Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

Julio3000 said:
The sum of the info in the Papadopoulos document looks pretty ominous.
Click to expand...

The question that I'm curious about is how the activity of Papadopoulos, Peter W. Smith and Cambridge Analytica line up. Was each free lancing by independent operators? Was it coordinated centrally? How did it relate to the chain of command within the campaign?
 
Hawk said:
An offer of leniency.

Come on guys. This is SOP.
Click to expand...

Sure. It might have no ongoing ramifications at all. And, frankly, unless Papadopoulos had knowledge of interactions that weren't memorialized electronically, he might not have anything to offer.

Still, that door is open now.

Just out of curiousity, you think this is still NBD?
 
nsacpi said:
The question that I'm curious about is how the activity of Papadopoulos, Peter W. Smith and Cambridge Analytica line up. Was each free lancing by independent operators? Was it coordinated centrally? How did it relate to the chain of command within the campaign?
Click to expand...

I think that's part of the central question that has to be answered. There's just way too much going on to lend any credence to the "get over it" crowd. It's enough to warrant a thorough, credible understanding of what happened, even if it is entirely devoid of criminal wrongdoing. Mueller's appointment was originally hailed as a step towards that. What's changed?
 
Julio3000 said:
Sure. It might have no ongoing ramifications at all. And, frankly, unless Papadopoulos had knowledge of interactions that weren't memorialized electronically, he might not have anything to offer.

Still, that door is open now.

Just out of curiousity, you think this is still NBD?
Click to expand...

I think the extent of what Papadopoulos had to offer was outlined in the indictment.

And, yeah, I'm more convinced that this is "NBD" today than I was yesterday, honestly.
 
Two things:

1)Trump was an idiot to hire Manafort.

2)Manafort was a bigger idiot to take the job. He had to know his financial shenanigans were going to come under scrutiny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
Ok. You might be correct. But, when you were saying "still sending bloodhounds to the banks and coming back dry" about Manafort, you seemed pretty confident, too.

I suspect that if Mueller's office weren't under the impression that there was more to come, that they wouldn't have unsealed the Papadopoulos indictment today. I could certainly be wrong about that.
 
Runnin said:
Two things:

1)Trump was an idiot to hire Manafort.

2)Manafort was a bigger idiot to take the job. He had to know his financial shenanigans were going to get some unwanted scrutiny.
Click to expand...

Manafort needed it. This is why it's silly to discount any reasonable conjecture about what he may have done. Maybe he didn't do anything sketchy after his elevation. Maybe he was canned before he could have. But since we know he directly signaled his intent to trade on his position, it follows that he is under suspicion...and he should be, right?
 
DNZWCKkWsAEd4HK.jpg:large


dat footnote tho...
 
Julio3000 said:
Ok. You might be correct. But, when you were saying "still sending bloodhounds to the banks and coming back dry" about Manafort, you seemed pretty confident, too.

I suspect that if Mueller's office weren't under the impression that there was more to come, that they wouldn't have unsealed the Papadopoulos indictment today. I could certainly be wrong about that.
Click to expand...

I believe Manafort will ultimately walk away with a (relative) slap on the wrist. Whether that comes as a result of a true deal, good lawyering, money, or the merits of the case itself ... well, I have my thoughts, but I'll reserve them for the time being.

I see where there could potentially be more to come here, absolutely. Everything that we've seen happen so far, in relation to how you would prosecute a case, is fairly conventional. At the same time, I feel like the leak about these indictments on Friday was pure pushback. Pushback that could have reached fever pitch if it had dominated the weekend cycle. So, in that sense, my reading of things going forward is a bit muted. I think these indictments gives Mueller some breathing room - the question is how much.
 
Hawk said:
I think the extent of what Papadopoulos had to offer was outlined in the indictment.

And, yeah, I'm more convinced that this is "NBD" today than I was yesterday, honestly.
Click to expand...

You have discounted the idea of collusion between Russia and the "Trump campaign proper." On the occasion of the announcement of a guilty plea from a member the Trump campaign proper re: lying about contacts with Russia, you're fortifying that position. I'm genuinely curious as to why are you more convinced today.
 
Runnin said:
Two things:

1)Trump was an idiot to hire Manafort.

2)Manafort was a bigger idiot to take the job. He had to know his financial shenanigans were going to come under scrutiny.
Click to expand...

with respect to #2 Manafort seems to have been in some financial difficulty and was able to use his connections to the campaign to get a $16 million "loan" from the Federal Savings Bank
 
Hawk said:
I believe Manafort will ultimately walk away with a (relative) slap on the wrist. Whether that comes as a result of a true deal, good lawyering, money, or the merits of the case itself ... well, I have my thoughts, but I'll reserve them for the time being.

I see where there could potentially be more to come here, absolutely. Everything that we've seen happen so far, in relation to how you would prosecute a case, is fairly conventional. At the same time, I feel like the leak about these indictments on Friday was pure pushback. Pushback that could have reached fever pitch if it had dominated the weekend cycle. So, in that sense, my reading of things going forward is a bit muted. I think these indictments gives Mueller some breathing room - the question is how much.
Click to expand...

Why?
 
Julio3000 said:
You have discounted the idea of collusion between Russia and the "Trump campaign proper." On the occasion of the announcement of a guilty plea from a member the Trump campaign proper re: lying about contacts with Russia, you're fortifying that position. I'm genuinely curious as to why are you more convinced today.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess in order for me to answer that question, I would need for you to demonstrate how you think Papadopoulos' contacts with Russia were collusive in nature. I'd also quibble with whether or not Papadopoulos fits into my "Trump campaign proper" categorization, but that's neither here nor there I suppose.
 
With respect to collusion, it seems to me a distinction can be made with respect to:

1) The Trump campaign actively seeking help from the Russians
2) The Trump campaign welcoming help from the Russians
3) The Trump campaign being indifferent about whether the source of information reaching it was connected to the Russians or not

Based on what I've seen so far, I would say 3 is very likely, 2 is more likely than not, and 1 remains unproven.

There is a law on the books prohibiting campaigns from receiving anything of value from foreign nationals and entities. I'm not sure the distinctions I made above matter with respect to the interpretation of this law. It could well be that the Mueller investigation will require the courts to rule on the interpretation of this law. The law could well equally apply to the Steele dossier, since he is a foreign national.

However, there remains a non-legal distinction to be made between accepting something from someone like Steele and accepting something from an entity under Putin's control. Imo this distinction is more important than some of the legal niceties involved.
 
So Papadopoulos made a direct effort at collusion. Next is proving trump knew about it (which, come on...)
 
Jake Tapper‏Verified account @jaketapper 5h5 hours ago
More
Also a good time for public to see which media outlets have been reporting the actual story vs which are obedient vassals of people in power
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top