Trump/Russia/SDNY investigation

I freely admit I wrote the whole thing off as people unable to comprehend Trump's victory and scapegoating. Maybe it was. Maybe it wasn't. Nothing quite so mindbogglingly mad has ever happened before and I sincerely hope the world comes to it's collective senses and never allows anything like it to happen again. Maybe, as everyone in this thread seems to think, it's not a kooky sideshow to deflect from what is really going on. I'll leave the thread. I bet it goes on and on and leads nowhere.
:smirk:
 
Hillary was scheming with terrorists?

Well.

I don't know if scheming is the right word, but if you look at what went down in Syria, it's hard to argue with the fact that the US government gave funding to groups affiliated with ISIL and AlQaeda. I mean, I voted for Hillary (with a pretty clear understanding of who we were funding in Syria), I think Trump is a disaster, and I hope he goes down in a blaze of glory, but the Obama administration did some pretty fecking shady shit in Syria. Even the British government seems to have cut off funding now with the admission that, yea, it looks like we've been funding terrorists, our bad.
 
Mueller seeking to speak to him him is obv great news but as the reports suggest his lawyers are hardly likely to allow him to sit face to face in an open ended interview. Mueller would have him bang to rights before he'd even unbuttoned his jacket. How worthwhile would it be if he's just allowed to compose written responses to a limited set of questions?
 
You guys are being harsh on DenisIrwin, I think he is a good guy that just needs to read up on source criticism and develop a bit of self-awareness. He is probably a young fella trying to educate himself and trying to improve his views by debating and that is a nice thing to do. His opening statement appears a bit rash, but I'm sure he didn't mean it that way. Happens to all of us.
 
You guys are being harsh on DenisIrwin, I think he is a good guy that just needs to read up on source criticism and develop a bit of self-awareness. He is probably a young fella trying to educate himself and trying to improve his views by debating and that is a nice thing to do. His opening statement appears a bit rash, but I'm sure he didn't mean it that way. Happens to all of us.

Damnit Javi, stop being nice and decent and an example to us all. :mad:
 
You have to wonder if this is why Trump has allowed the media to stay and broadcast the whole bipartisan meeting.
 
Just saw on another site..

Page 174

Q. You said that he told you of the meeting with the FBI in Rome in mid or late September, that he "gave them a full briefing"?

A. A debrief I think is what he probably said, they had debriefed him. I don't remember him articulating the specifics of that. You know, my understanding was that they would have gotten into who his sources were, how he knew certain things, and, you know, other details based on their own intelligence.

Essentially what he told me was they had other intelligence about this matter from an internal Trump campaign source and that -- that they -- my understanding was that they believed Chris at this point -- that they believed Chris's information might be credible because they had other intelligence that indicated the same thing and one of those pieces of intelligence was a human source from inside the Trump organization.

MOLE HUNT!!!
 


Republican's are going to be absolutely livid at that. There goes a whole bunch of their "talking points", they're going to have to rework the narrative now.
 
I confess I haven't been following this thread. I think it's a load of bullshit, tbh. Just wondering though, why isn't there similar concern about Israeli meddling in US (and UK) politics?
Plenty of critism of both around the CE forum it doesn't mean you can't be critical of other situations. Also most of the concern here is with Americans like Trump getting in trouble over this.
 
That's not a surprise. Just look at the dodgy deaths of Russian officials and the senior intel officers who were arrested in the last year.
 
Just scanning through it all now. One thing that I've found interesting is that Fusion GPS's investigation into Trump's businesses, specifically his Golf Courses, is that they don't make any money. They did a FOIA on his Tax returns in Scotland and they showed a lot of money going into the golf course and very little in return.

On top of that, Trump exaggerates the value most of his properties and it doesn't align with the information he has Trump has supplied in legal filings and other corporate records.
 
Just scanning through it all now. One thing that I've found interesting is that Fusion GPS's investigation into Trump's businesses, specifically his Golf Courses, is that they don't make any money. They did a FOIA on his Tax returns in Scotland and they showed a lot of money going into the golf course and very little in return.

On top of that, Trump exaggerates the value most of his properties and it doesn't align with the information he has Trump has supplied in legal filings and other corporate records.
The curtain being pulled back on the Trump Organization is the biggest worry for them all. Between their poor business skills and the 2008 financial crisis, they should have been wiped out. The only way they didn't go under is if they were engaging in illegal activities with people they shouldn't have been. In the end, it will be a tale of a greedy con who cut corners to gain wealth and power and let his hubris get the best of him.
 
Wow...an FBI informant inside the Trump campaign


Just read the Washington Post article and they're saying it was Papadopoulos.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-fbi-and-the-dossier/?utm_term=.ce5eb44f1981

“My understanding was that they believed Chris at this point — that they believed Chris might be credible because they had other intelligence that indicated the same thing and one of those pieces of intelligence was a human source from inside the Trump organization,” Simpson said, apparently also a reference to Papadopoulos.]
 
Just read the Washington Post article and they're saying it's Papadopoulos.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-fbi-and-the-dossier/?utm_term=.ce5eb44f1981

“My understanding was that they believed Chris at this point — that they believed Chris might be credible because they had other intelligence that indicated the same thing and one of those pieces of intelligence was a human source from inside the Trump organization,” Simpson said, apparently also a reference to Papadopoulos.]

So Papadopoulos had been an informant for perhaps a year longer than first thought?

So here is going to be the next Republican "talking point" pushed out there by Hannity and co: Papadopoulos was already working for the FBI when he was trying to organise Russian meetings for Trump and co.

My money is on it being someone other than Papadopoulos, someone who is still active.
 
Just read the Washington Post article and they're saying it was Papadopoulos.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-fbi-and-the-dossier/?utm_term=.ce5eb44f1981

“My understanding was that they believed Chris at this point — that they believed Chris might be credible because they had other intelligence that indicated the same thing and one of those pieces of intelligence was a human source from inside the Trump organization,” Simpson said, apparently also a reference to Papadopoulos.]

I've read elsewhere that it was Papadopolous as well, but I have a hard time believing its him because an innocent whistleblower wouldn't have been indicted by the FBI to later flip.
 
So Papadopoulos had been an informant for perhaps a year longer than first thought?

So here is going to be the next Republican "talking point" pushed out there by Hannity and co: Papadopoulos was already working for the FBI when he was trying to organise Russian meetings for Trump and co.

My money is on it being someone other than Papadopoulos, someone who is still active.
Given the things he kept offering to do wouldn't he be discounted as an agent provocateur?
 
So Papadopoulos had been an informant for perhaps a year longer than first thought?

So here is going to be the next Republican "talking point" pushed out there by Hannity and co: Papadopoulos was already working for the FBI when he was trying to organise Russian meetings for Trump and co.

My money is on it being someone other than Papadopoulos, someone who is still active.


If he was already working for the FBI why was he charged and plead guilty to lying to the FBI about Russian contacts
 
Given the things he kept offering to do wouldn't he be discounted as an agent provocateur?

Indeed, I think they will be looking to push this narrative though.

If he was already working for the FBI why was he charged and plead guilty to lying to the FBI about Russian contacts

Also true which is one of the reasons I doubt it's him.
 
Disregard the stuff about the informant. Simpson is backing away from those claims.