Trump/Russia/SDNY investigation

Buchan said:
Many Sanders supporters actually jumped ship to Trump's camp after the Primaries. They shared quite a few common policies after all. There is always an alternative if you don't like a candidate or his/her policies.
Click to expand...

12%. They shared 1 common policy, on revising trade deals. They shared a little more rhetoric, about protecting Social Security (which Trump has tried to cut twice now), and trying to reduce unemployment through industry.

They disagreed on literally everything else.
 
berbatrick said:
12%. They shared 1 common policy, on revising trade deals. They shared a little more rhetoric, about protecting Social Security (which Trump has tried to cut twice now), and trying to reduce unemployment through industry.

They disagreed on literally everything else.
Click to expand...

It's worth noting that Sanders pulled in some new supporters who were never Dems in the first place. That 12% includes a lot of them.
 
Warming to Preet and he always speak so well, now if he could help bring down the GOP a peg or two I might start to forgive him for ruining online poker
 
Should we get a poll going for who's going to be indicted tomorrow? Realistically, the front runner is Manafort and anyone else who was raided in August. Flynn is a prime candidate also, although logic suggests Manafort is a stronger candidate.

Outside bets include the likes of Kushner, Don jr, Page, one of Trump's lawyers, one of Trump's backroom staff (Rhona Graff perhaps)...
 
unchanged_lineup said:
Should we get a poll going for who's going to be indicted tomorrow? Realistically, the front runner is Manafort and anyone else who was raided in August. Flynn is a prime candidate also, although logic suggests Manafort is a stronger candidate.

Outside bets include the likes of Kushner, Don jr, Page, one of Trump's lawyers, one of Trump's backroom staff (Rhona Graff perhaps)...
Click to expand...

Manafort, Flynn, Page and Stone.
 
unchanged_lineup said:
Is that even possible? On a state charge, maybe? I'm a little confused over whether he could pardon himself.
Click to expand...

Probably not at this stage, would be interesting to see how it'd play out if it ever got to that.
 
unchanged_lineup said:
Should we get a poll going for who's going to be indicted tomorrow? Realistically, the front runner is Manafort and anyone else who was raided in August. Flynn is a prime candidate also, although logic suggests Manafort is a stronger candidate.

Outside bets include the likes of Kushner, Don jr, Page, one of Trump's lawyers, one of Trump's backroom staff (Rhona Graff perhaps)...
Click to expand...
I'm going with Manafort or at least somebody who is connected to him.
 
Another brainwashed, hypnotized Trump surrogate spewing coordinated talking points about Hillary/Uranium etc.

 
Trump will be sweating once that 19th hole is putted and his advisors are allowed to bother him with non essential work thingy stuff.
 
senorgregster said:
None of the above. Complete unknown that will make everyone say "well that's a let down"
Click to expand...

I'm going for this also because I'm a cynical bastard.

I feel like things would be even bigger if it was someone we actually knew and was important. Even Manafort isn't too much of a biggie really although if he flips he'll have a lot to give.

Fully expecting none of the Trumps or Kushner to ever face charges tbh.
 
Ramshock said:
@Raoul what would be the likely implications if Trump fired Mueller or can he even fire him?
Click to expand...

The very act of firing Mueller would be viewed as another obstruction of justice charge that is similar to what came out of his firing of Comey. He would probably be up against impeachment if that happened or at a minimum the Congress would enact another independent council statute where Mueller is reassigned to the case, this time without Trump having any ability to affect him.

That said, I would be surprised if Trump tried this since it would more or less confirm he's guilty of something he desperately doesn't want the world to find out.
 
shabadu84 said:
There are so many basic details in that that 1) have probably not been discussed on any TV news segment covering the topic and 2) would completely bring the temperature down on a non-issue.
Click to expand...

But that's what happens in a lot of other countries. Actual journalists defuse crap on a regular basis.
 
Any idea when this is going to go down?

This is like transfer deadline day :drool:
 
The Trump campaign in a text message to supporters just before the CNN story broke blasted out a fundraising solicitation for upwards of $2,700 from “Trump Headquarters” with a subject line, “RUSSIA?”

“The Script Has Been Flipped,” the campaign’s website read. “Crooked Hillary and the DNC have been EXPOSED paying a company to use a foreign agent to take down my Presidency. … And the company they used has ties to Russia. I need the IMMEDIATE support of the American people. Contribute now and DEMAND answers from Crooked Hillary and the DNC!”
Click to expand...

The man can mine oil from a dead rock.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/28/trump-russia-probe-legal-244270
 
unchanged_lineup said:
Click to expand...


There’s a politico article worth reading about this.

The social media giants have been trying to control the narrative so far - “Russians buying adverts” and they are happy to share data on this.

What they are trying to avoid (and congress appears to be wise to this) is the use of “organic trends”. The use of bots, fake and hijacked accounts to exploit their algorithms and push the stories they want pushed.

The social media giants are all trying to avoid talking about this because addressing it would be admitting that a sizeable percentage of the activity that drives their revenues comes from these underhand methods.

If they all attacked the bots (which is easily done as the posting style signatures stick out like sore thumbs and verification methods would be easy to introduce) they would be a lot quieter and slower paced places.
 
Pexbo said:
There’s a politico article worth reading about this.

The social media giants have been trying to control the narrative so far - “Russians buying adverts” and they are happy to share data on this.

What they are trying to avoid (and congress appears to be wise to this) is the use of “organic trends”. The use of bots, fake and hijacked accounts to exploit their algorithms and push the stories they want pushed.

The social media giants are all trying to avoid talking about this because addressing it would be admitting that a sizeable percentage of the activity that drives their revenues comes from these underhand methods.

If they all attacked the bots (which is easily done as the posting style signatures stick out like sore thumbs and verification methods would be easy to introduce) they would be a lot quieter and slower paced places.
Click to expand...

Sad but true. Dancing with the devil for profit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.