Special Counsel Appointed for Russia Investigation

[Elim Garak]

Yeah. This is you right now. This is actually, always you.

That's patently false as I know for sure that I am not skinny-dipping to your level right now.

[Skroe]

I think you are confusing me with other posters? I never said this would lead to war. I am just saying it is not in the financial interest of the EU right now. Germany certainly IS actively drawing a new energy map for itself. Several (though not all!) Eastern European states sadly do not have the political structure and maturity (understandable, their current incarnations are fairly young) to do so. And Russia will maintain decent ties with the UK simply because the UK cannot afford to cut off any clients at the moment.

Practically speaking though while I understand the urge to sanction Russia to starvation, would the natural result not be for the Russians to become a client state of the Chinese if it came to that? I know that historically a significant part of US foreign activity has been in building up SinoRussian rivalry and preventing that from happening. But if we END Russia and they are actually starving, would they have a choice? Do we want to replace Russia's weak power projection over Europe and the Middle East with a Chinese STRONG power projection over Europe and the Middle East and a Chinese controlled silk road running through a Russia that is under their thump? For me as a European that is the absolute worst case scenario.

Your point is valid, but it's again, another reasonably calculated risk. Russia and China have historic animosities and rivalries with each other that even in desperation, will not allow for a "new normal". Russia cannot and will not satisfy itself playing the role of Russia's sidekick, and China desires physical territory of the Russian Far East.

Keeping the two apart was essential while the USSR was strong and Mao was insane. But not now, with Russia weak and China growing in strength. The sum of their power and their risk to the world is far less than it was in the 1960s and 1970s were they to unite.

[Deleted]

Maybe because the primary objective isn't to cause butt-hurt? You really think global politics is all a big game of trolling?

I'm not a politician.

[Deleted]

Not sure if you were present in the Ukraine threads back in the day, but "THAT'S NOT PROOFS, WHERE ARE THE PROOFS?" is the main method used by the Russian paid trolls to derail any conversation into hopeless shouting match. The purpose is not to try to actually discuss the situation but to make it impossible for any sane person to follow the conversation, and to fool the less intelligent non-paid posters to chant the same catch phrase.

I'm not saying all of the "WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE?!?" people are Russian trolls, but non-zero percentage of them are paid agitators on Russian payroll.

Eh.... asking for evidence for an accusation is now trolling? And where's my troll monies!? Fucking Putin holding out on me!!!

[Kontinuum]

Trump campaign had at least 18 undisclosed contacts with Russians

Michael Flynn and other advisers to Donald Trump’s campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race, current and former U.S. officials familiar with the exchanges told Reuters.

The previously undisclosed interactions form part of the record now being reviewed by FBI and congressional investigators probing Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election and contacts between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

Six of the previously undisclosed contacts described to Reuters were phone calls between Sergei Kislyak, Russia's ambassador to the United States, and Trump advisers, including Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser, three current and former officials said.

Conversations between Flynn and Kislyak accelerated after the Nov. 8 vote as the two discussed establishing a back channel for communication between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that could bypass the U.S. national security bureaucracy, which both sides considered hostile to improved relations, four current U.S. officials said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...KCN18E106?il=0

[starlord]

No but they want you to think they would.

No country starts a war they know is lost from the get-go.

i for one am really scared of all the mean memes and hacked cookie reciepes they will distribute.

[Flarelaine]

Europe would not have to agree to most of them. Most of them don't require our ally's input. And the ones that do are mostly bilateral.

Wanna take a bet we could offer Poland a sweet deal to let us build some hangars?

Poles have centuries of butthurt to take out on the Russians. I doubt you would need much honey on that deal.

- - - Updated - - -

You greatly underestimate how much money and how much real-estate Russians have bought in the US, specifically New York City, in the past decade.

I bet Preet Bharara could tell you exactly. Mueller might want to start there.

[Cyberowl]

So, basically, they sent Podesta phishing emails and he's an idiot. That does sound pretty exciting.

The idea that the Russians are what destroyed HRC's reputation is pretty funny though, I'll give you that one.

True, it were the dozens of investigations started by the Republicans that lead nowhere except dragging her through the mud. OH, I forgot, you like those, you just dislike the investigations targeting your waifu pillow model Trump.

[Deleted]

Seems accurate.

Edit: Correction, super mean.

[Spectral]

True, it were the dozens of investigations started by the Republicans that lead nowhere except dragging her through the mud. OH, I forgot, you like those, you just dislike the investigations targeting your waifu pillow model Trump.

What I've actually written in this very thread:

Investigating is fine. I'll make a snide remark or two about the cost (and make no mistake, special prosecutors are expensive), but I'm not against investigating.

But anyway, the idea that HRC would actually have a reputation that's anything other than being deeply corrupt and the beneficiary of massive nepotism were it not for those rascally Republicans remains pretty funny. You really believe it, don't you?

- - - Updated - - -

Most likely - launder money (and committing various other types of financial fraud).
<snip>

Thanks @ringpriest, I sincerely appreciate someone giving me a real answer about the matter. This is much more interesting and worth investigating than the trumped up "interfered with the election" story that's the primary focus of most news outlets.

[Elim Garak]

Seems accurate.

It sure is, but I bet you don't get it quite right.

[Cyberowl]

But anyway, the idea that DJT would actually have a reputation that's anything other than being deeply corrupt and the beneficiary of massive nepotism were it not for those rascally Democrats and fake news remains pretty funny. You really believe it, don't you?

Corrected it for you.

Congrats that after Bill, Benghazi and email investigations, another investigation into the Clinton foundation, a charity with superb ratings, was enthusiastically accepted by the single digit IQ visitors of Breitbart and Infowars.

[Spectral]

Corrected it for you.

Congrats that after Bill, Benghazi and email investigations, another investigation into the Clinton foundation, a charity with superb ratings, was enthusiastically accepted by the single digit IQ visitors of Breitbart and Infowars.

God, this is pathetic.

I've pretty much never said anything positive about Trump. You're just flatly projecting here.

[Daelak]

Thanks @ringpriest, I sincerely appreciate someone giving me a real answer about the matter. This is much more interesting and worth investigating than the trumped up "interfered with the election" story that's the primary focus of most news outlets.

It isn't Trumped up, there have already been public hearings about how targeted Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan non-college educated white voters were to the Russian misinformation campaign via social media, fake news blogs created by Russians, and fake social media and forum profiles (disqus, high traffic forums, etc.).

[Cyberowl]

God, this is pathetic.

I've pretty much never said anything positive about Trump. You're just flatly projecting here.

Nah, you are another INDEPENDENT VOTER™, who can't see anything wrong with daily scandals from the Trump administration.

[Spectral]

Nah, you are another INDEPENDENT VOTER™, who can't see anything wrong with daily scandals from the Trump administration.

In this thread:

Which, admittedly, is pretty bad and severely impugns the ethics of Trump and his associates; it may be sufficient for removal from office.

It really is hard to see your views as anything other than the pathetic cheerleading of a completely unoriginal lackey.

[Stormspark]

Ordering Rosenstein to fire Mueller, and then firing both is basically what finally did in Nixon. Even Trump cant be that stupid.

I used to think that. Now I'm not so sure.

[Cyberowl]

In this thread:

It really is hard to see your views as anything other than the pathetic cheerleading of a completely unoriginal lackey.

You are in like every Trump thread qualifying and justifying his daily fuckups, you don't get your INDEPENDENT VOTER out of jail card for doing the opposite once.

[Cyi]

I didn't need the Russians to tell me that I didn't want Hillary as President, figured that one out myself. What cracks me up about this is that it will do little to nothing to change the minds of the those that voted for him. People voted for him because they didn't like the direction the country was going in. They didn't want another 8 years of it and they certainly didn't want Hillary, about as bad as it gets.

[Spectral]

You are in like every Trump thread qualifying and justifying his daily fuckups, you don't get your INDEPENDENT VOTER out of jail card for doing the opposite once.

I'm in many of these threads mocking the ridiculous cheerleading from Blue Team idiots that haven't thought about anything other than what they read on Daily Kos that morning.

My commentary on Trump is pretty much always negative. Go dig through my post history - you'll find dozens of comments about him being a deliberately ignorant degenerate that's completely unfit for public office. Any other narrative you've concocted is entirely in your own head.

Regarding voting, I'm quite literally an independent voter - depending on the election, my general voting breakdown is something along the lines of ~65% Democrat/~25% Libertarian/~10% Republican. I've voted in 4 Presidential elections and never chosen a Republican.