1. #6961
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    From another source:
    A source that lacks basic grammar skills, apparently.

    Or was the translation from native Russian was just that shitty.

  2. #6962
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    From another source:
    Which source?
    Quote Originally Posted by Zantos View Post
    There are no 2 species that are 100% identical.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redditor
    can you leftist twits just fucking admit that quantum mechanics has fuck all to do with thermodynamics, that shit is just a pose?

  3. #6963
    Quote Originally Posted by Garnier Fructis View Post
    Which source?
    Nothing worthwhile(unsurprisingly) turns up in a Google search of his post so, this should be good...

  4. #6964
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    From another source:
    Would you like to link to that source or just expect us to believe you made that up?

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  5. #6965
    Quote Originally Posted by Dontrike View Post
    Would you like to link to that source or just expect us to believe you made that up?
    It's likely from a Russian source as it reeks of being translated. I'd be surprised if he posts the source.

  6. #6966
    Quote Originally Posted by Bdatik View Post
    It's likely from a Russian source as it reeks of being translated. I'd be surprised if he posts the source.
    It is from twitter of Ben Aris, editor of http://www.intellinews.com

  7. #6967
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    It is from twitter of Ben Aris, editor of http://www.intellinews.com
    So not so much a source as much as a Twitter opinion.

    Is it possible you were aware of how weak your own assertion was or was that just a happy coincidence due to your natural failings at presenting a worthwhile argument?

  8. #6968
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    It is from twitter of Ben Aris, editor of http://www.intellinews.com
    I now understand why you didn't cite your source originally.

  9. #6969
    Quote Originally Posted by NYC17 View Post
    So not so much a source as much as a Twitter opinion.

    Is it possible you were aware of how weak your own assertion was or was that just a happy coincidence due to your natural failings at presenting a worthwhile argument?
    It is opinion of a man who covered Russian business for decades, based on his personal knowledge of man involved.

    Compared to people who just learned the name yesterday.

  10. #6970
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    24,569
    Couple of updates.

    One, van der Zwaan gets sentenced tomorrow. van der Zwaan plead guilty and is reportedly the person linking Manafort/Gates to Russian intelligence, based on emails in September 2016. None of this "boo hoo hoo it was before the campaign" handwaving for that. Most sources reporting on the subject predict van der Zwaan won't serve jail time, which implies he gave Mueller something good, whatever it was.

    Two, Vox lays out a summary of emails hacked by Russia leaking into the election. It's extensive, but they do point out that Team Trump reached out to hackers (Russian government included) six times. Papaduplex was the first, and he got caught getting drunk and bragging about it. Note that that's Papadopoulus, not Page, that'll be important later. Second was Trump Tower. Third, fourth and fifth were Cambridge Analytics, Don Jr, and Roger Stone contacting WikiLeaks, a thief working for Putin. (Note: that last guy Mueller grabbed at the airport? The FBI questioned him about going to the Ecuadorian embassy, where WikiLeaks' internet was recently cut off. Dude got subpoena'd)The sixth is a guy connected to Michael Flynn, and hasn't made the news much, looking for Clinton's deleted emails from Russian sources.

    Three, WaPo reports that Mueller, in the obstruction case, is now looking at the attempt to fire Sessions.

    I don't like quoting the whole thing, but WaPo has a paywall so...

    In recent months, Mueller’s team has questioned witnesses in detail about Trump’s private comments and state of mind in late July and early August of last year, around the time he issued a series of tweets belittling his “beleaguered” attorney general, these people said. The thrust of the questions was to determine whether the president’s goal was to oust Sessions in order to pick a replacement who would exercise control over the investigation into possible coordination between Russia and Trump associates during the 2016 election, these people said.

    The issue of Sessions’s tortured relationship with the president reared up again Wednesday morning when the president tweeted: “Why is A.G. Jeff Sessions asking the Inspector General to investigate potentially massive FISA abuse. ... Why not use Justice Department lawyers? DISGRACEFUL!”

    Sessions usually opts not to respond to such criticism, but in this case he did. Trump’s criticism faulted the attorney general for not more aggressively pursuing claims that the FBI and Justice Department may have misled a foreign surveillance court on a politically sensitive case in the waning days of the Obama administration. Sessions insisted in his statement that he had reacted appropriately by referring the matter to the department’s inspector general for a possible review of how the surveillance case was handled.

    “As long as I am the Attorney General, I will continue to discharge my duties with integrity and honor, and this Department will continue to do its work in a fair and impartial manner according to the law and Constitution,’’ Sessions said in the statement.

    It’s no secret in Washington that the relationship between the president and the attorney general has been badly broken for months. The president has repeatedly issued public broadsides, calling Sessions “weak” or criticizing his leadership of the Justice Department, despite the attorney general’s frequent proclamations of devotion to Trump’s agenda on immigration and crime.

    Behind the scenes, Trump has derisively referred to Sessions as “Mr. Magoo,” a cartoon character who is elderly, myopic and bumbling, according to people with whom he has spoken. Trump has told associates that he has hired the best lawyers for his entire life, but is stuck with Sessions, who is not defending him and is not sufficiently loyal.

    While Sessions has told associates he had been wounded by the attacks, he has also insisted he’s not going to resign, so the cold war continues.

    On the anniversary of Sessions’s confirmation earlier this month, senior aides decided to buy Sessions a bulletproof vest with his name emblazoned on it as a gift, according to a person familiar with the matter.

    While there is a soap-opera element to the drama between the country’s chief executive and chief law enforcement officer, Mueller apparently has decided there are significant issues at stake for the probe into whether the president or others in the White House sought to obstruct justice, according to the people familiar with the matter.

    The New York Times has previously reported that Mueller was examining Trump’s efforts in the spring of 2017 to fire Sessions. People familiar with the probe said the special counsel is also examining the period in late July in which the president sought to publicly shame the attorney general into quitting.

    In mid-July, Trump started escalating his public criticisms of Sessions, including angry tweets. Around that time, according to people familiar with internal White House discussions, the president discussed firing Sessions or forcing him out of the Justice Department. Those discussions are of particular interest to Mueller’s investigators, as they seek to determine the president’s intentions, according to a person familiar with the probe.

    At the time, a White House adviser told a Washington Post reporter that Trump was “stunned” that Sessions had not yet quit. The president, this adviser added, had been hoping the attorney general would be so embarrassed by Trump’s scathing comments that he would leave.

    Trump in this period also ordered his then-chief of staff, Reince Priebus, to get a resignation letter from Sessions. It was not his first request for such a letter, but Priebus hesitated, declining to make the request outright. Conservatives rallied to Sessions’s defense, particularly in Congress, and Trump backed down.

    Every Cabinet official can be fired by the president at any time for any reason. If Mueller’s team sought to make Trump’s efforts to oust the attorney general part of a pattern of attempted obstruction, it would have to offer evidence showing he had a corrupt motive in doing so — such as changing the direction of the Russia probe.
    As a reminder, Sessions said he recused himself from the Russia probe -- didn't stop him from sending the IG after the FISA warrant that Trump's rabid fanbase insist up and down, despite evidence otherwise, was the only sole lone solitary thing that caused the Trump investigation yep just Page nobody else just Page and only Page who somehow hasn't been charged yet and also who cares about obstruction of justice when Trump is innocent because Trump said so? Anyhow, if Trump fires Sessions with the specific purpose to change the Russia investigation, that's obstruction. If he tries, even if he fails, that's obstruction too.

    Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b). If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, and the act in violation of this section involves the threat of physical force or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case.
    That bolded? There's no "it has to be successful" clause. If Trump tries, that's obstruction. Mueller would need to prove the "corruptly" part, of course.

  11. #6971
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    It is opinion of a man who covered Russian business for decades, based on his personal knowledge of man involved.

    Compared to people who just learned the name yesterday.
    It's an opinion. For which it is entirely based on the idea that because he brought a lot of money to Russia, he couldn't possibly be shady.


    Your assertion was dumb, and you hid the source because you either knew on some level how dumb it was, or it was a happy accident that delayed the eventual ridicule you deserved. Either way, your argument, as has become the norm, is half-assed and unconvincing.

  12. #6972
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    From another source:
    When I say to you "What are you trying to pull? Nobody believes you." I want you to recall what happened here.

    You answered legitimate journalism with what amounts to a blog post by somebody with no reputation, no outlet, and you hid the link because you knew you'd be called on it.

    Next time Shalcker, when we're talking about Russian politics, why don't you just hook us up with the viewpoints of your mom and uncle Dmitri while you're at it.

    You should be embarrassed with how this went down.

  13. #6973
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    24,569
    So, Trump's planning to host a visit from Putin.

    Can't wait to see how well that goes. Hey, can Mueller meet him at the airport?

  14. #6974
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    That bolded? There's no "it has to be successful" clause. If Trump tries, that's obstruction. Mueller would need to prove the "corruptly" part, of course.
    See this bold as well:
    Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b). If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, and the act in violation of this section involves the threat of physical force or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case.
    Firing Comey in an effort to make the Russia investigation go away, as admitted to Lester Holt, should qualify.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.

  15. #6975
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    So, Trump's planning to host a visit from Putin.

    Can't wait to see how well that goes. Hey, can Mueller meet him at the airport?
    I don’t know... but, if Putin tires to use the same argument as he did during the taking of Crimea... Trump could just secede Brighton in NYC, to Russia. Everyone speaks Russian there! There is a greater population of Russians, than Americans. It’s a pretty obvious part of Russia. /sarcasm
    Entropy won't yield to you.
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    I don’t work here, I only smoke here.

  16. #6976
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    24,569
    In terms of the meeting, I'll remind everyone, last time, Trump claims he asked Putin if Putin meddled, Trump claims Putin said no, and Trump claims he believes him.

    If all three were true, Trump was siding with Putin over every US intelligence agency we have, and the entire House Intelligence Committee.

    Anyhow, he's going to have a harder time this go-around. Trump decided that, instead of sanctioning the people on the list he copy-pasted from Forbes, he's sanctioning the list of people he copy-pasted from Mueller's indictment. That's a formal recognition of Russia's meddling. So he can't try the same shit twice. He'll need to butter Putin up with a gift. Probably Syria, which Trump has gone from "unofficially ceding" to "officially ceding" right about the time he announced the sanctions.

  17. #6977
    Quote Originally Posted by NYC17 View Post
    It's an opinion. For which it is entirely based on the idea that because he brought a lot of money to Russia, he couldn't possibly be shady.
    You just need more to claim he is shady then "He is Russian and he got deals for Russia with Arabs" (who, afterwards, introduced him to Prince).

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    You answered legitimate journalism with what amounts to a blog post by somebody with no reputation, no outlet, and you hid the link because you knew you'd be called on it.
    He got reputation and outlet. It is business-focused magazine covering emerging markets (including Russia).

  18. #6978
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    You just need more to claim he is shady then "He is Russian and he got deals for Russia with Arabs" (who, afterwards, introduced him to Prince).
    I don't need anything. Your entire argument is an appropriation of someone saying, "nuh uh".

    It's unconvincing and half-assed. But given the nuh-uh nature, it's unsurprising why you find it appealing and consequential. Most of your arguments amount to the same lack of quality.

  19. #6979
    The Unstoppable Force Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    24,569
    McCabe asked for donations towards his legal fund to go after Trump for what he says is an unjust firing.

    He stopped asking for donations when he got double what he asked for.

    "Didn't Trump set up a legal fund for his employees?"

    Well, kind of. It was done in such a way that nobody can see who donated, nobody can see who received, and the entire thing might break ethics rules and federal laws. Basically, lobbyists can donate directly to this fund to get Trump's favor, and nobody can see it -- while those staffers who decide to testify could be denied funds, while others refusing to testify could get funds, directly rewarding people for keeping quiet.

    An investigation has been called for.
    Last edited by Breccia; 2018-04-02 at 04:01 PM.

  20. #6980
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post

    He got reputation and outlet. It is business-focused magazine covering emerging markets (including Russia).
    Yeah I've been looking into this. Wanna see what I found?

    intellinews is owned by Business News Europe, which describes itself as a newsmagazine (it isn't). It's mostly a blog of four guys and located at: Abbey House, 51 High Street, Saffron Walden, Essex, CB10 1AF

    Google mapped that. Found this:



    Yep. It's a dude's accountant.

    Basically a whole bunch of Googlefu lead to this conclusion: BNE and Intellinews is pretty much four guys on the internet with a Wordpress website.

    Small time is putting it lightly.

    Hell, just go to their twitter and scroll down:

    https://twitter.com/bneintellinews

    Basically nothing is retweeted, favored or anything. This for a so called newsmagazine.

    Same with Ben Aris
    https://twitter.com/bneeditor



    Shalcker... you continue to be absolutely terrible at this stuff. You act like none of us are on to your act. Come on man. This is just to the level of insulting our intelligence. This isn't even fun anymore.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •