn't make sense.
Like a Ukrainian hacker is going to turn himself in... without direction from the Communist Party.... To cause havoc in our political system.
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
durrrpp... Nazis? There's nothing wrong with Nazis..
Nazis just love Robert E Lee, because he is a traitor just like Donald Trump.
There are good neo-Nazis who just want to walk around with torches screaming anti-semitic slurs and threatening violence. They are very fine people. Just like Robert E Lee, a very fine traitor.
Durrppp I'm such a trashy wannabee Nazi that I support traitors like Donald Trump and Robert E Lee.
Donald Trump colluded....
By committing what crime(s)?
I've never had anybody actually explain what crime was committed by Trump or his Campaign here. I've heard a lot of people claiming that there was a crime or multiple crimes, but nobody can point to any actual laws that they think where broken,. I dare you, come up with an actual law that got broken by Trump or his Campaign related to the Russians... I'm starting to think there isn't anything. And while you are at it, what crimes did the Russians commit that had any affect on the election?
Donald Trump continues to obstruct investigations into Russia's election hacking and refuses to protect our country against Russian attacks.
How on earth is he doing this? Firing Comey? Asking him to let Flynn go? Is that all you got or is there more? You do realize that neither of these things had any affect on your supposed investigations. You also heard that Comey admitted that Trump wasn't under investigation before h was let go, under oath, after his departure, before congress. There is no obstruction here.
Donald Trump's behavior is the literal definition of treason.
Only in your contrived "Trumped up" accusations of criminal activity by Trump would this be Treason. EVEN IF he did what you claim, you are claiming that what he did meets the Constitutional definition of Treason? LOL.. I think you are nuts..
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
> I've never had anybody actually explain what crime was committed by Trump or his Campaign here
One aspect: Accepting material help from foreigners in a political campaign. The foreigner was an agent of a semi-hostile foreign government, and promised the help through criminally obtained materials. In return the foreign power wanted influence on US policy ("adoptions" is code for Magnitsky Act which are actually powerful economic sanctions targeted at oligarchs and the means of corrupt control in Russia). (If the person were domestic, it would be already bribery).
We don't know what is in the intelligence intercepts, but it appears to be enough to convince judges to agree to search warrants various times.
Before the election
Dec. 10, 2015
Lt. Gen Michael Flynn is part of a panel discussion in Moscow for the 10th anniversary of government-backed Russia Today, for which he receives payment (The Washington Post, Aug. 15, 2016). Officials notice an increase in communication between Flynn and the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, following the Russia Today event (CNN, May 19, 2017).
Late 2015
British intelligence agencies detect suspicious interactions between Russia and Trump aides that they pass on to American intelligence agencies (The Guardian, April 13, 2017).
March 19, 2016
Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta is sent an email that encourages him to change his email password, likely precipitating the hack of his account (CBS News, Oct. 28, 2016).
March 21
During an interview with The Post, Trump lists Carter Page as part of his foreign policy team. Page had been recommended by a son-in-law of President Richard Nixon, New York Republican Party Chairman Ed Cox (WP, March 21, 2016).
March 28
Political veteran Paul Manafort is hired to help the Trump campaign manage the delegate process for the Republican National Convention. He is recommended by Trump confidante Roger Stone (New York Times, March 28, 2016). Before joining the campaign, Manafort lobbied on behalf of Oleg Deripaska, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. That deal followed a memo from Manafort in which he offered a plan that could "greatly benefit the Putin Government." His relationship with Deripaska ended in 2009 (Associated Press, March 22, 2017). Manafort also worked on behalf of the Russia-friendly Party of Regions in Ukraine, helping guide the party's leader, Viktor Yanukovych, to the country's presidency. Yanukovych would later be ousted. (WP, Aug. 19, 2016)
April 27
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) may have met with Kislyak at a reception at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington before a foreign-policy speech given by Trump (CNN, May 31, 2017).
June
At a closed-door meeting of foreign policy experts and the prime minister of India, Page praises Putin effusively (WP, Aug. 5, 2016).
June 9
Donald Trump, Jr., Manafort and son-in-law Jared Kushner meet at Trump Tower with a Kremlin-connected attorney named Natalia Veselnitskaya. Veselnitskaya's efforts to reverse a law passed in 2012 sanctioning Russians suspected of human rights violations at some point drew the attention of the FBI. The meeting was not initially reported to the government by Kushner as required when he took a position with the administration (Times, July 8, 2017). After the meeting was originally reported, Trump, Jr. admitted that the pretext for the conversation was that he believed Veselnitskaya to have information incriminating Hillary Clinton (Times, July 9, 2017).
June 15
A hacker calling himself "Guccifer 2.0" releases the Democratic National Committee's research file on Donald Trump (Gawker, June 15, 2016). News reports already link the stolen data to Russian hackers (WP, June 14, 2016).
July
At some point this month, the FBI begins investigating possible links between the Russian government and Trump's campaign (Wired, March 20, 2017).
July 7
Page travels to Moscow to give a lecture (NYT, April 19, 2017). The Trump campaign approved the trip (USA Today, March 7, 2017). This trip was likely the catalyst for the FBI's request for a secret surveillance warrant to track Pageâs communications (WP, May 25, 2017).
July 11 or 12
Trump campaign staffers intervene with the committee developing the Republican Party's national security platform to remove language call arming Ukraine against Russian aggression. (July 18, 2016).
July 18
At an event hosted by the Heritage Foundation as part of the Republican National Convention, Sessions and Kislyak have a brief conversation (WP, March 2, 2017).
Flynn delivers a speech at the Republican convention, joining in the crowd's "Lock her up!" chant. "If I, a guy who knows this business, if I
I like how the argument has shifted from "There's no evidence of collusion" to "Collusion isn't technically a crime". They will find enough for impeachment - don't kid yourself.
I generally prefer to determine if a crime was committed by the outcome of the trial.
If there is an accusation, then rather than demanding evidence it would be more normal to ask if there was an investigation.
And if there is an investigation happening right now, it would be normal to expect to have to wait until the end of the process to find out if there is an indictment, and then still not to know what the evidence is in detail until the trial is happening.
It is not rational to demand the sort of details you're asking for at this point. Criminal investigations are conducted following certain norms, and being done in a fishbowl is not one of those norms. You want to argue, I get it, but there is nothing to argue over. We learned a Ukrainian hacker is cooperating with the FBI. We have no idea if that is significant, or what the significance is. Later, we'll find that out.
No collusion, and it's not a crime.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
from TFS: "turned himself into the FBI"
Ah, yes ... reminds me of the magician who was walking down the street and turned into a convenience store.
Alternative wording- try "turned himself in to the FBI". Much less disruptive to law enforcement.
...omphaloskepsis often...
You don't get it. At all. Wikileaks is 100% trustworthy when it is critical/damning of conservatives, but 100% trash and to be ignored when it hurts Democrats. Learn how the game is played! After all, Wolf Blitzer was on CNN today claiming that the ISIS van run-down attack in Barcelona was inspired by the cook in Charlottesville - and not the ISIS car/truck run-down attacks in Paris, London...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Ok.. So which law is this? If you find one, there are a couple of other campaigns which may have some legal issues too.
I ask for the actual law because it is important that we know exactly what the imagined crime here is. Given your wording, I don't suppose that talking to a Russian would be enough for it to be a crime, but I'd like to see the law you think got broken so we can argue specifics.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
As far as the American entirely corrupt Deep State is concerned, not paying corporate lobbyists hundreds of millions of dollars to buy politicians, is the most heinous crime, worthy of a death sentence. That lobbyists pay of politicians to start wars for profit and kill millions, is no crime at all, just the way business is done, just ask those lobbyists, well, ask them if you can afford to pay them to answer the questions, those fuckers don't do anything for free. Governments pay, corporations pay, despots pay, crime lords pay, how dare Russia not pay, oh wait they did, they learnt after all the Russian lobbyists were kicked out as spies, imagine try to cheat American Lobbyists corporations out of the millions.
The Deep state and the lobbyists are turning themselves into a joke parody of themselves trying to keep the corruption gravy train going as the internet continues to expose them. You just know the swap from blaming Russia to blaming 'Anonymous' is bound to occur, perhaps 'Anonymous' contracting out to Russia, yeah, that'll work ;).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Yea, that's my impression of this too. This is about keeping Trump from doing things by keeping up this specter of illegal activity by forever investigating something that never happened..
It's about politics, not about finding the truth. It's about disabling as much of Trumps political power as possible to prevent him from achieving any of his major goals or policies.. In short, it's all a sham...
Sad thing here is a lot of their base seems to be swallowing the whole idea, hook line and sinker....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Oh you misunderstand my point.. I'm asking for THEORIES, based on law. Find me the actual law that was broken, or all the evidence is meaningless anyway.
There are a bunch of folks acting like there was an obvious crime or two committed here, so I'm asking for someone to tell me what they propose said crime(s) actually are. Give me the law or laws that where possibly broken so we can discuss what kinds of evidence you need to support the conclusion of a crime having been committed. I'm just asking for some kind of workable theories. You pick the crime, find the law, then we can evaluate the evidence we know about and see if we are in the ball park. So far, we aren't.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
I like how the argument has shifted from "There's no evidence of collusion" to "Collusion isn't technically a crime". They will find enough for impeachment - don't kid yourself.
I've always been asking the question "What does collusion actually mean?" How's that a crime?
But hey, I'm asking for theories about actual criminal activity... What laws got broken here and by whom? How could this accusation that Trump (or his campaign) did anything illegal be true? I'm not seeing it... I'm not seeing what laws might have been broken... So tell me, what do you think it is?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
> I generally prefer to determine if a crime was committed by the outcome of the trial.
The funny thing about that is that you need a FUCKING INDICTMENT first. That means you SPELL OUT EXACTLY what crime was committed and by whom.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
You are not even trying here. It took all of 1 minute to track down the actual law. And if I can do that without too much effort with just a single google search you might want to go back to the Fox News forums and let them know not to go to Tech websites where we can actually RTFM when asked.
The law you're "looking" for is US Code 441 section e paragraph a. Abbreviated in many places online as: U.S.C. 441e(a)
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/...
Which states the same thing that has been repeated many times on actual fact based news channels and websites:
441e. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals (a) Prohibition
It shall be unlawful for—
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly,
to make—
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value,
or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution
or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering
communication (within the meaning of section 434(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in
subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
So the parts you want to re-read are where they mention the illegality of giving, receiving, or asking for things of value from foreign nationals to aid in the election.
) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
As I replied to your original post but you're still asking questions I'll link it here as well:
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/...
Section e Paragraph a
Quoted above but the basics are that it's illegal to solicit, offer, or accept anything of value by a foreign national to help an election.
So there's the law.
It's also been cited in previous court cases in case you're wondering. And the judges summarized it pretty well in those cases as well. Just look online.
http://www.politico.com/static...
is a good example of a 2002 case.
) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
*Sorry, 2011 case that references the 2002 law.
) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
US code 441 e
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/...
441e. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals (a) Prohibition
It shall be unlawful for—
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly,
to make—
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value,
or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution
or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering
communication (within the meaning of section 434(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in
subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
This article cites some of the applicable laws: http://www.politico.com/magazi...
US code 441 e
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/...
441e. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals (a) Prohibition
It shall be unlawful forâ"
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly,
to makeâ"
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value,
or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution
or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering
communication (within the meaning of section 434(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in
subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
If there were financial records to prove this it would have been plastered on every network and all over the 'net by now and you know it.
I'm no fan of Trump. IMO he has no real and solid ideological nor political beliefs or principles, beyond those of a rich NYC real estate developer.
He may be dirty, he may not. But what's happening is not an impartial look at facts & law. In fact, the shitstorm of obvious bullshit and false accusations that are being detonated about every single thing Trump says or does, or hell, anything anyone dreams up that he maybe might do/have done will actually *HELP TRUMP GET AWAY WITH IT IF HE **IS** GUILTY*, FFS!
If he's broken the law, you're damned straight I want his ass prosecuted! Don't go fucking it up with all this bullshit, you idiots! Think beyond your nose!
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Donald Trump colluded....
By committing what crime(s)?
I've never had anybody actually explain what crime was committed by Trump or his Campaign here. I've heard a lot of people claiming that there was a crime or multiple crimes, but nobody can point to any actual laws that they think where broken,. I dare you, come up with an actual law that got broken by Trump or his Campaign related to the Russians...
1) Donald Jr. attended a meeting with the intent of getting campaign assistance in the form of Intel from the Russian Government. This arguably violated campaign finance law. It's not an open and shut legal argument, but it isn't absurd either, and that he tried to get the info from the Russian government is abundantly clear.
2) Multiple members of Trump's campaign have been caught omitting foreign contacts from security clearance forms, in violation of the law.
3) Multiple members of Trump's campaign have been caught concealing payments from foreign governments, spawning money laundering investigations.
4) Trump's Attorney General (also a member of his campaign) lied to congress while under oath during his confirmation hearing.
5) IF Trump and/or his campaign conspired with Russian agents in the DNC hack, or in how to spread the contents emails they knew were hacked, then they're involved in a criminal conspiracy.
6) There's a lot of Russian money and investment flowing through Trump's business empire, it's possibly one of the only things that saved him from bankruptcy. It's extremely speculative, but it opens up the doors to money laundering, bribery, and a whole lot of shady things that might affect Trump personally.
7) Mueller has gotten a grand jury together, he clearly has some very specific crimes in mind.
what crimes did the Russians commit that had any affect on the election?
Are you daft? Were you in a coma last year or did you just forget about the months of coverage about Podesta's emails and the DNC hack?
How on earth is he doing this? Firing Comey? Asking him to let Flynn go? Is that all you got or is there more? You do realize that neither of these things had any affect on your supposed investigations.
You don't actually have to be successful in obstructing an investigation to be guilty of obstructing justice.
You also heard that Comey admitted that Trump wasn't under investigation before h was let go, under oath, after his departure, before congress. There is no obstruction here.
Obstructing justice on an investigation of your associates, and investigation that may grow to include you, is still obstruction of justice.
Also, the sky is blue.
Donald Trump's behavior is the literal definition of treason.
Only in your contrived "Trumped up" accusations of criminal activity by Trump would this be Treason. EVEN IF he did what you claim, you are claiming that what he did meets the Constitutional definition of Treason? LOL.. I think you are nuts..
I'm with you on this one, the literal definition of treason requires a state of war.
I stole this Sig
Clinton accepted huge donations from Chinese sources during the 1996 campaign and was forced to return most of them post-campaign.
Imagine Trump firing Rosenstein for appointing a special counsel. That's a fair summation of the Clinton administration's response to this.
And you wonder why we hate Clintons - most of you probably don't even remember this shit, and this was only the nth of the sleazy Clintons had been up to.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Ok.. So which law is this? If you find one, there are a couple of other campaigns which may have some legal issues too.
Patriotic Citizens don't pick Party over Country. Keep deflecting.
How is this something that Clinton didn't do, with the Clinton foundation?
The Clinton foundation is for charity, it is not an election campaign fund. Paying any election-related activities, or anything at all that benefits the Clintons, from the funds of the Clinton foundation would be illegal, and would get the foundation into trouble with the IRS.
This is not theoretical, Donald Trump's charity did get into trouble with the IRS for this exact violation: see http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ru...
> I generally prefer to determine if a crime was committed by the outcome of the trial.
The funny thing about that is that you need a FUCKING INDICTMENT first. That means you SPELL OUT EXACTLY what crime was committed and by whom.
They are not at the stage of a trial yet. They are now investigating whether or not a crime has been committed, and if so what the indictment would read like. All extremely standard operating procedure.
Yep, he's both a far left wing communist colluding with Russia, and a far right wing Nazi both at the same time.
Truly only a billionaire could afford to buy and wear so many hats...
You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
One aspect: Accepting material help from foreigners in a political campaign. The foreigner was an agent of a semi-hostile foreign government
Russia is our ally. One one the few that matter.
When did Trump do that? I'm legitimately curious.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Perjury and obstruction of justice. There's enough there to take him down.
By that measure, multiple Democrats would be guilty also. See the "dossier" and Democratic party members who colluded with the Ukraine to dig up dirt on Paul Manafort.
Because they would have to charge people in both parties, you simply won't see it happen. On the 1 in a trillion chance they do make such a charge, it would be on a toady that actually did the handling of information and cash that would be guilty. Hillary and Donald would be free of any such charge.
Contrary to popular belief, Politicians really are not dumb. They all come from Law school and know how to play the game.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Ye gods, not this crap again.
There is NO evidence to link Seth Rich to the leaks. None. Not a vestige. Even FOX retracted their story saying otherwise, and for FOX to retract a story you know it has to be pretty fucking sketchy.
Assange has dropped HINTS that he was. He hasn't "confirmed" shit, even assuming he *knows* shit. He drops hints because he's a troll, he loves to feed his fellow trolls. Read Assange's own manifesto for Wikileaks: his whole aim and objective is to spread doubt and distrust about everything and everyone. Everything he does is geared toward that single aim. He's the quintessential troll.
You have nothing. Nothing you listed is illegal, and everything you have listed seems normal for a transition team and business people. Why no stink with Obama met with dozens of foreign agencies before he was even elected, let along after he won? Ignoring history makes you look really dumb to most of us.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Good you pointed out the law Clinton broke with the Clinton foundation. Again what law was broken by Trump that actually has proof beyond vague rumors. This has been going on for more than a year and there is still nothing. Not only that investigators are starting to resign from Mueller's team.
Are you alleging that Trump directly colluded with a foreign government, or that someone under him did? Will be Hillary be charged with Treason if Alexandra Chalupa is charged with colluding with a foreign government? Much more evidence that happened, but that doesn't change the question.
14 months after these allegations started there is still no evidence that Trump did anything wrong. I see a few very weak allegations based on anecdote that Flynn or Manafort did, but there are 0 (Zero, goose egg, nada) charges pending for either of them. That is after at least 12 months investigating Manafort and 9 months investigating Flynn.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Compare the charlottesville vs barcelona. The first case, the media is trying to claim that it's "domestic terrorism." In the second case, they're claiming that it's a "van crash" while avoiding using the word terrorism as best as possible.
Om, nomnomnom...
BeauHD I think is really unhinged or he is just trolling for page clicks.
Patent Lover's post deserves mod points, whether you believe any of this happened or not - the article spells out the legal specifics regarding what's being investigated quite well.
#DeleteChrome
Showing support for Nazis is literally "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" which is the legal definition of treason.
When you say there are "very fine" Nazis, you are showing support for them. Trump said exactly that.
Anyway, there is a pretty sizable investigation by an Independent Prosecutor going on right now. Subpoenas. Grand juries. Let the process run it's course and then let's revisit this discussion, ok?
You are welcome on my lawn.
The law is not pedantic nonsense. Read the fucking Constitution. It defines treason. They felt the definition was so important, they wrote the specific definition into the framework of the country so that the courts couldn't decide otherwise.
This is not a defense of Trump, it's a defense of honesty and reality. Trump's a fucking moron. You, however, are trying to be even dumber than Trump. Read the damned Constitution, for starters.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
He may be dirty, he may not.
This is right up there with "there may be good people among the alt-right neo-Nazis". How many eyes do you need to close to not see that Trump is and always has been dirty? From the Trump University scam to the 1980's cancellation of permits to build Trump Casino in Sydney because of demonstrable mafia connections, there is plenty of dirt on this guy for anyone who has their eyes open to see. And why won't he release his tax returns?
> I generally prefer to determine if a crime was committed by the outcome of the trial.
The funny thing about that is that you need a FUCKING INDICTMENT first. That means you SPELL OUT EXACTLY what crime was committed and by whom.
Feel free to continue reading my comment past the first few words and you'll find the part where I talked about that stage of the process.
No, the courts and our history have defined it that way. In order to be treason, it must be an enemy. In order to be an enemy, it must be official - namely, we must be in a war with them. We are not at war with Russia. We sure as hell aren't in a declared war with Russia. We surely aren't in an open war with Russia.
How about a link from a site you're likely to trust?
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
I'm REALLY trying to be polite but you're not helping. No, no you are not. I'm half convinced you're trolling, at this point.
Once more, Russia isn't our enemy, officially speaking. No, sanctions are not an act of war.
One slight update: A couple of people were found guilty post WWII. They were pardoned and released. My mistake.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
"Not only that investigators are starting to resign from Mueller's team."
Hmm, if that's true, it worths a separate investigation, why.
Any sudden deaths too?
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
Donald Trump colluded with Russia's attack on our democracy and continues to cover up Russian crimes.
Donald Trump continues to obstruct investigations into Russia's election hacking and refuses to protect our country against Russian attacks.
Donald Trump's behavior is the literal definition of treason.
I know you think you mean something but not really. Here is the literal definition of treason under U.S. Law
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States .
---18 U.S. Code 2381 - Treason
https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...
It isn't even treason under the common usage of treason but that's another matter.
The best you might get is an FEC violation or possibly espionage. If you are going to get upset about election code violations well that's a can of worms I would be more than glad to open but!!!, Bill, Hillary and Barack almost certainly wouldn't. I'd be happy to see them all in Jail with GW Bush the only one on the outside laughing.
Too many of my fellow Americans have lost their mind, just because Trump won. I didn't vote for him, but at least I didn't fall for this Russian BULLSHIT, which we ONLY have the word from CrowdStrike -- a "private" company the DNC and has ties to Clinton -- that "MAYBE" the RUSSIANS did it. FOR FUCK SAKE PEOPLE! The real collusion and crimes are with Clinton and the DNC. But we need to get Trump out, so let's just blame him for the DNC/Clinton's bullshit...
How convenient, let's just ignore the very person who's campaign is responsible for this Russian-conspiracy-bullshit.
Yeah, well... If Trump has nothing to fear, he should not be afraid, should not interfere, and should let the matter follow its due course. Then if no evidence against him can be found, or if irrefutable evidence to the opposite can be found, his case will be based on so;id "Roman quality" concrete for posterity. If all he can do is try to interfere, well.... Being president is not about winning every verbal fight every hour, not matter the cost to your own causes. Far form it.
Thats the question he wont respond to.
"His name was James Damore."
That would be investigator, note the singular and stop talking out of your ass. We do not know why he stepped down, could be anything, just use your imagination, it doesn't seem to know any bounds.
Ah, the ominous Deep State reference, a conspiracy theorist's nightly wet dream. The only way for you to be free of that shibboleth is for all civil servants to be fired every 4 years. That will work wonders for a functioning government with no institutional memory of how anything works...but maybe that would make you happy.
The only thing preventing Trump from "doing things" is his own incompetence. Maybe he'll be able to restart the Civil War, now that would be something he could do.
Brian Krebs has a blog post today claiming the NYT is incorrectly attributing these claims.
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/08/blowing-the-whistle-on-bad-attribution/
I didn't realize we were at war with Russia.
>I've never had anybody actually explain what crime was committed by Trump or his Campaign here.
Collusion, duh. Not that you'll find any sort of US Code violation for "collusion," but that doesn't stop the left. See, in their world, it's not about rule of law, it's about rule by outcome. They know Trump is guilty of...something...which is why they keep throwing anything and everything, hoping something sticks in the minds of the (R) Congress members they would need to lock in an impeachment.
>LOL.. I think you are nuts..
That's the general problem here. The left is operating like a cult, with all the features inherent, including dissociation from reality.
So...accepting campaign donations from foriegners, then? Cuz............yea, thanks to the hack, we know who did that.
>This article cites some of the applicable laws:
The cases there are really, really weak.
And none of the them rise to the level of treason.
The money or thing of value is something of tangible monetary value, not something of generic use like information.
The vast majority of people aren't rational in their political beliefs. They belong to a team, and whatever the team believes is what they believe. That's why Democrats were able to go from being against gay marriage and DATA to being strong advocates for gay marriage and having the military pay for transexuals to have transition surgery, all in about one generation.
30 years ago, the teams were more or less amicable. Now, it's pretty much hatred all around. People are no longer friends because one is a Republican and the other is a Democrat, people are getting divorces, and shooting each other. All because of blue team / green team bullshit. You can't believe different things from me because you have different experiences and values, it's because you are evil.
You are arguing with a troll.
Not defending Russia here...but, you act like the US doesn't undermine every other country's elections (including Russia, Ukraine, Israel, Italy) whenever it suits us.
The vast majority of people aren't rational in their political beliefs. They belong to a team, and whatever the team believes is what they believe.
That sums up the situation very well. I wish I still had mod points.
You can't believe different things from me because you have different experiences and values, it's because you are evil.
I'd disagree with this statement. It's become more "my team believes the exact opposite of your team, and its part of my fundamental belief system" Note that both parties have planks strongly tied to religion, although one has gone much further than the other. For instance, Republicans: anti-abortion, Democrats: anti-death penalty. Rationally, you cannot be anti-abortion (sanctity of life) and pro capital punishment but the Republicans manage it, because it's against one of the Democratic planks. And they've used it liberally in campaigns when it suits them.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
>Rationally, you cannot be anti-abortion (sanctity of life) and pro capital punishment but the Republicans manage it, because it's against one of the Democratic planks.
Sure you can. It's not even that much of a logical leap...you are leaving out a word. Sanctity of unborn life, where that life is presumed innocent of sin (note: I'm an atheist, just borrowing terms here). Whereas, capital punishment is applied to people who, at least in the United States, murder with special circumstances - basically establishing themselves as the worst of the sinners.
>I'd disagree with this statement.
I wouldn't - team identification comes along with demonizing the other team and viewing them as evil. Ideologically speaking, there is a whole lot less disagreement between the American left and the American right, than there is the American left and say, radical Islam. But the American left will ascribe all sorts of negative attributes to the American right while ascribing all sorts of positive attributes to radical Islam (e.g., they are fighting American 'imperialism' and 'capitalist exploitation') despite radical Islam (and not so radical Islam) being categorically much, much worse that the right on just about every single policy disagreement between American right and left. That's only possible because the American left has convinced itself that the American right is evil*.
* - Gross generalization doesn't apply to everyone or even a majority, but does apply to many thought leaders and people driving the respective movements.
Well at this point it doesn't matter what the legal experts on Slashdot think. Now it matters what the grand jury thinks.
How many people has he fired over the Russia story?
Nothing like a massively broad generalization to attempt to portray a narrative, followed by a speculation based on 3rd party opinion instead of facts or the subject being attacked with this rhetoric.
Manafort was fired after a short stint on the campaign. Manafort having been in Ukraine, and Trump firing him to an independent observer looks like Trump didn't want people with potential ties to Russia on his team. Further evidence of this can be found in documents given to the various committees where a guy kept trying to setup meetings with Russian officials and both Manafort and Trump refused any meetings.
Flynn, like Manafort had a problem with visibility. Having been in Turkey and on RT the firing looks like Trump did not want people with potential ties to Russia. As with Manafort, there is plenty of evidence to back that assertion.
Sally Yates was fired because she _refused_to_do_her_job and played politics on an issue not related to "Russia". The DOJ works for the President, and she refused to comply with the law and her bosses (yes, that is plural). Her job was to address the law, not to grandstand a Democratic position which _MOST_ Americans disagree with.
Comey was fired for lots of reasons. The particular issue of "Russia" Trump disliked is that Comey would not publicly announce that Trump was not under investigation which would have removed the narrative repeated by Leftists, Democrats, RINOs, and the media that supports them. Democrat and RINO outrage is laughable, as is any true Republican outrage. Comey was the most evil man alive and cost Hillary the election and a _majority_ of voices in Media and Politics called for his head numerous times since last summer for slightly different reason. We call this feigned outrage, and it's quite common.
You then make a claim about Mueller which is based on what? Tea leaf or bone reading? Are aliens beaming you info, or the extra voices in your head telling you things? Perhaps all of those things from third parties in your religious party so you believe them? I can only suggest that you consider medical treatment for your delusion.
Instead of playing the fallacy logic game, how about you use real logic and critical thinking. Give me _FACTS_ which show President Trump, or anyone on his team, committed a crime. After over a year of investigation by the FBI including numerous individual investigations, numerous Senate and Congressional committees running for upwards of 8 months, and independent investigation for 6 months, there are 0 charges and 0 evidence presented which even hints at wrong doing let alone crimes being committed.
If you were smart, you would be pissed at politicians and media outlets for lying to you repeatedly and generating hysteria over those lies. Sadly people are not smart, which is why the media continues the narrative. Dummies keep falling for it.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I only deleted yoga emails, FBI determined she deleted work emails
I did it to only use 1 device, FBI determined she used 14 devices
I didn't have classified information in emails, FBI determined there was classified information in emails
My lawyers went through all my emails, FBI determined she didn't
The above are all clear cut examples of perjury. In addition she deleted 30k emails, destroyed 14 email servers, and the FBI determined many of them were work related after they were subpoenaed by Congress. That is clear cut obstruction of justice.
So we are ignoring text book cases of perjury and obstruction of justice, to persue your claims that you have no evidence of for a completely different person.
Nice to see you are a partisan hack with no interest in being honest.
Exactly.. But one has to add the following.. The democrats are using this to obstruct and delay by diminishing Trump's appeal and are hoping this translates into gains in the midterms and hopefully gives them a chance at retaking both Congress and the White House in 2020. It's politics of the scorched earth kind. They are playing a dangerous game and I think it's going to backfire.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Yea, but he's doing what he can with that phone and pen, which is pretty much all Obama could do without Congress' help as well. Seems he's undoing a lot of Obama's policies, you just don't know about it because the media is obsessed with being critical of him in order to sell advertising with their latest "bombshell" story about Trump.
Personally, I blame Congress for most of the issue here, but hey, you can blame Trump if you like (or if it suits your political purposes)
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Oh, I did understand. Read it again while giving the benefit of the doubt that I do understand, and you'll have a better chance at comprehension.
And all these questions are ones I already answered above. If you could read, you'd know that.
Last I checked, the Ukraine and Russia were practically at war. I'm not sure how the involvement of a Ukrainian automatically means a Putin managed it.
Showing support for Nazis is literally "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" which is the legal definition of treason.
Seriously? Got to trump up such nonsense to bludgeon Trump with? He doesn't support such groups, never has and likely never will. Of all the ridiculous charges to make. Even a cursory review of Trump's public statements on such things makes it clear you are obviously wrong.
Haven't you figured out yet that the media isn't telling you the whole truth here? Certainly the democrats are lying about Trump for political purposes. Yet you blindly accept what they say? Sad...
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Then... Why is it not rational to not demand that somebody come up with a plausible theory that is based on actual law?
Until somebody comes up with some actual criminal theories falling out of actual law, investigating is nothing more than a witch hunt. This "We KNOW he did something wrong, we just don't yet know what it is..." Doesn't fly with me, is impossible to discuss or investigate such blanket claims. Not to mention that such claims are basically unfair on their face.
But that's where the democrats are on all of this... They know for sure something criminal happened, but they cannot tell you what it might be only that it must be investigated! This is by design endless investigations and innuendo for political purposes. They are not interested in finding truth, quite the opposite because they know the truth doesn't help them, this is about keeping the investigations flowing to keep up the "Trump did something wrong" narrative for as long as they can..
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Sure you can. It's not even that much of a logical leap...you are leaving out a word. Sanctity of unborn life, where that life is presumed innocent of sin
You're applying religious logic there. Why is "unborn" life presumed innocent of sin, especially since so much of it causes death and injury worldwide?
I wouldn't - team identification comes along with demonizing the other team and viewing them as evil.
Why? Ever play sports? Team identification comes from everyone being in the same group and associating with each other. Evil never comes into play. That Republicans made it an us or them, and "them" are evil baby killing communists, and you aren't one of those, are you? splits back in the 80s is something else.
.... That's only possible because the American left has convinced itself that the American right is evil*.
* - Gross generalization doesn't apply to everyone or even a majority, but does apply to many thought leaders and people driving the respective movements.
I'd say it applies to so few as to be negligible. I'm not even sure I'd categorize those holding those views as really being American left. Either that, or I don't know a single person on the left. I do know lots of people that think the far right (alt-right, nazis, neo-nazis, KKK, etc) are pretty evil. You'd have to front an argument for why that view is incorrect. That the GOP have flirted with going there is only the responsibility of the GOP. It's one reason moderates are a shrinking percentage of the party.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
If the Clinton Foundation doesn't involve itself in politics, it doesn't fall under that law. It uses words like "election" and "political" and "electioneering".
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Don't worry, Trump is doing his best to alienate everyone outside his core group of supporters, who are really loyal, and not numerous enough to win elections.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Someone posted laws that show that most foreign influence in US elections is illegal, and it's illegal to solicit any such. From what I've seen, it's plausible that the Trump campaign cooperated with Russia to influence the elections in illegal ways. Trump did ask Russia for Clinton's emails, which could be illegal under USC 441, parts of which were posted by another, but even if that were technically a violation I can't see it being prosecuted. We'll know more when the investigation is concluded.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
So you want him to roll over onto his back and show his belly to persecution by those that hate him solely for the fact that he won an election.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
US code 441 e https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/...
441e. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals (a) Prohibition It shall be unlawful for— (1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make— (A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election; (B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or (C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 434(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
OK, So we are talking about something valuable and tangible, money, donations a roll of film, something you can point to or hold in your hand or a service you can identify and say "Here, this is the item(s) given that has value". Correct?
Now, I assume you already have an idea what item(s) of value where given or received. Tell us what that was.
Now, if you are talking about items in paragraph C, it's not Trump's issue if the Russians did any of these things. Reading paragraph (2) clearly excepts the stuff in "C". The only way Trump (or an associate being directed by him) can violate this law is by accepting anything in paragraph A or B, which basically boils down to money or things of value (such as office space, office machines, long distance phone service and such). So is your item in that list? If not, we are done.. If so, then what evidence do you have that it was solicited or accepted?
BTW... Don Jr's meeting with a Russian lawyer does not constitute evidence of this. Everyone at the meeting agrees that nothing changed hands, no information was given no promises made by either side. Unless you have some kind of proof that they are lying or something that shows something changed hands, it's a wild theory and nothing more...
Also, by this statute, Trump is only at risk if he asked for, received a donation of a service, money or item that has tangible value to his campaign. Trump (or his campaign) had to know about it. If a foreign national does stuff in paragraph C, Trump (or his associates) didn't break the law.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Trump did ask Russia for Clinton's E-mail.... For Pete's sake, that was a JOKE during a debate. I don't suppose Hillary thought it to be a funny one, but I sure did. Trump slammed her pretty hard on this topic, and those E-mails will never be found at this point because Hillary had them destroyed.
So... Did Russia cough up said E-mails? Um, nope. Actually, Russia didn't... I know, you are thinking the WiKi Leaks E-mail leak was this very thing....Sorry that would be wrong. The E-mail from that source where from the DNC's E-mail system and NOT Clinton's lost 30,000 E-mails Trump joked about the Russians having...
So... What are you claiming happened here? Trump jokingly asked for E-mails but never got them.... And this is a problem how?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
I've heard this observation before... During the primaries.. Then again during the general election.... I not so sure it was right back then, along with the "he has no path to 270" observation which was obviously wrong.. Perhaps it's still wrong? I wonder..
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
>Define and defend weak in legal terms.
Weak as in insufficient to get a prosecution unless someone goes jury shopping, and almost certainly too weak to secure a conviction.
Why? Because there is no tangible evidence that anything of value was exchanged. Every single public claim has evaporated under scrutiny. Even the Don Jr. story was that he met with a Russian woman in exchange for information on Hillary Clinton that never was delivered - and even if useful information had been delivered, you would have to establish that it had *value* in a monetary sense. And then, even then, you have to contend with things like Al Gore taking cash donations (and admitting it) from Chinese government officials back in 1996 where there was no prosecution or conviction to see how significant the Federal government takes "crimes" of this nature. And then you'll have to reconcile the prosecution of Don Jr. with the non-prosecution of Alexandra Chalupa on behalf of the Clinton campaign, whose involvement with foreign nationals on behalf of Hillary Clinton was much more overt than anything Don Jr. did.
Unborn life is presumed innocent since it hasn't done anything yet. No harm to anyone else - and this is divorced from any religious beliefs, as I have none except snuff means snuff and we die forever. If you believe in judging people by the sum total of their actions, it makes sense to exempt the unborn from that.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Unborn life is presumed innocent since it hasn't done anything yet. No harm to anyone else - and this is divorced from any religious beliefs, as I have none except snuff means snuff and we die forever. If you believe in judging people by the sum total of their actions, it makes sense to exempt the unborn from that.
"Unborn" life can absolutely harm and even kill, and has, many many many times throughout history. Too many to count, actually, and it still goes on even today. You might want to familiarize yourself with maternal mortality for starters.
That aside, what is this notion of "innocent" in this conversation if it's not based on a religious ideology? Is a 1 day old child innocent? How about 1 week? 1 month? 1 year? 1 decade? When does this magical innocence suddenly go away, and why?
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
As usual, you're ignoring intent, which is the reason the insane aren't held accountable for their actions. That makes the whole presentation invalid on its face.
Injecting religion into it is a nonsequitur.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
But, in the context of this conversation, the point is that people are pro-life because "Sanctity of unborn life, where that life is presumed innocent of sin." That's what kicked off this particular thread. If you remove religion, then shouldn't all life be preserved? This is obviously not the case, but limited to humans only. Why? Religion. You just can't get around the fundamental issue of religion driving the pro-life movement of today. (pun intended)
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
From TFA: "Ukrainian police did not provide details on the individual in question, including his name, but said he is living in Ukraine and has not been arrested. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE the individual worked for Russian intelligence."
From other articles in Ukrainian and Russian press - hacker made it very clear that he was NOT working for Russia. Moreover, he only created the malware, he didn't attack any American server.
I'm starting to think that Slashdot stopped being news for nerds and became a swamp of low-end political "news".
> If you remove religion, then shouldn't all life be preserved?
How do you figure? From a purely biological perspective, all life exists at the expense of some other life. Even plants poison and crowd out their competitors. Now, if you argue that morality and/or ethics can exist independently of religion, then I agree with you. All three are human constructions. It does not follow, however, that the life of a murderer is just as sacred as the life of an unborn child (or fetus).
Likewise, lots of people - given the choice and ability, to end their own lives because of terminal, painful illnesses. I mean, do you really want to tell someone suffering from glioblastoma that all life is sacred, their life is sacred, and despite the intense and agonizing pain before their soon to be certain death, they should keep on keeping on?
> If you remove religion, then shouldn't all life be preserved? How do you figure? From a purely biological perspective, all life exists at the expense of some other life. Even plants poison and crowd out their competitors. Now, if you argue that morality and/or ethics can exist independently of religion, then I agree with you. All three are human constructions. It does not follow, however, that the life of a murderer is just as sacred as the life of an unborn child (or fetus).
This line only leads into the standard pro/anti choice rhetoric.
Likewise, lots of people - given the choice and ability, to end their own lives because of terminal, painful illnesses. I mean, do you really want to tell someone suffering from glioblastoma that all life is sacred, their life is sacred, and despite the intense and agonizing pain before their soon to be certain death, they should keep on keeping on?
I agree with this: life at all costs is not necessarily life worth living nor wanted.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.