Mueller Indictments for 13 Russian Nationals in US Election Meddling

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: Xcathdra

Wow.

Does the Trump infected brain automatically redact "IN THIS INDICTMENT" from those statements.

Curious as to how the disease works.

I am not really in a mood to play moving goalposts with you today.

I didn't move any goalposts.

Certainly wasn't the one to claim that Mueller or Rosenstein concluded that their was no collusion or that the interference didn't impact the election.

then learn to read because your post to TheRedneck and your post to me contradict each other.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: soberbacchus

No.

If you're having trouble reading, please contact an English tutor.

TheRedneck

I have no problem reading.

You lied when you said the Indictment proves that their was no collusion or that the election outcome was not impacted.

The indictment made no such conclusion about the investigation.

Mueller and the Intelligence Community have made no determination whether the interference impacted the investigation. Not once. Never. They are not tasked with and have not answered that question.

Secondly Rosenstein said "THIS Indictment"..
Does not mean their are not more indictments to follow.
A new one was made public just today and surely many more to come.

Speaking of liars I just provided you with the info where Rosenstein said it did not change the outcome of the election.

Take his advice on the reading part.

Where does he say that?

You seem unable to read.

He says THIS INDCITMENT
Contains NO ALLEGATION
that THIS CONDUCT
Altered the outcome of the 2016 election.

A) It isn't Muellers job to make that determination
B) Mueller made NO CONCLUSION about how the conduct altered the outcome.
C) He is talking specifically about THIS INDICTMENT

Goes the same for Collusion.

You seem unable to read simple words.

a reply to: soberbacchus

I have no problem reading.

OK, comprehension then. That's tougher.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Just hang in there Red.

I know it must be embarrassing to claim the investigation was over and no more indictments were coming, only to have another one drop within a couple days.

Your head is probably going to explode when news breaks that Trumps former Campaign Chief Manafort is going to change his plea to guilty and spill everything he knows to the Special Counsel.

The Dominos are falling.

Geez...Which of Trump's chosen team HASN'T worked with Russians or beaten their wife or laundered money?

It really is a gross collection of criminals, traitors and thieves.

Good to see Mueller draining the Swamp.

a reply to: TheRedneck

You just made an accusation, so now I am going to ask you to prove that statement, that I am colluding with Russia.

Dissension is not disloyalty. The country has had that discussion about 50 years ago.

I am saying that this investigation is needed. If you want it to end, and it does, are you so willing to agree not to have an investigation the next time? Do we now turn our elections over to any country with the know how to do what Russia did, and then be willing to accept the results? Are you so certain that it won't happen again? Cause it is, just that the next presidential election, it may be another country, and what if it is a Democrat that gets into office, would you be willing to accept it?

I would rather have this investigation to go through and see the truth, than see it end, only in the next time that we see such come out again, and the question of how secure the election is, or the very integrity of that election will be.

a reply to: soberbacchus

I know it must be embarrassing to claim the investigation was over and no more indictments were coming, only to have another one drop within a couple days.

I would really appreciate you not putting words in my mouth. I never said this would be the last indictment. Lies do not behoove you. I actually admitted I would not be surprised if a few more came out connected with Manafort/Gates.

So you just lied through your teeth.

As for Manafort, if he's guilty, he's guilty. Period. Let him sing from the watchtowers, for all I care.

Some day, you'll figure it out. I hope.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: soberbacchus

I know it must be embarrassing to claim the investigation was over and no more indictments were coming, only to have another one drop within a couple days.

I would really appreciate you not putting words in my mouth. I never said this would be the last indictment. Lies do not behoove you. I actually admitted I would not be surprised if a few more came out connected with Manafort/Gates.

Except you actually posted just the opposite in this thread just a couple days ago?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: knoxie

"is the investigation over?"

Officially no, but it would be very unusual for there to be further indictments against Americans pertaining to charges already being pursued in light of Rosenstein's statement.

I expect it will officially be declared finished soon.

TheRedneck

a reply to: sdcigarpig

I am going to ask you to prove that statement, that I am colluding with Russia.

You are actively engaging in hateful political rhetoric, while ignoring facts and instead attempting personal destruction of certain personalities based on rumor and innuendo. That behavior is identical to the actions taken by Russian operatives described in the indictments.

So, if Russia is the 'great Satan,' your actions are complimenting their attempts. I guess we could call it "giving aid and comfort to the enemy," but I thought you would prefer collusion.

Dissension is not disloyalty.

Attempting to hide corruption is.

I am saying that this investigation is needed.

i have no problem with this investigation thus far. It has uncovered the Manafort/Gates issue, and has shown exactly what tactics were used by Russia to attempt to destabilize the country. Those are good things.

You assume much. I guess collusion requires that.

TheRedneck

a reply to: soberbacchus

Do you need a definition of 'unusual'?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: soberbacchus

Do you need a definition of 'unusual'?

TheRedneck

Really?

So in your world of up is down,

"it would be very unusual for there to be further indictments against Americans pertaining to charges already being pursued"

Actually means you said:

"I actually admitted I would not be surprised if a few more (indictments) came out connected with Manafort/Gates. "

You have issue with either memory of your own posts/claims or honesty.

originally posted by: knoxie

Another Mueller indictment.

Alex Van Der Zwaan lied to the FBI and coverered up evidence.

He's the son-in-law of a Russian Oligarch and close to Manafort.

I wonder who person A is..


LINK

Manafort (and after he stepped away his deputy Rick Gates) were working with and for Russian interests via Konstantin Kilimnik.

Konstantin Kilimnik is “person A” in the most recent Mueller indictment.
www.reuters.com...


He is also the one that asked Manafort via email to give a personal briefing to Russian Oligarch Oleg Deripaska (recently shown on video with a prostitute on a boat with Putins second in command and Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Prikhodko chatting about the 2016 election)
www.dailymail.co.uk...

abcnews.go.com...


Authorities looked into Manafort protégé
An associate of an ex-Trump campaign chairman is suspected of connections to Russian intelligence.

www.politico.com...

www.theatlantic.com...

This is getting fun

Mueller is saving the good stuff for last by not naming them in the lower indictments. "Person A" etc.

FBI already knew about these 13 Russians long before Mueller. They were known back in 2014. Old news. And it has nothing to do with Russia meddling in 2016 election.

How about a bipartisan compromise? Sure, let's go ahead and impeach Trump (and do the same to Pence proactively, no one likes him), but at that same moment, let's march Hillary up the gallows as a traitor for her almost innumerable crimes ranging from mishandling of classified data on a private server which she tried to hide after receiving a subpoena, her destabilization of Libya and Syria and support of ISIS, her coverup of using Benghazi to have a loose end in her criminal enterprises whacked, her involvement in collusion with the Russians in the Uranium One deal, to the various scandals and mysterious deaths which have surrounded her and Bill going back all the way to their earliest days. You know, a lot of those recent things were done in association with Obama though, so let's send him up to the hangman right behind her. After all, he did continue the Bush era nonsense of the Patriot Act and followed it up by signing into law measures which allow the government to strip citizens of their Constitutional rights and employ propaganda domestically, all while droning the # out of people in continuation of an illegal war. Bush era...Where are W, Rumsfeld, Cheney and the rest of the cohort who brought us such wonders as that aforementioned Patriot Act and an illegal war based on falsified intelligence reports? I'm sure none of that had anything to do with their collective connections to the military-industrial complex, but they can all follow Obama up the stairs. Bush Sr. can join his son, since the two of them are Skull and Bones, CIA connected scum. Maybe that'll finally jog the old man's memory as to where he was on November 22, 1963. In fact, everyone connected to the CIA should get a ticket to the gallows for their legendary lineup of hits such as Operation Mockingbird, Project MKUltra, and the general takeover of international drug, weapons, and human trafficking in order to finance subversive operations at home and abroad. While we're at it, let's not forget to bring in Eric Holder for the Fast and Furious gun running he's so far gotten away with to the point that he thinks it's safe to make public comments on politics. I mentioned that other Clinton before, but just to be sure there's no doubt, he can join the party after riding in with whoever is operating the lolita express these days. Of course, Trump was on that particular passenger list as well, so maybe impeachment isn't going far enough.
And that's not even getting to current and former Congressmen, their aides, the other intelligence agencies, local politicians and law enforcement, the military leadership, civilian industry leaders and academics, the media (what little is left of the media establishment that isn't already tied to the CIA, that is).

But I'm sure all the people frothing at the mouth while focused on Trumptrumptrumptrumprussiarussiarussiarussia to the exclusion of all else will never go for such a compromise. We should just patiently wait for Mueller to waste another year or two with nothing to show for it. I guess 13 Russians who will never see the inside of a courtroom is supposed to be a good haul by the standard of government work. Wait a second, is that Mueller the same Robert Mueller who was director of the FBI? Whatever, I'm sure it doesn't matter, FBI directors have got to be trustworthy.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Let me help you out, there's no secret conspiracy or grand plan in mueller's indictments. What you see is what you get. He's not hiding people for surprise shock effect to be used later. He's not "saving the good stuff for last" or he wouldn't have led with Manafort and gates, then moved on to Russians no one knows or cares about.

In short, tomorrow never comes, you're being strung along just like the Q followers.

a reply to: soberbacchus

My friend soberbacchus,

I have some questions for you which I would deeply enjoy a humble and honest response to. Before you respond, however, I would like to respectfully request that you exclude all preconceived and or projected grievances, and leave out any emotional reactions and or assumptions which may naturally manifest itself when you read the questions. I assure you I am not trying to prove a point, or sway an opinion, or attack or belittle anyone in any way. I would simply like to isolate this communication from the current volley of passionate and emotional messages you are presently involved in, and truly understand your position and perspective starting from a clean slate, without any baggage from previous posters and comments in this topic.

With that said, here are my questions.

1: Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in the 2016 election. How do you personally explain that to yourself in the context of Russian influence? Do you feel this is because the Russian influence didn't work? Or do you feel the Russian influence did work, and it worked so well that it pinpointed only the electoral college voters (which is how Trump won), but failed to work on the rest of the US population?

2: Do you believe that the electoral college voters are easily manipulated by Facebook, Twitter, websites with no credibility, and they based their votes on propaganda? Keep in mind, these voters must meet in their state's capital to vote, and submit a Certificate of Vote from their state with their signatures, and their votes must be Certified by Congress. Do you believe these electoral voters were manipulated by Russia in some way? You can see all the certificates of vote here: www.archives.gov...

3: The main purpose of the electoral college is to prevent against the "desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils". Are you saying that failed? How exactly did it fail, what was the Russian attack vector? - Do you believe Russians spammed Facebook, Twitter, random websites, and organized rallies in order to sway popular opinion (which we know failed) in an attempt to have the public somehow convince the electoral voters? I can't make sense of the exact angle of attack, can you shed light on this? How do you think they targeted the electoral voters?

Thank you for your time. I appreciate your civil and well thought out and respectful reply in advance.

originally posted by: justinmind
FBI already knew about these 13 Russians long before Mueller. They were known back in 2014. Old news. And it has nothing to do with Russia meddling in 2016 election.

It was a distraction by Mueller and nothing more. Not only that they know full well Russia does not extradite its citizens to foreign countries so the chances of these 13 being held accountable is slim to none.

Given Flynn's new judge ordered Mueller to turn over all exculpatory evidence to Flynn's team says a lot. Even more damning for the special counsel is Flynn's team did not specifically make a motion for that. The judge ordered it and my guess is his background is why. He is known to go after government corruption.

It is one thing for a person to plead guilty if they are in fact guilty. It is something else entirely when a person pleads guilty because they cant afford to defend themselves and to protect family members against prosecution. In Flynn's case that is exactly what occurred. He ran out of resources to continue the legal battle and his son was threatened with prosecution if Flynn did not plead guilty. Given FBI agents stated Flynn did not lie to them also speaks volumes.

It makes one wonder just what the hell is going on in the special prosecutors office, the FBI and the DOJ.

They don't have photos of these 13 Russians. If they change name they can still go anywhere they want.

originally posted by: Kyrios0Zero


How about a bipartisan compromise?
Sure, let's go ahead and impeach Trump (and do the same to Pence proactively, no one likes him),
but at that same moment, let's march Hillary up the gallows as a traitor for her almost innumerable crimes

How about a non-partisan conclusion based on facts and evidence?

I will be the first to march in protest in the streets if Trump was to be impeached due to false or insufficient evidence, and I hate Trump personally and think he is the worst president in history.
I am not willing to trade our justice system, or sacrifice a pillar of US democracy to see him gone though.
Country first.

Pence would be 10X more effective delivering on the far rights agenda than Trump. I don't want to see him President, but if Trump has broken laws and done indisputably impeachable things, then he should be impeached and Pence should be President. Country before party.

Hillary? I have yet to see any argument that she has done anything worthy of charges and unlike Trump, she has had multiple investigations (Congress, OIG, Senate and FBI) that literally lasted years and all reached full conclusion, none of which found any wrongdoing that a prosecutor would prosecute. But hey, if an investigation reveals solid, indisputable, demonstrable evidence of significant crimes with intent? She should face justice as well.

Country first.
Blind Justice.
Facts and Evidence above all.

Not lies, conspiracy and 3rd world dictatorship BS and propaganda.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Yep, you need a dictionary.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: More1ThanAny1
a reply to: soberbacchus

1: Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in the 2016 election. How do you personally explain that to yourself in the context of Russian influence? Do you feel this is because the Russian influence didn't work? Or do you feel the Russian influence did work, and it worked so well that it pinpointed only the electoral college voters (which is how Trump won), but failed to work on the rest of the US population?

I believe that the Russian Interference Campaign was specifically targeted with the electoral college in mind.

The US intelligence community, Trump appointed Conservative Directors, GOP investigative committees in the House and Senate and the FBI have all acknowledged this fact.

Exclusive: Russian-linked Facebook ads targeted Michigan and Wisconsin
www.cnn.com...

How Did the Russians Know to Target Michigan & Wisconsin on Facebook?
www.epolitics.com...

Wisconsin, Michigan were key targets of Russia-linked ads on Facebook
www.reuters.com...

They went as far as to create elaborate FB Profiles of fake people living in electoral districts in WI and MI that were critical to the states.

Examples of the Fake Profiles in those states here:
The Fake Americans Russia Created to Influence the Election
www.nytimes.com...