aloyisious wrote: » The Dems could well make their electoral slogan for 2020 "We're the party with the American Candidate" and keep pushing the angle that the GOP put it's interests first, not the U.S. interests, by promo-ing a friend of Russia.
aloyisious wrote: » If you accept that it's a fact that the Russian Govt, through it's agencies and agents, interfered directly with the US voting system, one has to ask was it to get one candidate into office over the other. Asking for a reason to the Russian Govt's decision point's toward what people say about HRC, she was a hawk that Russia realised it couldn't make sweetheart deals with, leaving Russia with no choice, it had to be the GOP candidate. Don, the "I know ho to make deals" businessman, enters the electoral stage and, with the assist of the GOP nominee system, win's the nomination. For Russia, whatever choice it had up til then, it was a one-horse race after that. The gift was that Don was, and still is, solely interested in making deals, the thing he still think's he's the best in the USA at. Russia screwed over the US all the way to the bank with Don and the GOP as patsies into the bargain. The Dems could well make their electoral slogan for 2020 "We're the party with the American Candidate" and keep pushing the angle that the GOP put it's interests first, not the U.S. interests, by promo-ing a friend of Russia.
Leroy42 wrote: » Another issue that seems not to have been discussed is the public's responsibility in all of this Russian interference. Voters need to ask themselves how it was so easy for the Russians to be able to interfere? Not from a technical POV, but just how easily they well led. There is little doubt that the Russians were able to interfere to the extend that they were because of the acceptance of many of these items at face value by many supporters. So well apart from whether Trump was involved, what this episode has shown is that it is relatively easy and cheap to manipulate a sufficient amount of voters. The FBI etc can do all they can, but in the end interference will, and I suppose always has been, a part of any democracy. So what systems are you going to put in place to limit any potential outcomes? Based on the current state of the political system in the US, it won't be them who come up with any solutions, as they both hope that they will gain the advantage next time.
Leroy42 wrote: » It doesn't mean they weren't aligned, and certainly the Trump Tower meeting with Trump Jr is becoming ever more serious by the day, but neither does any of this mean that they actually were.
demfad wrote: » Do you still believe that the Trump campaign did not knowingly collude with Russia?
Water John wrote: » It was a personal animosity for Hillary Clinton by Putin that was the initial driving force.
notobtuse wrote: » I've been reading this site on the comments regarding US politics for some time. Special Counsel Mueller's indictment of foreign citizens for trying to influence the American public about an election seems rather far reaching and now IMO poses potential problems for sites like this. The indictments of the 13 Russians, regarding US politics, were because those citizens did not register as a foreign agent nor record their financial expenditures to the Federal Elections Commission. I don't see anything the Russians did to be substantially different from what I read here. So the question is posed: Should this site now be limited to only countries outside the United States for comment? Should everyone here who posts comments about US politics, who is not a US citizen, now be required to register in the US as a foreign citizen under the Foreign Agents Registration Act; and list their source and expenditure of funding to the Federal Election Commission? Or does boards.ie ignore this recent indictment and flaunt US laws? Boards seems to avoid running afoul of laws, but will the laws of the US be different?
Leroy42 wrote: » I doesn't really matter what I believe, as Tom Cruise once said as Lt Kaffee "It doesn't matter what I believe. It only matters what I can prove." and at the present time there is no proof. I would certainly be of the view that the Russia's were very much in Trump's corner, that Trump has significant ties with Russia and that the timing of those ties are deeply suspicious to say the least
listermint wrote: » notobtuse wrote: » I've been reading this site on the comments regarding US politics for some time. Special Counsel Mueller's indictment of foreign citizens for trying to influence the American public about an election seems rather far reaching and now IMO poses potential problems for sites like this. The indictments of the 13 Russians, regarding US politics, were because those citizens did not register as a foreign agent nor record their financial expenditures to the Federal Elections Commission. I don't see anything the Russians did to be substantially different from what I read here. So the question is posed: Should this site now be limited to only countries outside the United States for comment? Should everyone here who posts comments about US politics, who is not a US citizen, now be required to register in the US as a foreign citizen under the Foreign Agents Registration Act; and list their source and expenditure of funding to the Federal Election Commission? Or does boards.ie ignore this recent indictment and flaunt US laws? Boards seems to avoid running afoul of laws, but will the laws of the US be different? You assertion that people posting on a messaging forum is akin to the direct and proven meddling in the US election on US Soil it somewhat erm,, perplexing
demfad wrote: » There is not going to be any proof until the investigation is over. There is himalayan scale evidence now. There is himalayan scale anecdotal and cirucmstantial pointers. There is himalayan scale guilty acting by the perpetrators. There is himalayan scale obstruction by Trump. You don't have to prove it to be certain of his and his campaigns guilt. There are 20 indictments and growing. 2 have pleaded guilty and Ricky Gates is about to do the same and testify against Paul Manafort. The one page of evidence posted here before is now about 3.
notobtuse wrote: » An argument can be made that what is posted here about US political, social and economic situations can be intended to influence political thought to anyone from the US reading them.
Baron de Charlus wrote: » Posters on Boards.ie are not agents of a foreign principal and therefore the US Foreign Agents Registration Act doesn't apply to them. If you have any further questions or concerns about this, please open a thread on the Help Desk and the admins or community managers can answer them. Now, back on topic.
Leroy42 wrote: » I have cut off the rest of the post merely to save space. I agree with all that you say, I was only saying that in terms of 'proof' (ie tried in court or admitted to) there is nothing on Trump. And in terms of people that support him, it seems that until he is actually tried and convicted then that 'proves' he is innocent. Look at Fox etc and Trump reaction to the latest indictments. It was if they were a victory for Trump. The casual sideswatting of the Papadopolous and Flynn bargains and the almost ignoring of the Manafort charges. Unless Mueller finds a letter delivered by hand by Putin, with a video if it, being handed to Trump and Trump reading the letter and stroking a cat whilst laughing about the fall of the US, many will simply pass this all off. It is truly staggering to me to see the level of questions and conflicts that Trump has and it seems that many people are non-plussed about the whole thing.
notobtuse wrote: » Robert Mueller's indictment seemingly also makes Christopher Steele a criminal. He is a foreign citizen, he tried to influence an election, he received payments to do so, and he neither registered as a foreign agent nor listed his receipts and expenditures to the Federal Election Commission.
And if that is the case with Steele, a case can possibly be made that FusionGPS was a criminal co-conspirator.
Also entangled would be the DNC and the Clinton campaign as they might have run afoul of the Federal Election Commission by disguising their payments to Steele as legal expenses through a law firm. They knew Steele was a foreign citizen, they paid Steele to influence an election, and knew Steele neither registering as a foreign agent. It is highly unlikely the DNC, the Clinton campaign, and even Barack Obama will ever be charged, as it would be detrimental to the US system to have an entire party determined to be guilty of illegally trying to influence an election, using governmental agencies to target political opposition and help another, and possibly of sedition. But it will give the GOP political ammunition going into the 2018 and 2020 elections.
notobtuse wrote: » Robert Mueller's indictment seemingly also makes Christopher Steele a criminal. He is a foreign citizen, he tried to influence an election, he received payments to do so, and he neither registered as a foreign agent nor listed his receipts and expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. And if that is the case with Steele, a case can possibly be made that FusionGPS was a criminal co-conspirator. Also entangled would be the DNC and the Clinton campaign as they might have run afoul of the Federal Election Commission by disguising their payments to Steele as legal expenses through a law firm. They knew Steele was a foreign citizen, they paid Steele to influence an election, and knew Steele neither registering as a foreign agent. It is highly unlikely the DNC, the Clinton campaign, and even Barack Obama will ever be charged, as it would be detrimental to the US system to have an entire party determined to be guilty of illegally trying to influence an election, using governmental agencies to target political opposition and help another, and possibly of sedition. But it will give the GOP political ammunition going into the 2018 and 2020 elections.
mcmoustache wrote: » Where are you getting your information from? That post looks like it wouldn't be out of place in r/the_donald. There's so much wrong there that I don't even know where to begin in terms of refuting it.
Quin_Dub wrote: » My view on it is twofold.I don't really believe that Trump himself actively (and knowingly) colluded with the Russians to influence the Election. However through a combination of Hubris , ignorance of rules and also Trumps in ability to look at some of his successes through the lens "If it looks to good to be true it probably isn't" they definitely gained from it. But - His attacks on Mueller and his current lack of willingness to punish Russia for their actions I believe it absolutely down to him not wanting people looking too closely as his connections to Russia and Russian Money in particular.
notobtuse wrote: » I read quite a bit of US political news. I believe unbiased news in the US does not exist, so I read opinions from Left, Right and Center media sources to gain a balanced approach. But I do lean right and my posts naturally would reflect that. I feel we don’t get news anymore, and instead are delivered primarily opinion pieces from media types who trade their journalist hats in favor of activist hats. But in this case I have been searching out opinions from sources that deal with US Constitutional and criminal law.
demfad wrote: Remember Russia cyber attacked on three fronts: ... and the penetration of state voting systems. The latter was so serious that Obama rang Putin on the red line and told him to 'knock it off'.
Quin_Dub wrote: » My view on it is twofold. I don't really believe that Trump himself actively (and knowingly) colluded with the Russians to influence the Election. However through a combination of Hubris , ignorance of rules and also Trumps in ability to look at some of his successes through the lens "If it looks to good to be true it probably isn't" they definitely gained from it. But - His attacks on Mueller and his current lack of willingness to punish Russia for their actions I believe it absolutely down to him not wanting people looking too closely as his connections to Russia and Russian Money in particular.
UsedToWait wrote: » Demfad, I've been reading your posts with interest, particularly about Cambridge Analytica and the money trail etc, but I don't recall this point having been made before. Could you point us to the source?
