Slashdot Mirror


US Sanctions Russians Over Military, Intelligence Hacking (reuters.com)

The U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions on three Russian individuals and five companies on Monday, saying they had worked with Moscow's military and intelligence services on ways to conduct cyber attacks against the United States and its allies. From a report: "The United States is engaged in an ongoing effort to counter malicious actors working at the behest of the Russian Federation and its military and intelligence units to increase Russiaâ(TM)s offensive cyber capabilities," Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said in a statement. "The entities designated today have directly contributed to improving Russia's cyber and underwater capabilities through their work with the FSB and therefore jeopardize the safety and security of the United States and our allies," Mnuchin said, using an acronym for Russia's Federal Security Service.

159 comments

  1. Collusion by AlanObject · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I won't be either the first or the last to point this out, but this looks like staged chaff to distract the feeble-minded American public away from the new psy-ops operations now gearing up for the next election cycle.

    So easy to think: "Ha. If Trump was colluding with the Russians would he allow this!" (stupid libs.)

    Obvious answer: No.

    Correct answer: Not so fast.

    1. Re:Collusion by Luthair · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Unlikely given 2-days ago Trump was asking for Russia to be re-admitted to the G7

    2. Re:Collusion by bobbied · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So.... You are saying Trump, who is supposed to be the stupidest man to ever serve as president, is smart enough to actually arrange for this kind of diversionary tactic, but the American public is stupid enough to fall for it, but the press is willing to overlook it? (Not likely, perhaps, no way in HE double tooth picks.)

      Who's off in the weeds here?

      Could it just possibly be the government working as it is currently implmented? That the Russians have been hacking and we are dealing with it in the standard bureaucratic way and the administration has little to do with this?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    3. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that didn't take long to jump to that conclusion, bravo.
      Trumpo could cure cancer and you guys would be like, "Drumpf puts thousands of medical specialists out of work".

    4. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump does what Putin and his apparatus tell him to do. He is just a dancing monkey.

    5. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So.... You are saying Trump, who is supposed to be the stupidest man to ever serve as president,...

      OP never said that. You're the one who injected that to try to make the rest of your idiotic claim stick

      ...is smart enough to actually arrange for this kind of diversionary tactic, but his redneck voter base is stupid enough to fall for it

      FTFY
       

      but the press is willing to overlook it?

      The press won't overlook it. In fact, they'll call him out on it and he'll yell, "FAKE NEWS!!!!!" which is typical of his MO.

      Who's off in the weeds here?

      You for defending this prick

    6. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I won't be either the first or the last to point this out, but this looks like staged chaff to distract the feeble-minded American public away from the new psy-ops operations now gearing up for the next election cycle.

      So easy to think: "Ha. If Trump was colluding with the Russians would he allow this!" (stupid libs.)

      Obvious answer: No.

      Correct answer: Not so fast.

      Trump Derangement Syndrome much?

      Lordy, Trump has you totally bamboozled, doesn't he? You don't know whether you're coming or going.

      And it's fucking hilarious.

      BTW - despite the media obviously doing everything they can to bring him down, Trump's got better approval ratings now than Obama did at the same time. You know what that means?

      FOUR MORE YEARS!!!!

      OF ME LAUGHING AT YOUR PATHETIC "PROGRESSIVE" STUPIDITY

      BWAAA HAAA HAAA!!!

      And Trump's approval ratings are better than Obama's and that's before the depth of Obama's SpyGate effort comes to light.

      Can you say "James Comey in jail"? Because Andy McCabe's already angling for an immunity deal...

      Oh, the stories we're gonna hear from the guy who got $1 million from Crooked Liar Hillary! to bury her email investigation! You think he'll give up Obama, too? And it looks like it's all gonna happen just in time for the mid-term elections, too!

      I can't wait for Justices Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg to be replaced by another two Antonin Scalia clones - who know how to read the US Constitution.

    7. Re:Collusion by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Trumpo could cure cancer

      But he chooses not to. He's playing 53-dimensional chess with cancer.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:Collusion by rogoshen1 · · Score: 0

      They did the same kind of mental gymnastics with bush over 9/11.

      "hey he's as dumb as a chimp, just look at him!"
      "hey, he orchestrated the biggest government cover-up in the history of the world!"

      (Of course when called out on this, blame was then shifted to Cheney or whoever was the convenient boogeyman at the time)

    9. Re: Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying it is not possible for there to be incompetence AND malice?

    10. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bush jr. went to Yale where he was a near-80 student, and then he graduated from Harvard with an MBA. How many dummies do you know who graduated from Harvard Business School? Zero, same number I know of.

    11. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even stupid men can hire smart people.

      Look at Reagan.

    12. Re:Collusion by amiga3D · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A lot of what Trump says is just meant to make the press go crazy and distract them from something else. They're like cats chasing the red dot of a laser pointer. I swear sometimes he just does it for entertainment purposes. You can take the Reality TV star off his series but you can't get him to stop playing Reality Star. It's like we have the Apprentice 2.0, DC Whitehouse Version.

    13. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to learn who Steve Bannon is, and the rest of his tribe, and their influence on Trump, and you should know that he has a White House full of advisors, all taking the country's temperature.

      He's Putin's puppet, and many of his supporters know this and are okay with this, because Putin has aligned himself with White Nationalism.

      You should also learn that Trump has been fighting against sanctions for over a year, and praising thug Putin, who murders his enemies and invades other countries, along with interfering in our elections.

      Actually, now that I think about it, how do you not already know these things?

    14. Re:Collusion by bobbied · · Score: 1

      That may be true, and I like you laser pointer illustration.. But do you actually THINK that some investigative reporter wouldn't love to expose Trump if they could? Or do you think they are all just too busy chasing their tails to miss a real live story hitting them in the face?

      Trump may be enjoying the attention from the press, but you really have to think the press is stupid enough to just ignore a story that could scuttle a guy they obviously loath? Yea, I'm not buying that idea. The press isn't that stupid. They play along with the president because it's good for ratings, they chase that red dot because they know it sells advertising. I don't think they would give up the ratings bonanza that covering a story that legitimately made Trump look bad and either not see it or willingly ignore it. I think they'd jump at the chance to obliterate Trump, if they could...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    15. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carrot and stick.

    16. Re:Collusion by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      So if Trump does something to hurt Russia, it's a smokescreen and if he does something to help Russia it's proof of collusion?

    17. Re:Collusion by jittles · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I won't be either the first or the last to point this out, but this looks like staged chaff to distract the feeble-minded American public away from the new psy-ops operations now gearing up for the next election cycle.

      So easy to think: "Ha. If Trump was colluding with the Russians would he allow this!" (stupid libs.)

      Obvious answer: No.

      Correct answer: Not so fast.

      More likely it’s just the Trump administration working out a ‘legal’ way to initiate a funds transfer into the Trump Organization. After all, we hit ZTE with sacntions and what happens literally days later? Chinese government authorizes a $500M loan to Trump and all of the sudden we are costing the Chinese people too many jobs. So he’s just sticking his hand out asking for another check.

    18. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, all collusion.

    19. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really!? Prove there was collusion.

      And look, the pot calling the kettle black. Maybe the US should sanction themselves for hacking into Russian and Chinese military sites.

    20. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that you all are turning into a bunch of conspiracy theory nuts, right?

      You are the mirror image of the 9/11 truthers, the Obama birthers, the Clinton bodycount listers, the Seth Rich-got-killed-by-the-DNC nutters.

      You are exactly like those nuts, and you don't even get it. Actually, you are worse, because those nuts at least have some non-circumstantial facts to back up their delusions --- you have none, except for your blind hatred of Trump.

    21. Re:Collusion by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Bannon is a traitor to his country, to freedom, to democracy, and to people of good will everywhere.

      (All these wanna-be Nazis and RaHoWa types marching to the tune of a man who's stated quite clearly that he seeks to emulate Vladimir Lenin. Oh, the irony.)

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    22. Re:Collusion by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      What a waste.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    23. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should Russia or China ever produce some evidence of US transgressions they can certainly file a complaint. You never hear of any country accusing the US of hacking their systems. So the question becomes:
      1. Can they not produce any tangible evidence of US hacking because US is not even attempting to hack them?

      2. Is the US just so good at hacking others that the targets are totally unaware they have been compromised?

      3. Or our other countries afraid to say anything because they do not want to provoke the US any more than they already have? Allies and enemies are still busy trying to calculate how much the can annoy the US and get away with it like days gone by. The US has a pretty strong military and economy but what's been lacking is unpredictability. Prior to Trump both allies and enemies knew exactly what the US would do in any type of scenario. When you know your adversaries response is to every action you can take advantage of the predictability and do pretty much what you want. Over the past 20 years people have been lamenting the lack of US power but the power was never lacking it just wasn't being used to it's fullest extent. Trump is pretty much a disaster as President but he has delivered a deserved slap up side the head for both enemies and allies. And both enemies and allies have been using the US as their bogeyman in their domestic politics for years. Iran and NK can get with doing this but the US allies who can trash the US during their election cycles can no longer do so without repercussions. The free handouts, sweet trade deals, and military protection are suddenly no longer a given.

    24. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if Trump does something to hurt Russia, it's a smokescreen and if he does something to help Russia it's proof of collusion?

      Trump colluded with Russia. He did it on TV and no one with a brain believes he didn't know about the Trump tower meeting and likely other things. That being said, Mueller can figure out the details.

      The government is a big place, and not every decision is made by Trump. Just because something comes out that may not benefit Russia does not, in itself, mean much.

      The bottom line is Trump may or may not be effectively working for Putin. Certainly his behavior seems to have him working for Putin as one of the few logical explanations. It could also be that he fears Putin killing him off. The exact reason doesn't really matter. Trump is basically through incompetence, stupidity, or design doing a very credible job in bringing down American democracy and our place in the world. He is going just slow enough to drag the republican party with him and prevent any great accidental rebooting of their ethics centers.

      Frankly, when Trump's admin says there is a special place in Hell for the leader of Canada and the only real response from most republicans in power is crickets (There were exceptions), well, you can pretty well write off half of congress as a credible representative for what is right.

      Don't get me wrong, I hope the summit somehow works, and I hope it ends in some formal treaty backed by the congress that is at least as good as the Iran deal, without sacrificing our defense of South Korea and such. I'm just don't see it happening. The Iran deal was a decent deal. North Korea sure as hell isn't going to agree to something worse. We'll they aren't likely to keep their word in any event.

    25. Re: Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take a look in the mirror yourself, pal.

    26. Re: Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck and wit.

    27. Re: Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a yes then.

    28. Re:Collusion by ath1901 · · Score: 1

      Insulting your allies and saying dictators are "great guys" just to distract the press? If he's playing stupid as a strategy then it is a very stupid strategy.

    29. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You people are so delusional, after all this time there is not a single piece of evidence to support any of these wild claims. The Trump tower meeting has been shown to have been a setup by FusionGPS - the lawyer met with FusionGPS both before and after that meeting, and funny how she was complaining a couple of weeks ago that if this meeting was oh so important, why hadn't Mueller's team interviewed her? Because Mueller knows it was a setup and he has enough problems already.

      But lest anyone forget, even if there was a meeting IT IS NOT A CRIME. The only criminal act related to foreign powers is if they provide something of substance to a campaign. You know, like a British national providing opposition research, or illegal aliens making contributions to a campaign. There is also no collusion statute in the US code except between corporations. The only time speaking to a foreign power could be considered a crime is if we are at war with that power and the person speaking was giving "aid and comfort" to the enemy. Last time I looked we were not at war with Russia.

      So for all you butt hurt liberals who lost the election, I have 3 links for you:

      Election is over, we won, deal with it - B. Obama
      Stop whining about the U.S. elections being rigged - B. Obama
      Trump wouldn't say if he'll accept the outcome....horrifying - H. Clinton

    30. Re:Collusion by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      There are still some good reporters out there looking for real stories instead of focusing on the ridiculous crap that Trump rips off the top of his head at every opportunity. They just seem to get lost in the howls of outrage.

    31. Re:Collusion by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      It's working though. Instead of his numbers dropping they have been steadily rising over the last few months.

    32. Re:Collusion by BoFo · · Score: 1

      Look, as an American I must point out the US/Israel leads the world in hacking for information gathering and for sabotage. Can't forget the stuxnet virus, used to destroy uranium centrifuges in Iran and a derivative of the same used to hack into Proximus in Belgium to eavesdrop on GSMs in Europe. The WikiLeaks Vault 7 release showed us that the NSA had developed and deployed hacks that would leave false clues leading to blaming third parties. The sanctions, on the other hand, are acts of war designed to weaken a foreign country. If the same sanctions were declared against the US, the post 9/11 laws would lead the US military to attack those responsible. All of this based on hacking incidents where no objective proof has ever been put forward.

    33. Re: Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Obama wasn't even born in America. He's an extremist Muslim. His words mean nothing in communist America. Why even post about him? Still butthurt a black guy ran America better than the past white guts? It's ok.

    34. Re: Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL.

      I am picturing DJT goose stepping to a beat

      Boom chhhh booom chhhh booom chhhhh

    35. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only among his base, which is rapidly dwindling. His supporters are at an all-time low nowadays.

    36. Re:Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right wingers love to pretend like they emulate Soviet leaders, because it publicly deflects blame to the left. It is a ruse that I'm afraid you've fallen for. Naturally if Bannon said he wanted to emulate Hitler, not only would it be entirely too honest and obvious, but that would reflect poorly on the right, which is the last thing a right winger wants to do.

    37. Re:Collusion by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Don't kid yourself. I remember in the 1980s when I visited the journalism building, don't remember why. Anyhow, Reagan was President and all they could talk about was how terrible he was. You would have thought he was grinding up baby cats in the WH basement or something. I remember one Prof actually saying Reagan killed a baby on camera. I asked when was that and he got very vague. I said it never happened, did it. After about 5 minutes of back peddling he admitted he made it all up. That's what they teach - lies.

      There could be a good honest reporter out there, however if they are one they're going to be a conservative reporter. Certainly not a liberal one because they can't stop drinking the cool aid (ok, probably the pot cigarette) long enough to think. Trump trolls them well and like the cat & laser bit he plays them well and gets things done.

    38. Re:Collusion by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      You don't seem to understand, his number among "voters" are going up. It's easy enough to see, virtually every poll shows climbing approval numbers.

    39. Re:Collusion by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      There are reporters that don't let their biases control what they report. It's just very few are part of any major news outlet. Those are all agenda driven.

    40. Re:Collusion by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      "sanctions, on the other hand, are acts of war "

      Um, where have sanctions ever been considered an act of war? Clue: they haven't...they're different from embargos, which can be considered as such. And no proof is required to implement them, it's totally up to Congress and the Executive branch to decide if they want to impose sanctions.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    41. Re: Collusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't recall making any mention of race, in fact I didn't even say anything about the past administration other than to simply present links of comments by your liberal gods that show the massive hypocrisy of your side. You all cheered and agreed with what they said then but now you're the ones that are horrifying and whining and you refuse to admit it. But why is it anytime someone says anything about the worst President to ever occupy the Oval office you immediately jump to race? How do you even know what my race is? Typical leftist playbook, don't address the facts, instead call names.

      But seriously "ran America better"? Did the worst economic recovery in history show you that? Did the record number of people on food stamps show you that? Or maybe it was when the Obama administration altered the formula for determining the unemployment number to drop all of those who stopped looking, while today even according to the NYT since Trump's has reversed or halted many of Obama's policies we're at statistically 0 unemployment.

      Oh and of course there's always the signature ACA legislation where if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor and how they admitted to having lied to stupid Americans to get it passed. And now of course we see that there really is no affordable in the ACA, but that rates are skyrocketing and it is taking the deficit with it.

      Please list the accomplishments of which you speak. Considering he was in office for 8 years and Trump has only been in office 500 days I'm sure you can find many more instances of his successes than the current President.

      And I won't even get started on foreign policy like Libya, Afghanistan, Iran, etc.

  2. But isn't Trump working for Putin? by schwit1 · · Score: 1, Informative

    And he did the same last month
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0...

    1. Re:But isn't Trump working for Putin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:But isn't Trump working for Putin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Republicans want Cold War 2.0. The first one was very profitable for them.

    3. Re:But isn't Trump working for Putin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's funny.. the Republicans did the most to end it. (Reagan/Bush Sr)

    4. Re:But isn't Trump working for Putin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct, and that was why they were so upset that Obama just let Russia take Crimia. They wanted to create a problem with Russia.

    5. Re:But isn't Trump working for Putin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't really apply, because that was a very different Russia than Putin's expansionist election-meddling current version. The US is right to stand up to Putin's attacks - Trump however is a pure traitor, there's no question.

    6. Re: But isn't Trump working for Putin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And today's "Republocans" would call Reagan's actual policies "Socialist", at the very least.

      I have the luck to still remember an "old" Republican saying that it all started with Dick Cheney and his bunch of Neocons. He said, and that is a literal quote, that they were "completely nuts".

    7. Re: But isn't Trump working for Putin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, trump supporters aren't racist. They are everyday people just like you and I.

  3. Target irrelevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Hackers" and "Russians" both mean "distraction"; and they go doubleplus well together.

    1. Re: Target irrelevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But we have always been at war with Westasia!

  4. For reals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I seem to recall us imposing sanctions not that long ago as well, except they weren't actually enforced by Trump. Will this be any different?

  5. Token anti-punishment. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "three Russian individuals and five companies".

    Three individuals. Five companies.

    This is the new Republican standard operating procedure for progressing corruption in their favor.

    You do the worst things you can do, inflict as great cruelty as you can through intermediaries... then when punishment is incoming, you pick out a few token groups to slap on the wrist, then don't mention in a year when you dismiss exactly those punishments.

    It's basically organized crime tactics. The bosses use stooges, ideally across jurisdictions, to make all punishments possible ineffectual. As long as the crimes can be pay for the punishments, it's all a cruel form of accounting.

    It's also how limited liability company shell companies and white collar crime work.

    1. Re:Token anti-punishment. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      So.. Muller is working for the republicans now?

      Wow, nobody is safe from getting rolled under that democrat impeachment bus... But all is fair in war and if you can nail Trump with something, the collateral damage is fine, even if Al Franken and WJ Clinton get tread marks on their backs...Muller better produce something, or under he goes too.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re: Token anti-punishment. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about?

      The person you replied to wasn't discussing mueller.

      Jesus Christ, now it's becoming crystal clear.
      You have a hard on for trump, and a soft on for mueller.

      Bobby, please seek help, you are delusional.

  6. Can there be a more hypoctite state than the usa? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They cry like small boys when somebody possibly has done something while at the same time enganging, illegally such an Syria, Serbia, Iraq, in so many wars and "regime changes" . I really look forward to see the day when it dissolves after all other countries have dumped the dollar.

  7. Re:Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah it also says to not eat shit. why don't you start there

  8. Pot meets kettle by johanw · · Score: 1

    As if Snowden can't name a lot of people who can forsee Russian sanctions for doing the same and more.

  9. Sure seems like it. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1, Insightful

    But isn't Trump working for Putin?

    Honestly, we don't know for sure but he's "working overtime" to try and shut down the investigation that would allow us to find out.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I too like to make shit up. It's fun, isn't it?

    2. Re:Sure seems like it. by bobbied · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How long do you suppose it would take to find out? Muller has pretty much a blank check and authorization to investigate pretty much any leads he finds into pretty much anything. He's been going over a year now and the FBI 9 months before that.

      Are you sure we don't already know enough to be reasonably sure? You cannot prove a negative, but if you cannot come up with some kind of prove of the positive after a year, it's starting to look like nothing happened. Of course, you can keep looking until you find something or the target leaves office... Historically, That's what special councils do anyway, but how much time does it take before we can assume there is no there there? A year, two years? Eight years?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    3. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the investigation moves really fast (compared to other special investigations):
      https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-russia-investigation-is-moving-really-freaking-fast/

    4. Re:Sure seems like it. by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      ...if you cannot come up with some kind of prove of the positive after a year, it's starting to look like nothing happened.

      20 people indicted and four guilty pleas so far. So much nothing.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    5. Re:Sure seems like it. by forgottenusername · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nothing happened?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      "Through June 2018, the Special Counsel has publicly initiated criminal proceedings against 20 peopleâ"five U.S. nationals, 14 Russian nationals, and one Dutch nationalâ"and three Russian organizations."

      This is just Russia, not even his other illegal doings like stuff Cohen is under investigation for. Quite the nothingburger.

      "They haven't proved anything about Trump!"

      No, just a bunch of his associates, including several directly involved with his administration and election campaign. I guess they all acted independently & committed crimes for teh lulz. If you believe the ultimate boss of a bunch of criminals isn't involved then you need your common sense meter checked.

      So tired of the "nothing has been found" false narrative. Many indictments have come down. There are so many moving pieces, and it's such a sensitive investigation, if it had wrapped up by now it'd mean Mueller was subverted ala House investigation. "No one showed up, no one answered our questions, the WH was in direct communication with interviewees. However based on available data we can say there was absolutely no collusion"

      Pretty easy to come to that conclusion when your investigation is a farce.

    6. Re:Sure seems like it. by SinGunner · · Score: 2

      This sort of large-scale case can take MANY YEARS to develop. I had some minor part in a large suit against the major US investment banks alleging some very nasty collusion. If you read the emails from discovery, you'd think it would have ended with everyone's head on a chopping block. You'd be wrong. Although a couple of the worst offenders did go under before they could face the courts due to their rampant illegal activities in the housing market (this was 2007~2008).

    7. Re:Sure seems like it. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 0

      How long do you suppose it would take to find out?

      Couldn't say for certain but given the results thus far, Mueller and his team have been moving at lightning speed.

      Muller has pretty much a blank check and authorization to investigate pretty much any leads he finds into pretty much anything.

      Well if you haven't noticed, there are a bunch of guilty pleas and a boatload of indictments. It's not like the investigation isn't going anywhere.

      He's been going over a year now and the FBI 9 months before that.

      The Watergate investigation took longer. Also, I think "conservatives" have lost the right to complain after screaming about Benghazi in 17 investigations that found no wrongdoing over the span of four years.

      Are you sure we don't already know enough to be reasonably sure?

      Mueller isn't one to waste time or resources. The president is refusing to be interviewed which is holding up the process.

      You cannot prove a negative, but if you cannot come up with some kind of prove of the positive after a year, it's starting to look like nothing happened.

      The 20 people and three companies that have indicted prove that something happened.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    8. Re:Sure seems like it. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Look close at what all the supposed "crimes" actually are... I think you will find they don't have anything close to the "Russian Collusion" that started the whole Special Council thing and by all appearances Muller is off chasing some obstruction idea now.

      Someday I'm going to make and post a list of these "crimes" so we can dispense with this "Well Muller charged some folks! Surely there was wrongdoing in the campaign!" canard that's a mis-representation of what's actually been happening here that gets twisted into something it's not.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    9. Re:Sure seems like it. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Nothing about what justified Muller's appointment has been found.

      Crimes from 10 years ago (before anybody including Trump knew he was running for president) for a guy that served on the campaign mean what? A conspirator in these crimes who DIDN'T participate in the campaign? Meaningless to the campaign...

      A couple of "Lying to the FBI" charges mean what to Muller exactly? Leverage maybe for Muller, but again, nothing a all to do with the campaign as all these happened AFTER the election was over.

      Charging Russian companies and foreign nationals with illegal election participation (for both parties candidates) means what? The Russians where meddling? And how's that have anything to do with Trump's campaign?

      I'm tired of the IMPLIED guilt here. Nothing that implicates the Trump Campaign has been found and disclosed, no crimes related to Trump's campaign have been charged. Even after a year...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    10. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if you haven't noticed, there are a bunch of guilty pleas and a boatload of indictments. It's not like the investigation isn't going anywhere.

      Indictments mean literally nothing (a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, after all), and guilty pleas only mean that it was simply cheaper for the defendant to plea guilty, get a slap on the wrist, and turn "state's evidence" rather than try and win in court. (Note that there haven't been any serious jail times for the people pleading guilty - almost as if they were convinced that it was better to plead guilty than prove their innocence.)

      The 20 people and three companies that have indicted prove that something happened.

      It literally does not. Proof would be actual evidence of wrong-doing, not evidence of a witch-hunt desperately trying to come up with something - anything - to prove that it wasn't a huge waste of money.

    11. Re:Sure seems like it. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      How long do you suppose it would take to find out?

      Couldn't say for certain but given the results thus far, Mueller and his team have been moving at lightning speed.

      How long will it take was the question, not how fast you think Muller is going. How long do we give him? One year, two? Eight? Muller's been busy, but for all the looking we have what? Nothing that has any direct relation to crimes by the president's campaign has been disclosed yet....

      Muller has pretty much a blank check and authorization to investigate pretty much any leads he finds into pretty much anything.

      Well if you haven't noticed, there are a bunch of guilty pleas and a boatload of indictments. It's not like the investigation isn't going anywhere.

      Again, guilty pleas for crimes that happened when? AFTER the election and for what? Lying to the FBI? Give me a break...

      He's been going over a year now and the FBI 9 months before that.

      The Watergate investigation took longer. Also, I think "conservatives" have lost the right to complain after screaming about Benghazi in 17 investigations that found no wrongdoing over the span of four years.

      No wrongdoing found? Well.. I know you don't like it, but the Hillary E-mail thing was found (and that was evidence of a crime) though it and a whole bunch of lying to the US public was proven too. Was Susan Rice's "it was a video" Sunday show lies wrong? Well it wasn't a crime, but I thought it was wrong. As was Clinton's lying about the same thing, that was wrong too, just not illegal... But hey...

      Are you sure we don't already know enough to be reasonably sure?

      Mueller isn't one to waste time or resources. The president is refusing to be interviewed which is holding up the process.

      That is a convenient excuse and nothing more. If Muller has the goods, he doesn't need to interview Trump, just write the report and be done. If he doesn't, then why would Trump talk to Muller? There is zero upside for talking to Muller. How about this? Why doesn't Muller put his questions in writing and send them over the Whitehouse for answers? Yea, not going to happen. Hard to set a trap that way.

      You cannot prove a negative, but if you cannot come up with some kind of prove of the positive after a year, it's starting to look like nothing happened.

      The 20 people and three companies that have indicted prove that something happened.

      Twenty charges? Oh yea, foreign nationals and companies who never where directly involved in either campaign. Folks who will never stand trial unless they are stupid enough to travel though the USA and get arrested because they are Russians who are not on US soil anyway. Twenty trials for which Muller doesn't have to prove one blooming thing because they will never go to court and 20 Russians for which we have zero evidence of contact with Trump's campaign, much less Trump, but SOMETHING happened. Yea, go with that.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    12. Re:Sure seems like it. by bobbied · · Score: 0

      You know.. I have one question.... What is Muller looking for? What was the reason for his appointment?

      This was supposed to be a slam dunk, 6 moths at most. Democrats where talking IMPEACHMENT for Pete's sake. Now, over a year in, we still don't have any evidence that implicates anybody in Trump's campaign with anything approaching a crime during the campaign.... Now you are telling me this will take years? Right...

      I'm just guessing here, but Muller isn't going to stop looking until Trump leaves office. I'm also guessing that will be January 20th 2025 around noon. Muller will retire after this. We will get a report, but it's going to say Trump's campaign didn't do anything wrong, even though individuals involved in the campaign got caught in unrelated crimes.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    13. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Special prosecutor investigations always take a long time. Out of 9 previous prosecutors, only two wound up in less than 2 years, and Mueller has already produced more charges than both of them put together. The only other investigations of comparable public profile to this, Iran-Contra and Whitewater, both lasted around 7 years.

      A handy comparison chart here

    14. Re:Sure seems like it. by Straif · · Score: 1

      Almost all American indictments have been for process crimes or crimes that had nothing to do with the Trump campaign or even the 2016 election. Their highest profile conviction, Flynn, is falling apart even after he confessed as it's been shown that the original FBI agents reported no sign of perjury (a report hidden from the defense) and the primary driver of the confession was a threat to pursue and potentially bankrupt his son on similar 'made up' charges (made up in the manner that the FBI can effectively charge anyone with lying to them as it's almost impossible to be 100% accurate when making a statement about anything you are not currently doing).

      The majority of the indictments are Russian and were so poorly backed that when some of the named companies actually sent lawyers to court (something no one, especially Mueller expected) Mueller's team couldn't actually proceed and had to ask for a continuance. The funniest part was the motion to delay based on not properly handling the summons. Usually this is a defense tactic to say they weren't properly served so therefore should be given more time or special considerations but in this case it was the prosecutors claiming they weren't able to properly send out the summons while the defense lawyers were in court saying we don't care if the summons wasn't properly processed because of mistakes on the special councils part, they were ready to go and would waive any rights this mistake may have granted them.

      He was effectively padding his numbers by including charges he had no legal means to follow up on but was called on it and didn't know what to do. Adding to that, because the Russians showed up, they now have legal rights to all of the evidence against them which could include details about highly classified intelligence sources. All in all a very bad move on the Special Councils part. Even if they get a conviction the Russians win as they'll get a lot of juicy data and there's no legal recourse to penalize those companies anyway except preventing a few Russians from being able to go to Disneyworld or catch Hamilton on Broadway. If they lose the Russians still get the data plus they can fly on over to Kansas to visit the world's largest ball of twine if they so choose to.

      As for Manafort, the closet thing to what most people think of as a criminal case, all of his charges stem from dealings that had nothing to do his short time at the Trump campaign and more to do with his very slippery business practices dating back several years. I don't think anyone from either side of the aisle will shed a tear if Manafort is convicted of something but those crimes should really be outside of the scope of this special councils mandate.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    15. Re:Sure seems like it. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      How long will it take was the question, not how fast you think Muller is going. How long do we give him? One year, two? Eight?

      We give him all the time he needs. We don't let criminals off the hook just because you think it takes too long to route them out.

      Muller's been busy, but for all the looking we have what? Nothing that has any direct relation to crimes by the president's campaign has been disclosed yet....

      What we have is an ongoing investigation. The details aren't public just like all other FBI investigations. Why do you think that's a bad thing?

      Again, guilty pleas for crimes that happened when? AFTER the election and for what? Lying to the FBI? Give me a break...

      * What happened to being the party of "law and order"?
      * Lying to the FBI is no small thing.
      * Rick Gates pleaded guilty to conspiracy against the United States.

      No wrongdoing found?

      Correct.

      Well.. I know you don't like it, but the Hillary E-mail thing was found (and that was evidence of a crime) though

      Seems like you didn't pay attention because they charge criminals with crimes when they find them.

      and a whole bunch of lying to the US public was proven too.

      Oh man... if that was a crime then Trump would already be behind bars!

      That is a convenient excuse and nothing more. If Muller has the goods, he doesn't need to interview Trump, just write the report and be done. If he doesn't, then why would Trump talk to Muller?

      Mueller already stated that Trump isn't the target of the investigation.

      There is zero upside for talking to Muller.

      We cannot know that for certain until he is interviewed.

      How about this? Why doesn't Muller put his questions in writing and send them over the Whitehouse for answers? Yea, not going to happen. Hard to set a trap that way.

      If Trump did nothing wrong then there is no trap to be had. All he has to do is answer some questions truthfully. Hillary Clinton was deposed for 11 hours and was never "trapped" because she told the truth and had committed no crimes.

      Twenty charges?

      Actually, there are 100+ charges but there are 20+ indictments.

      Oh yea, foreign nationals and companies who never where directly involved in either campaign.

      Paul Manifort and Michael Cohen are not foreign nationals.

      Folks who will never stand trial unless they are stupid enough to travel though the USA and get arrested because they are Russians who are not on US soil anyway.

      They need only leave Russia and they will be scooped up.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    16. Re:Sure seems like it. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      You know.. I have one question.... What is Muller looking for? What was the reason for his appointment?

      To investigate any contacts between Russia and the Trump campaign and any crimes that are uncovered in the process of investigating.

      This was supposed to be a slam dunk, 6 moths at most.

      Whoever told you that is an idiot.

      we still don't have any evidence that implicates anybody in Trump's campaign with anything approaching a crime during the campaign....

      Paul Manifort wasn't part of the Trump campaign? Also, we have no idea what treasures have been uncovered from the documents from Michael Cohen.

      Muller will retire after this.

      Mueller is retired, you idiot. He was pulled out of retirement specifically for this.

      We will get a report, but it's going to say Trump's campaign didn't do anything wrong, even though individuals involved in the campaign got caught in unrelated crimes.

      That might be the case but current indications are that it's not. I mean, Trump acts like the guiltiest man on the planet.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    17. Re:Sure seems like it. by Zamphatta · · Score: 1

      Excellent point. I really have nothing to add to what you said besides that. I had to say something though, 'cause I went to moderate your comment up as "Insightful" but the cursor accidentally landed on the wrong thing & moderated it as "redundant". So I need to make a comment, to undo the mistake.

    18. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing happened. Plain and simple. Those indictments prove this is a witch hunt.

    19. Re:Sure seems like it. by jon3k · · Score: 4, Informative

      Even after a year...

      It's been an awfully busy year and it has gone down a number of rabbit holes which have led to numerous arrests and convictions. Turns out it's a pretty complex process and it's ONLY been a year. How many years did we investigate Benghazi? Four?

    20. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember those guys running around, saying that Obama has a muslim birth certificate?
      That's exactly the kind of nuts now in charge of running the DNC and the media. So "Trump Russia Hitler Collusion" is their answer to "Obama Killary Muslim Benghazi."

      The terrifying part is that our side has never let our nutters off the leash. While their lunatics are now in charge of the asylum.

      My advice to you is: don't bother arguing with the crazies. TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) is a bitch.

    21. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming that you are simply naive and clueless, here is a lecture from an actual lawyer (Prof. J. Duane, Regent University Law School), explaining why you should never, ever talk to the police, especially if you are innocent and telling the truth .

      TLDR: even a completely innocent man, telling complete truth can/will still be convicted of lying under a variety of circumstances, if the FBI/police are not 1000% clear-headed, honest, unbiased, and don't make mistakes. You should only talk to them through a lawyer.

      He gives concrete examples in the video of how completely innocent people (later acquitted by the DNA evidence) ended up on the death row, just by talking to the police/FBI.

    22. Re:Sure seems like it. by SinGunner · · Score: 1

      Yeah, what he said. As a legal professional, I've actually been amazed at how FAST this case has proceeded. People just don't understand that. This thing is a rocket ship. I'd love to get an idea of how they're processing things this quickly on the IT/discovery side. I could handle it more efficiently, of course ;)

    23. Re:Sure seems like it. by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      He is waiting to interview Trump. He doesn't want to finish without that.

      He's dragging on Manafort because he wants a flip.

      For the record Trump didn't want to win so he didn't collude. But he did obstruct. And Mueller will get him on that. Trump's flunkies wanted to open the door for business deals and tried to collude. Whether they did or not is the question

      How long will it take? Till he can get Trump on record.

    24. Re:Sure seems like it. by pots · · Score: 4, Informative

      How long do you suppose it would take to find out?

      If you want a real answer, it looks like four years is about average for this type of investigation.

    25. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But her emails!"

      The FBI found 110 felony counts and another 30,000 pieces of evidence willfully destroyed "Like, with a cloth?". Nothing happened.

      Why do you think some people tangentially connected which might or might not be found guilty eventually of minor crimes will stick to Trump?

    26. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Does the word Whitewater mean anything to you?

      Ken Starr was appointed in August 1994 to investigate a failed real estate investment. Starr issued his report in September 1998 and Whitewater was barely mentioned. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_controversy)

      Clinton's impeachment had nothing to do with real estate.

      If it takes 4 years to find out if Trump is guilty of treason, money laundering and/or obstruction, so be it.

    27. Re:Sure seems like it. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The great click bait war. What a joke, it's so fucking stupid, they do not even have a record of what the click bait actually clicked to. Sure the click bait was targeted but that is the whole idea, nothing about selling anything, just getting people to click the ad, which directs them to a paying ad. Here is how the scam works, what you do is go to an internet advertising group and find out how much they charge for clicks. Then you hunt around to find how much companies will pay for clicks. Then once you find a company that charges less, than what you can charge, your advertise on their site with click bait. The user clicks the paid for ad, which takes them to another ad which the click baiting firm gets paid, more than they paid. The US government knows this, everyone in the industry knows, this. So straight up flagrant lies and disingenuous deceit by the US government in nothing by criminally corrupt justice practices, so completely and totally and utterly full of shit.

      So now if you work for American defence industries expect to be targeted for sanctions but of course the US government does not give a crap about your inconvenience. This sanction game is going to come back and bite the US on the ass really, really hard.

      Is there a way you can apply for a US sanction for free (I wouldn't bother to pay for it, not that funny, well not much anyhow), I wouldn't mind one, especially if it came with a frame able document with a wax seal of validity. Anyone know a relatively safe way to by sanctioned by the insane US state department. Is there like a specific SJW nutburger you can insult or something. How about applying for a job with a sanctioned Russian company, will that help?

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    28. Re:Sure seems like it. by jebrick · · Score: 1

      Of course, you can keep looking until you find something or the target leaves office... Historically, That's what special councils do anyway, but how much time does it take before we can assume there is no there there? A year, two years? Eight years?

      Actually, only Ken Star did that because Congress wanted something on Clinton. All other special prosecutors have stayed within their mandate given by the Justice department. There is no proof that Muller has gone outside that mandate. When he did have evidence of a crime outside his mandate he passed it off to the local federal prosecutors.

    29. Re:Sure seems like it. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      I have to ask.. How did Trump obstruct?

      If you think it was firing the FBI director, you are crazy. Firing the FBI director didn't stop anything did it and it's totally within the rights of the president to let the director of the FBI go if he wants. If you think it was the "let the Flynn thing go" comment, again you are nuts. This statement started with "I hope you can..." which means it was an expression of a wish not an order. Comey felt free to not obey this request, and Flynn was NOT let go. You may wish to claim "Attempted obstruction" but Trump merely claims it wasn't an order, Comey cannot prove it was an order, so your case falls apart as there is no proof.

      Do you Have something, ANYTHING else?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    30. Re:Sure seems like it. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Let me guess, you thought Star was doing right by Clinton the whole time?

      I'd like to point out that it is the excesses of the past that caused congress to revise the laws regarding Special Councils to make them much more targeted and less open ended. This investigation shouldn't last nearly as long as Star's... Personally, I think Star knew the basic facts within a year and could have wrapped up the whole process in two. I also think the Lewinsky affair was a huge mistake by all involved, including Star and that Clinton should have never been impeached for perjury.

      But my question remains... How long is reasonable? Is a year, two years, eight? What's reasonable here from your perspective?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    31. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If its what you say, I love it"

    32. Re: Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So when you guys did it, it was ok. When the other guys do it, it's bad because they aren't on their leash?

      Sucking on trumps cock syndrome is real. It's a bitch.

    33. Re: Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4 years and not one shred of evidence. But that won't stop them from bitching at us for providing real evidence.

    34. Re:Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So tired of the "nothing has been found" false narrative. Many indictments have come down.

      That's because you're arguing a strawman.

      The people saying "nothing has been found", they're referring to the goal of the investigation: to find collusion between Trump n friends with the Russians.

      So, those indictments... exactly how many have to do with Russian collusion?

      The answer is 0. At least so far. Be honest.

    35. Re: Sure seems like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About 80% of the democrats and 90% of the media are now on the same cognitive level as the anti-vaxxers and the flat-earthers. You are now reaching Alex Jones levels of paranoia.

      In your mind, it's all OK because the other guys (Alex Jones...) did it?

      Wake up. Wake UP! You must be better than this!

    36. Re:Sure seems like it. by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      "This sanction game is going to come back and bite the US on the ass really, really hard. "

      How do you suppose that's going to happen? Do you think Russia hasn't already been doing whatever it can to undermine the US?

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    37. Re:Sure seems like it. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Really? He just passes off stuff to local authorities if they are outside his mandate?

      So, if his mandate has "Russian collusion in the 2016 campaign" at it's core, why in God's name is Manafort facing tax evasion charges for stuff that happened 10 years ago, long before 2016 election season got started and well before his short stint as Trump's campaign manager? Then there is Flynn, who didn't have a conversation with the Russians until after the election, as heir apparent to his National security adviser position... How's that related to the original mandate?

      I'm just guessing, but it does seem Muller is pushing an obstruction of justice angle for stuff that happened AFTER the campaign was over, which *might* be within his mandate, but only if he actually found crimes within his mandate and could prove an effort to cover them up.

      I'm afraid that Muller has obviously pushed the boundaries of his initial mandate and It sure doesn't seem justified from up here in the cheep seats.... But Rosenstein will have to justify this eventually and I look forward to that bit of spin...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  10. Trump colluded and continues to collude, face it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Putin quite obviously does have massive leverage over the well-documented liar that Trump is. There's no question. Trump would not be talking about his self-pardoning powers if he were not so plainly guilty. He's going to prison either way.

  11. Sanctions for how long by PraiseBob · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I expect Trump to step in personally, and reverse these sanctions, just like he did to all previous anti-Russian actions. He is Vladimirs stooge. The only way the sanctions would remain in place is if these oligarchs are political enemies of Putin.

    1. Re:Sanctions for how long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US started shipping weapons to Ukraine to over Russian objections:

      https://abcnews.go.com/International/us-announces-sale-anti-tank-missiles-ukraine-russian/story?id=53450406

      Did he reverse that decision?

      What people don't understand is that Trump is constantly maneuvering and negotiating. The reason his actions don't make sense to you is he's constantly probing and prodding at things. He did it with North Korea just to see how serious they were about negotiations. He did it when he offered an 800,000 person amnesty to the Democrats. The ZTE deal is another example where he is trying to show China that he doesn't want to just punish them.

      It's a carrot and stick approach to trade and foreign policy. Get the best deal for the US that is possible.

      It's a damn sight better to the Obama administration which would make bluster and make pronouncements then reverse course the second something was out of place such as Red Lines in Syria or big talk about Russia but not doing anything. (Hey, at least Trump bombed Syria when they gassed people.)

    2. Re:Sanctions for how long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, where does this notion that Syria gassed people come from? Do you know something I don't? I have yet to see the evidence. I think either Trump got manipulated and actually think it happened, or is on board with the lie. Not that anyone seems to care anymore though.

  12. sanctions must be enforced, first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The last time our government passed sactions on russia, trump signed the law but then REFUSED TO ENFORCE IT. Now we are being told that is is just another "coincidence" that he is now undermining the US's relations with almost every NATO country. When you look at the facts, it is clear that Trump is working either with or FOR Putin.

  13. Re: Conspiracy Theories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your post is sad on so many levels.

  14. Trump will have impeachment after election by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump will have impeachment after election

    1. Re:Trump will have impeachment after election by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Because the republicans turn on him or because the democrats intend to commit suicide if they manage to eek out control of the house?

      The last time a president was impeached and not convicted over things that where not "high crimes and misdemeanors" it didn't go well for the party that let it happen. There is not a chance the senate convicts and less of a chance Trump choses to resign. So what will you accomplish?

      But by all means, keep talking about it. It can only increase republican turn out when you do.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re: Trump will have impeachment after election by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize, you are the only nonAC going out of HIS way to defend trump. None of your republican mates are coming out
      Of the woodwork on slashdot to show support. The only people standing up for trump are racist ACs, and you.

      Yet people have answered your questions over and over, provided links, pointed out your mistakes, showed you where you went wrong in the thinking process, yet, you still think they are lying.

      I'm not sure where you get your news from, but if they are the only ones parroting what you are parroting, then you need to recalculate your sources. You are wrong, plain and simple. Give it time to work itself out. Cases aren't always open and shut.
      The average is 4 years. Let them investigate, interview trump, and then we will discuss the facts. Because right now, we don't know, it's an open investigation and we aren't going to get the answers we want right now.

  15. Lol, fuck off, Murica! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're undead. You already fell over, you just kept your eyes closed, like you always did, and your face hasn't planted itself on the wire brush grinder yet.

    Like the Soviets, you're done for it.
    You can do what you want; we know we just have to wait it out.

    BTW: Good Americans are of course welcome to flee. Just keep your society's cultural cancers at home.

    Kind regards,

        All of the universe forever.

  16. Re: Conspiracy Theories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    20 indictments and 8 guilty pleas so far, and all the Republicon INCEL faggots have is Hannity's whining, awwwww sad! Mueller will see you bitches now. Bring your toothbrush, prisoner. You won't be leaving alive.

  17. Re: Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably because they took their koran, to make ideology Maultaschen from the ideology shit.

    (It is said that the Swabians invented Maultaschen, to hide the meat from God on Fridays. Which is incredibly stupid, if you think about it. Then again that's kinda a prerequisite for religion.)

  18. Re:Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm Muslim and jihad doesn't mean suicide martyr. In the context of the Quran it means to persevere or in Christian context is similar to "keep the faith". All religion have extremists.

  19. Trump is a traitor. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump basically isn't even an American anymore. Just another nazi Republicon fraud trying to pass himself off as the new normal, lol. Get Trump a nice glass of toilet wine from his new digs, cell block D.

    1. Re: Trump is a traitor. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah Goldman, whatever you say.

  20. Re: Conspiracy Theories by Train0987 · · Score: 0

    None of those indictments have anything to do with the campaign, but you knew that already.

  21. Disconnect: G7, Sanctions by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    So on one hand Trump tells the G7 that Russia should be allowed back in the club, while on the other hand congress is approving sanctions against Russia. Maybe he doesn't seem to understand the contradictions or is so far out of his depth he wasn't sure what the G7 club was about?

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re: Disconnect: G7, Sanctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Putin told Trump he did nothing wrong so Trump believes him, as any reasonable person would.

    2. Re: Disconnect: G7, Sanctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. Putin has no reason to lie.

  22. Russiaâ(TM)s by jgrimard · · Score: 1

    Jesus Christ! Even the editors can't control their smart quotes! Get it together man!

    1. Re: Russiaâ(TM)s by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      They would not need to if /. had its character encoding sorted out. Page reports as supporting UTF-8, but then something goes screwy backend.

      Is Slashcode open source anymore?

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    2. Re: Russiaâ(TM)s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      open and fixed at soylentnews

    3. Re: Russiaâ(TM)s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      msmash saw the opportunity to post a RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA article, do you really expect that dumb cunt to actually proofread her shit before slamming the submit button?

  23. Re: Conspiracy Theories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you are putins cuck

  24. It's a big deal to lock up a traitor POTUS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It takes a while to make sure every angle of Kremlin influence, every ounce of fraud, every redirected campaign dollar, every substantial lie, and every treasonous action in support of an enemy dictatorship be properly documented.
    This is important not only for making the charges stick, which they are already, but for America to document Russia's attempts to usurp our continuance of government. Trump will die a traitor in Federal Prison. America will go on.

    Mueller is an American hero even before he locks Trump up for life.

    I don't expect a moron like Bobby here to appreciate the gravity of Mueller's job. He's a willing traitor for political gain, faggots like Bobby need their necks stretched for treason. No more fucking around, hang this traitor high. No quarter.

    1. Re: It's a big deal to lock up a traitor POTUS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What has Putin ever done to you? You know, the reason you don't have a job was because of Hilary. Putin has nothing to do with this country.

  25. Okay... by theM_xl · · Score: 1

    So... it'd be okay now if Russia and China sanctioned say, Microsoft and Oracle for improving the capabilities of the CIA/NSA?

    1. Re: Okay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would of course Probe the wickedness of Pootn. The devilish KGB officer who took the Last Loaf of bred from New York billionaires!

  26. Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they did and maybe they didn't. But you know who HAS been interfering in America's elections? Rich Americans, and corporations that are now allowed to BUY our "elected" (hahaha) "leaders" (hahaha) which begs the question, why is it such a big deal if the people screwing with our elections are "domestic" or "foreign"? Does anyone really believe that rich people who own homes around the world, travel freely and often between countries, can be counted upon to do what's RIGHT for OUR country, rather than what's right for them?

    Is anyone so naive as to think that being born in a place magically instills feelings of loyalty to the regime RUNNING that place? All signs point to "no". The rich who now outright OWN the bulk of our politicians and direct their actions are why we've been in a lot of these undeclared wars, why the government now seems to be working at crossed purposes with the majority of the electorate, etc.

    Need cases in point? Okay, the vast, vast, VAST majority of Americans want common-sense gun control / gun ownership reform, and decriminalization of (or outright legalization of) certain substances, such as cannabis, (a.k.a., "weed,") but the government ignores them. Why is that? In what pretends to be a democracy, a system (whether you prefer to call it that, or a "representative republic," being no matter, they mean the same damned thing, government with the consent of the governed,) in which the leaders are chosen by the people to do THEIR will, and look after THEIR interests, they seem instead to be working exclusively for their "donors," (by which I mean, their owners, because that's what they are,) not just in cases where both interests can be served simultaneously, or the people don't care one way or another. In these cases, and many others, the people care VERY MUCH (or would if they weren't asleep, most of them,) about a great many issues. But the people who run the place officially, and answer to the people in theory, should, over and over again, have been evicted from office, but rarely are.

    This is because the system perpetuates itself, the media that should be shedding light on these shenanigans has mostly been bought, and is directed to look away, people who refuse are FIRED and blacklisted, never to be heard from again on any of the mainstream media networks the majority, for some strange reason still listen to, as if they're still doing their jobs, and people have been tricked into believing that a vote for anyone besides the Republican nominee is as good as a vote for the Democratic nominee, and vice versa, and therefore if you're not voting for one or the other, you're throwing away your vote, and/or you shouldn't even bother because why waste your time if your candidate can't win, and so we have these UNELECTED, fraudulent corrupt politicians, being "elected" with a small fraction of the total number of votes that COULD legally have been cast in any election, because people have let themselves be defeated before the battle even began.

    So let me say this now. Vote, and vote for whomever you think would govern or legislate best, not for whomever you are TOLD you better vote for, and vote even if your candidate "can't win". In fact, vote ESPECIALLY if he or she "can't win" because that assertion is ONLY true if you believe it. It's literally a self-fulfilling prophesy. If you believe he or she can't win, and so you don't "waste" your "vote" on that person, choosing instead to let someone tell you whom you WILL vote for, then it is actually true. So rather than doing that, vote instead for someone who has truly earned it, regardless of whether or not he or she can win, and if nothing else, send a message to all the other people who HAVE fallen for that lie, that it IS a lie, and all we need to do to fix this, is show up, VOTE, and vote for someone who has EARNED it, rather than for someone who has SCARED or TRICKED you into voting for him or her.

    Remember, there's no such thing as a "spoiler" in an election. Until

  27. Re:Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    STOP COMING TO UK. THX.

  28. Re:Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tell your politicians to stop letting them in. TRUMP has the right idea and is dealing with this in the US. Wall on Mexican and Canadian borders.

  29. Re: Conspiracy Theories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haven't you figured out that there are Russian posters on this forum? They are very clearly present here and continuing to influence social media.

  30. Re:Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol i wish mate. all pols are very good at appeasement

  31. Let's get this clear by Provocateur · · Score: 1

    That's Military, Comma, Intelligence --two words with a comma in between! said the White House press agent. That ought to reduce the "fake news" by a third. One-third, got it?

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  32. REUTERS IS OWNED BY WHO NOW? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... work that out, and you'll see what this BS is all about ;)

  33. Re:Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The UK should build a wall on the Spanish and French borders ASAP.

    Dumb American.

  34. Allies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which allies? OK, OK. North Korea perhaps.

  35. Re:Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come to Iceland. I've never even seen a Muslim here.

  36. Re:Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump is a GLOBAL phenomenon.

  37. Amazing how often you're outsmarted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, we're just amused that you still haven't figured out what's wrong with continually complaining that you were outsmarted by someone you think is an idiot.

    Let us know if you ever figure it out, okay?

    1. Re: Amazing how often you're outsmarted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are the idiot. It is not US who they outsmarted.

      It is the partisan cocksuckers who they were fooling. The repubfags who cheer on anything they do blindly.

  38. Down the list by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    "cyber and underwater capabilities"
    What happened under water? Some optical got tapped into? "Tracking?"

    The list has NotPetya. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    The original of the code was something from EternalBlue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... .

    "U.S. energy grid and on internet routers and switches".
    Finally something in the USA?
    Back to "underwater capabilities".
    Then a jump to "nuclear facilities"?

    So Russian now has "design, manufacture and supply" of " professional diving equipment"? Sanctions.
    EternalBlue lost to the wild of the internet? Sanctions.
    Something cyber something nuclear facilities? Sanctions.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  39. witches exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll leave this here for you:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOVPStnVgvU (John Oliver)

  40. Took 2 years for Nixon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They investigated that for a long time. They get an iron-clad case then they snap it shut. I would suspect he's slowly tightening the noose...

  41. Re: Conspiracy Theories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're completely wrong, 17 of them do, but you knew that already.

    13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted on conspiracy charges, with some also being accused of identity theft. The charges related to a Russian propaganda effort designed to interfere with the 2016 campaign. The companies involved are the Internet Research Agency, often described as a âoeRussian troll farm,â and two other companies that helped finance it. The Russian nationals indicted include 12 of the agencyâ(TM)s employees and its alleged financier, Yevgeny Prigozhin.

    Richard Pinedo: This California man pleaded guilty to an identity theft charge in connection with the Russian indictments, and has agreed to cooperate with Mueller.

    All of Robert Muellerâ(TM)s indictments and plea deals in the Russia investigation so far
    That we know of

  42. Re: Conspiracy Theories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe Paul Manafort had something to do with the campaign.

  43. Quick Donnie by Maritz · · Score: 1

    Roll those sanctions back before Vlad gets annoyed at you, Donnie. Traitorous scumbag that you are.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.