Author Topic: Russia Investigation.  (Read 33913 times)

no_free_lunch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: Russia Investigation.
« Reply #30 on: July 14, 2018, 11:25:34 AM »
Schwab,

Ukraine is sitting there asking for military assistance.  They have Russian troops and equipment in their country fighting against them.  If anyone is hurt by the escalation it is them.  You then have Obama saying he knows better and actually they don`t need any weapons.  It only makes sense that he would make that call if he is worried about things escalating beyond ukraine, which without too much hyperbole could be called ww3.

I get it, it was a tough call to make and he did what he thought was in the US best interests.  However, the republicans saw US best interests as standing up to Russia.  To go from that to saying they collaborate, that`s quite a leap.

Then there is the fact that Trump is pushing EU to move away from Russian energy source.  Maybe you don`t agree, maybe it is too hard ON RUSSIA, but that isn`t something someone pro kremlin does.

There is also Trump pushing EU to bolster their military, again not something you do when you are owned by them.

It doesn`t add up.


Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 989
Re: Russia Investigation.
« Reply #31 on: July 14, 2018, 11:49:37 AM »
I think more so what is funny is that this really didn't effect anyone and yet everyone is so up in arms. Let's say Trump did work with Russia to expose dirt on his political opponent, does this really effect anyone? Does it mean that Hillary didn't do those things? That the DNC didn't write all those awful emails and rig the election for HRC?

I get it, what he may have done is against the law. So that's a no-no. Yet the same people(mostly liberals) so outraged blatantly justify breaking the law ALL THE TIME with regard to immigrant, anti-police, violence against people with different views, etc. Did any of you get physically hurt by Trump/Russia? Did it cost you money? Did you lose your home or have a family member harmed? I know I still get up in the morning and have the same day to day routine as I did under Obama. The false outrage is absurd and people can't seem to see that they are just being played by Democrats looking to create distractions and road blocks for the Trump administration. Nothing more to it.

Also as a side note, I find it funny that the FBI, led by idiots like Comey, Mccabe and Strzok, couldn't find all of the Clinton emails. But Russia could.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2018, 11:51:54 AM by Gregmal »

Schwab711

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1343
Re: Russia Investigation.
« Reply #32 on: July 14, 2018, 01:46:14 PM »
No free lunch,

I think you are getting things confused. A lot has happened since Russia/Georgia 10 years ago. We had problems. Tried a failed *reset* (Romney ran against this policy with Russia/Iran). Then Russia/Crimea. New sanctions are placed on certain Russians.

Clinton pushed for arming Ukraine. Obama still didn't want a conflict at that time (2015 - in part due to Middle East). HRC views basically mirror GOP. Manafort/Trump change GOP policy towards Obama at the convention. Thats the fear. Why did he do it while publicly admonishing Obama?

https://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/hillary-clinton-ukraine-aid-military-financial-114462

https://www.npr.org/2016/08/06/488876597/how-the-trump-campaign-weakened-the-republican-platform-on-aid-to-ukraine

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/568310790/2016-rnc-delegate-trump-directed-change-to-party-platform-on-ukraine-support

Part of the Russia/Ukraine/US issue is Obama/Clinton didn't want to support Yanukovych (supported by Manafort) and Clinton was fine with Poroshenko. Trump is anti-Poroshenko because of Manafort.

Trump is not some outsider. The issue with Trump is the legality behind his rise to power (among many, many other issues).

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.eu/article/mikheil-saakashvili-petro-poroshenko-enemies-of-putin-but-no-longer-friends/amp/

Arguing Trump is anti-Russia makes zero sense, especially when it's only supported by Trump calling out Germany's pipeline from Russia 6-12 months after Merkel and most of the EU have cautioned about it. Trump was putting on a show for specific media outlets. The pipeline was approved during the reset. There is zero debate about Trump being pro-Russia.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2018, 01:57:58 PM by Schwab711 »

cobafdek

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
Re: Russia Investigation.
« Reply #33 on: July 14, 2018, 02:17:46 PM »
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/read-muellers-full-indictment-against-12-russian-officers-for-election-interference

I just finished reading the entire actual Mueller indictment.  It was readable, gripping, and convincing to a point.

The only problem is it's presenting a connected bunch of dots, and not showing us the actual raw evidence.  Therefore, it is not as credible as if Mueller had given us the actual evidence. 

For example, why should we believe anything that the government says about Guccifer when their presentation about "him" or "it" keeps changing with time?  Would a real hacker be so incompetent as not to cover his tracks?  Would the Russian government employ such incompetent amateurs to do what the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theorists believe they did?

cobafdek

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
Re: Russia Investigation.
« Reply #34 on: July 14, 2018, 02:21:31 PM »
Appreciate the posts, doug. Ther is nothing wrong with bringing facts to the table, despite other people's uncouth responses.

Appreciate the posts, doug. Ther is nothing wrong with bringing facts to the table, despite other people's uncouth responses.

Just trying to stay humble on this one. See where the facts come to light. Im no lawyer so I cant really speak to law matters. But ummm.....feel free to add to them and that goes to anyone. Lets try to stick to the topic on this one and make it about the Muller/Russia Investigation.

I try to look for primary docs and things. Sometimes articles from reputable places like the WSJ.

LC, are you talking to yourself again?

doughishere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1367
Re: Russia Investigation.
« Reply #35 on: July 14, 2018, 02:47:49 PM »
Appreciate the posts, doug. Ther is nothing wrong with bringing facts to the table, despite other people's uncouth responses.

Appreciate the posts, doug. Ther is nothing wrong with bringing facts to the table, despite other people's uncouth responses.

Just trying to stay humble on this one. See where the facts come to light. Im no lawyer so I cant really speak to law matters. But ummm.....feel free to add to them and that goes to anyone. Lets try to stick to the topic on this one and make it about the Muller/Russia Investigation.

I try to look for primary docs and things. Sometimes articles from reputable places like the WSJ.

LC, are you talking to yourself again?

Were just hoping for and honest open and truthful conversation. Nothing more. Nothing less. Thank you for participating.

Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 989
Re: Russia Investigation.
« Reply #36 on: July 14, 2018, 03:19:53 PM »
Appreciate the posts, doug. Ther is nothing wrong with bringing facts to the table, despite other people's uncouth responses.

Appreciate the posts, doug. Ther is nothing wrong with bringing facts to the table, despite other people's uncouth responses.

Just trying to stay humble on this one. See where the facts come to light. Im no lawyer so I cant really speak to law matters. But ummm.....feel free to add to them and that goes to anyone. Lets try to stick to the topic on this one and make it about the Muller/Russia Investigation.

I try to look for primary docs and things. Sometimes articles from reputable places like the WSJ.

LC, are you talking to yourself again?

Were just hoping for and honest open and truthful conversation. Nothing more. Nothing less. Thank you for participating.

Just as in the investing world, there are many layers of varying significance to "honest open and truthful". Many things can be true, and it doesn't justify the end result. You see it all the time with short pitches. Yes, many things are true. Then there are many that are really just opinion or can vary widely depending upon how the individual interprets them. They usually can neither be easily determined to be true or not, rather they must be looked at in % terms of probability and likelihood of them being true. Finally, there is the most important part, which is assessing all of the above and determine it's impact or significance in the grand scheme of things. All of a short report can be true, and the investment can be a failure. Bill Ackman had a very strong case about HLF. Much was true, much was "likely" true. And at the end of the day he got killed because it was determined that this just wasn't as big a deal as he thought it was. It wasn't worth 0, it was worth $75 even with all the "truths, about Herbalife.

What are the indisputable truths?
-There are links between Russia and American politics and the Trump campaign. Ok, so? Links by themselves aren't illegal and don't mean anything. Why does this matter. Cuz it's Trump
-There is likely, but not yet proven, corruption. Again, you're a fool if you don't think politicians are corrupt. Trump's opponent engaged in more corrupt activities than probably any politician who has ever lived. Again, what does this mean? Well the American people have more or less accepted this bad behavior from politicians. Why is it all of a sudden so outrageous? Cuz it's Trump
-Otherwise, what's left? Russia favored one candidate over another one for national interests? Ok. Well, don't we do the same? Why is it a big deal? Cuz it's Trump.
-Private info was stolen that revealed Clinton and DNC bad behavior... ok, hacking people's stuff is a crime and those that did it should face consequences. So is pay for play, not using a secure email in office, rigging primaries, leaking confidential information.

So with this witch hunt, how does this effect everyone? The answer is, not really at all. Why is this such a big deal? Because it's Trump and Democrats and main stream media are still butt hurt, and embarrassed, and can't accept that their candidate lost. And that's all there really is to it.

doc75

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 537
Re: Russia Investigation.
« Reply #37 on: July 14, 2018, 03:34:15 PM »
For example, why should we believe anything that the government says about Guccifer when their presentation about "him" or "it" keeps changing with time?  Would a real hacker be so incompetent as not to cover his tracks?  Would the Russian government employ such incompetent amateurs to do what the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theorists believe they did?

The fact that they didn't go to great lengths to hide their tracks does not make them incompetent amateurs. 

Russian state-sponsored hacking is not subtle, by all accounts. They could be more subtle if they wanted, but why bother?  This is hacking 101 stuff -- basic spearphishing campaign -- and there's no need to be fancy if you don't care about getting caught.  Have you not been reading about their intrusions into US infrastructure?   They've been caught. Repeatedly.   They don't fear the US.  In fact, apparently they've been fighting and re-entering when they've been caught and removed from various systems.  They are very big fans of implausible deniability, and they have the perfect adversary -- one that is always happy to entertain a deep-state conspiracy theory.

You could ask similar questions of Russia about the poisonings in Britain.  Or doping at the olympics.  Or missiles or soldiers in Ukraine.  You really have to like conspiracy theories to believe that all of these events are western fabrications, but that's Russia's position.  (Well I guess Putin did admit to the soldiers in Ukraine eventually.)

I think it's important to draw the line here between what was done and the effect thereof.  It should be a big deal to every US citizen that a foreign power was fairly aggressively meddling in your elections -- regardless of what effect (if any) their meddling had on the vote. Sure the US has done it to lots of countries over the years, but you should still be concerned when it happens to you.  Taking sides based on the  "what did Trump know? did it cause Hillary to lose?" debate and dismissing ongoing cyber-threats is really dangerous, IMO.

As for getting more evidence:  It's quite possible that they will not divulge all evidence because it would divulge too much info regarding their technical capabilities. I have no idea to what degree this is true in this case, but certainly a consideration.


LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2690
Re: Russia Investigation.
« Reply #39 on: July 14, 2018, 04:05:41 PM »
LC, are you talking to yourself again?

No but I should talk to your case worker. Looks like your thorazine script is running low again   :P
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | cash