CDZ What to make of the Indictments and where we are now?

[jon_berzerk]

That's a bunch of fucking lies.

The indictment does not say any of that. The indictment says Americans were involved.

Furthermore, the indictment does not say that Russia funded any of that shit.

How can you be wrong so many times in one fucking paragraph?

tell him your secret

Common sense. Unlike you idiots, I went to the DoJ website and read the fucking indictment rather than let biased fake news sites tell me what it says, jackass.

too bad you didn't understand any of the big words

it explicitly says russia funded, as you so eloquently put it, *that shit*

you've got a good idea, going to the doj website, but next time take a literate person, aka adult, with you to do the thinking

You're fucking lying. It doesn't say that Russia funded anything.

you see dudes like del would not know what the indictment says he has not read it

he only parrots what he is told to parrot

if he had he would know that jon carys State department let these operatives in for example

 

[P@triot]

All roads from Russia lead directly to the Democrats...

The email raises a number of questions. First, why would Rice send an email to herself — regarding a meeting that took place weeks earlier — on the day Trump was sworn into office? In fact, the email was sent about 25 minutes after Obama and his team, including Rice, were officially out of the White House.

But that’s not the only bizarre part of Rice’s emails...

Also, why would Obama go out of his way to tell the FBI to conduct their investigation “by the book”? Shouldn’t the FBI’s investigations always done by the book?

This sounds like something right out of “A Few Good Men” when Colonol Nathan R. Jessep instructed his men “not” to touch PFC Santiago as a cover - because he had in fact given orders for a “Code Red”. Why would Barack Obama give such an absurd order? It implies that either his FBI was routinely engaged in corrupt investigations and he felt this one was too important to mess up or that this was all a lie designed to cover up their collusion with the Russians.

Susan Rice’s Email Raises Questions About Obama’s Part in Russiagate. Here’s What It Said

 

[usmbguest5318]

So what do you all make of the indictments?

Here -- Mueller indicts Russian hackers—read the full court documents here -- one will find the indictment document. From reading and carefully considering it, one may, because the bar required to file an indictment is far higher than is the bar to which the USIC, to say nothing of the press and political speakers, is held for making accusations, infer legitimately:

• That Russians interfered in the 2016 electoral process was not the hoax Trump has been trying to claim it was.
• The level of detail in the indictment shows that FBI thoroughly penetrated the Russian network that effected interference in the American electoral process; moreover, it communicates very clearly to the Russians that the USIC is, like white on rice, "all over" the Russian's shenanigans.
• There is absolutely no basis for thinking Russia is anything but an enemy of the U.S.
• That the money laundering with which Manafort (Gage?) has been charged may well have been connected to money transfers that aided and abetted the Russian's propagandistic activities.
• The Russians, by organizing and effecting political rallies and protests, successfully converted an online information campaign into actual behavior among American supporters of Donald Trump.
• That gullible partisanship is pervasive among Republicans that material quantities of them will believe anything that seems to support their wild "conspiracy theory" notions, and the Russians know it and are more than happy to exploit it as part of a strategy for suborning the U.S.
• That a paucity of perspicacity so pervades the GOP that material quantities of them would sooner imperil America's primacy than see their political opponents take office, and the Russians know it and are more than happy to exploit it as part of a strategy for suborning the U.S. Quite simply, exercising rigorous thought to arrive as sound/cogent conclusions
  
• For all their talk about patriotism, many Republicans are such deuced dullards that don't know what patriotism is. Chief among those Republicans is Donald Trump, who remains among the very few, has not directed that anything be done to inter
• By dint of the D. Atty. General's (RR) stressing what "this indictment" alleges indicates there's a lot more to come.
  • One will notice that RR was clear in stating that today's indictment does not assert that any American willfully acted to spread the Russians' propaganda. The reason for that is obvious from a legal standpoint:
    • The indictments don't identify any Americans as defendants.
    • Regardless of what role any Americans may have had, what the Russian defendants did is what the Russians will, if the defendants can be extradited, be tried.
    • To indicate otherwise would tip the DoJ's and Mueller's hand with regard to the legal direction in which the investigation is going or may head.
• Unclear remains the matter of whether Trump and his team knowingly collaborated with Russian efforts to suborn the U.S.
• Mueller is methodically -- to a "chapter and verse" textbook level -- establishing the veracity of one assertion after another, the totality of which may very well lead to being shown probatively a final assertion : Donald Trump and his campaign conspired illegally with Russians to undermine the 2016 American election and secure Trump's election win. One can see exactly what he's doing. He's gathering evidence that goes directly to the triad of elements that, in concert with other sound/cogent assertions made and supported with evidentiary matter, lead to prevailing at trial: means, motive and opportunity. (See also: The Elements of a Crime)
  • Assertions supported by the content of the extant "Russia" investigation indictments and guilty pleas:
    • Today's indictment provides assertions and summarize the nature of evidence Mueller will produce to show what took place --> The Russians conspired to configure and implement a complex apparatus designed to, via information warfare, manipulate the American electoral process and its very democracy.
    • Prior indictments provide assertions about and summarize the nature and extent of means and opportunity Trump and his associates had (have) in connection with what the Russians were doing --> Multiple Trump campaign officials had relationships with Russian state actors and those campaign officials availed themselves of those relationships in efforts to aid and abet the Trump's campaign.
  • Assertions that remain to be established probatively --> those that identify the nature and extent of Donald Trump and his campaign's involvement (actus reus) in the Russians' propaganda activities.
    • Donald Trump and/or his campaign team's endorsement -- by dint of repeating them in interviews, via tweets, on their Facebook pages, in press releases, etc. -- of Russian propagandists' messages was done with awareness that Russian state actors and/or cutouts were behind the messages.
    • Donald Trump and/or his campaign team was complicit in/acquiescent to the Russian state actors and/or cutouts' propaganda and/or election manipulation activities.
    • Donald Trump and/or his campaign team encouraged Russian state actors and/or cutouts' propaganda and/or election manipulation activities.
    • Donald Trump and/or his campaign team conspired, as a willing participant, with Russian state actors and/or cutouts' propaganda and election manipulation activities.

 

[Tehon]

There is absolutely no basis for thinking Russia is anything but an enemy of the U.S.

I think that if one is of that opinion then they should to do some inward thinking about our own presence in this world. Reap what you sow.

American activists fly out of Egypt, defusing row

Russia bans Soros charity as ‘security threat’

The U.S. Role In The Honduras Coup And Subsequent Violence | HuffPost

Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup

January 30, 2014 – The State Department’s website Media Note announced Nuland’s upcoming travel plans that ”In Kyiv, Assistant Secretary Nuland will meet with government officials, opposition leaders, civil society and business leaders to encourage agreement on a new government and plan of action.” In other words, almost a month before President Yanukovych was ousted, the US was planning to rid the world of another independently elected President.

February 4, 2014 – More evidence of Ms. Nuland’s meddling with extremist factions and the high level stakes of war and peace occurred in her taped conversation with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt discussing their calculations of who’s in and who’s out to replace Yanukovych. Note mention of Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok. Here are some selected excerpts:

Nuland: “What do you think?”

Pyatt: “I think we’re in play… the [Vitali] Klitsch piece is obviously the complicated electron here especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister. Your argument to him which you’ll need to make, I think the next phone call we want to set up is exactly the one you made to Yats [Yatsenyuk]. And I’m glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario and I’m very glad he said what he said in response.”

Nuland: “I don’t think Klitsch should go into government. I don’t think its necessary. I don’t think it’s a good idea.”

Pyatt: “yeah…I mean I guess. You think…what…in terms of him not going into the government, just let him sort of stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I’m just thinking in terms of the process moving ahead, we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok and his guys. I’m sure that’s what Yanukoyvch is calculating on all this.”

Nuland: “I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. What he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside and he needs to be talking to them four times a week you know…I think with Klitsch going in at that level working for Yats, it’s not going to work.”

Nuland: “My understanding is that the big three [Yatsenyuk, Klitsch and Tyahnybok] were going in to their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a three plus one conversation with you.”

Pyatt: “ That’s what he proposed but knowing the dynamic that’s been with them where Klitsch has been top dog; he’s going to take a while to show up at a meeting, he’s probably talking to his guys at this point so I think you reaching out to him will help with the personality management among the three and gives us a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn’t like it.”

Nuland: … “when I talked to Jeff Feltman this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy …Robert Serry – he’s now gotten both Serry and Ban ki Moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday… so that would be great I think to help glue this thing and have the UN help glue it and you know fuck the EU.”

Pyatt: “Exactly. I think we’ve got to do something to make it sticktogether because you can be pretty sure the Russians will be working behind the scenes. ….Let me work on Klitchko and I think we want to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help midwife this thing.”

Nuland: ”…Sullivan’s come back to me saying you need Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an” ‘atta’ boy’ and get the deeds to stick so Biden’s willing.”

 

[P@triot]

Remember: she’s the tough one on sanctions from the Obama administration.