Mueller Indicts 12 For Russian Hacking

Sure, I’m a liberal too who basically is independent liberal after 2016.

The problem is, while I know full well there are sane liberals, including a number of my close friends, and my girlfriend, I also know literally hundreds of liberals personally who are eating up the DNC and media narrative. This is because due to my ngo, government, and political work, I’m quite close to this world. In my current job, a majority might as well be loudspeakers or DNC talking points. It’s like living and working at CNN.

Might surprise folks, but I was offered a campaign opportunity on Ocasio’s primary campaign. My point is I’m close to this stuff.

My roommate is a director for an elected official, etc.
a reply to: JBurns

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Kharron
This does not feel like a cover-up for some botched hearing yesterday, this is done in advance of the Summit, just two days away.

It is a cya to justify the SC investigation. For months now people have been bitching the SC investigation has targeted everyone and everything with the exception of Trump Russia collusion (because it doesnt exist). Democrats hitched their wagon to that narrative and after 2 years and tens of millions of dollars they have nothing to show for it except for indictments for crimes that occurred in the 1980s'/1990's and early 2000's.

For the record Trump has said there was russian interference. What he points out, and what certain media outlets ignore, is his continued statement that he did not collude with russia.

Coverup.. justification.. whatever term you want to use. It is evident (at least to me and imo) what this action by the SC is and what audience it is for.

That could have been done at any point, a week ago, or two weeks from now. This is done two days in advance of a summit, where the two presidents already announced they were to have a private meeting with no one else there. Doesn't anyone else find it odd that when you're being investigated for collusion, or there is a Special Counsel appointed to investigate collusion with Russia in general, to schedule a private meeting?

This feels like a response to that. Either as a warning against making shady deals, or simply as a warning to the president -- this is who you're dealing with, be careful. Either way, I doubt it's about a hearing that's already past and has not produced anything but a lot of hot air out of everyone.

a reply to: theantediluvian

It's relevant because the usual suspects are acting like Russia doesn't know how to cover their tracks.

And guess WHAT ?

They do.

It's more likely team left spoofed those ip address's to frame Russia.

a reply to: Kharron

and it comes the day after strzok testifies and the day of pages testimony.

Just like the manufactured outrage over separating illegal immigrant minors as required by the Flores ruling came the day the IG report was released.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Good for you my friend Glad to hear there are still mainstream liberals out there, preaching all the good points of liberal democracy without all the crazy theories/spin

I always make it a point not to blanket criticize the left/democrats/liberals, because I still believe a vast majority of you (us? dare I say?) still retain our common sense and critical thinking skills

They are using this as a wedge issue, sadly, to attack Trump. They are totally ignoring the dangerous precedent this sets

And Ocasio seems like a brilliant young lady with big plans. Hope nothing but the absolute best for her I wish my own party (current party?) would purge mega-corporate interests as well and block out establishment insiders in favor of new candidates with new ideas!

(and thank you for the work you do in politics/government, as well as the unique inside that provides)

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: theantediluvian

O.k., look, I read the Politico article you linked, (thanks) and it says that the indictment is against 12 Russian Generals.

All of whom, I presume..........are in Russia.

What possible chance does this have of ever going anywhere?

Whatever the hell is the point?

If history is any indication, it is no more than a slap on the wrist, a little piece of public relations that will hardly bear fruit. When the US indicted Chinese hackers back in 2014, they treated it as a sensitive topic:

A spokeswoman for the State Department told reporters that Washington wants to have more dialogue with Beijing about the issue.

"We remain deeply concerned about Chinese government-sponsored, cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets and other sensitive business information for commercial gain," Jen Psaki said. "And, again, this was specific to the actions of ... of just a few individuals. And we hope that the Chinese government can understand that."

This was a law enforcement case, she added, not a diplomatic one.

"We continue to believe -- and this is relevant to us, our role here at the State Department -- that we can have a constructive and productive relationship with China," she said. "We're ready to work with China to prevent these types of activities from continuing."

China Hacking Charges

Compare that rhetoric to the consistent drum beat we hear now.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Kharron

and it comes the day after strzok testifies and the day of pages testimony.

Just like the manufactured outrage over separating illegal immigrant minors as required by the Flores ruling came the day the IG report was released.

And two days before a historic meeting with a president of a government being investigated for collusion. I have to go with the one that is directly related.

a reply to: JinMI

Guess you took the time to create that meme special just for me you should get your use out of it. I'm flattered I mean enough to you you remembered my first name and everything.
You're so cool.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Just like the manufactured outrage over separating illegal immigrant minorsas required by the Flores ruling came the day the IG report was released.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Democratic Party has selected a handful of undocumented immigrants for official roles at next week’s Democratic National Convention, in a bid to highlight the gaping policy divide on immigration between White House hopeful Hillary Clinton and Republican rival Donald Trump.

Ye p manufactured outrage

I wonder when those people will be indicted.

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Xcathdra

Mueller was the first prosecutor (to my knowledge) that actually indicted the proverbial ham sandwich!

One of the companies he indicted didn't even exist during the time frame he alleged the crimes were committed

Its no coincidence this info was released the day after the disastrous strzok hearings.

Actually, I think the goal is to have it posted before Trump meets Putin.

Kind of like, "We know what you did. Don't think you can make some deals with Putin to get out of it."

Like a warning shot. That's just what it feels like, we'll see.

Prosecutors dont fire warning shots.
they also dont usually file indictments until they have all they can find.

this is the investigations climax, they are hoping by squeezing the russians involved that they will obtain information on anyone else involved.
the russians wont break.
they know this.
so the timing goes to show another tactic they are using I will describe below.

most MSM drones are gonna without even reading the article(as seen already here by some) assume that indictment = guilty.
when trump comes back from russia and the dems see business as usual they are gonna cling harder to the "Oh look its proof, proooooof he was in on it"
que more drama from that spectrum.

end of story.

An open letter to everyone claiming Trump somehow asked Russia to do this hacking:

You do know that the "hacking" (really internal leaks) began in April 2016, a full 2 months before Trump made his statement, right?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

And for all of this, the US taxpayer is bilked out of millions to fund Mueller's interminable investigation.

This country really is just too wealthy to survive.

a reply to: neo96

That's our intelligence agencies. Your tax dollars at work!

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: JinMI

Guess you took the time to create that meme special just for me you should get your use out of it. I'm flattered I mean enough to you you remembered my first name and everything.
You're so cool.

Karen memes are older than...well your register date.

Surprised?

a reply to: JBurns

..and its none of your business/concern how our President (YOUR President, in fact) chooses to conduct himself diplomatically

Is that right?

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Kharron

and it comes the day after strzok testifies and the day of pages testimony.

Just like the manufactured outrage over separating illegal immigrant minors as required by the Flores ruling came the day the IG report was released.

And two days before a historic meeting with a president of a government being investigated for collusion. I have to go with the one that is directly related.

There is no such crime as collusion in the federal body of law (criminal).

originally posted by: neo96


They're still not over the 2000 election

Not over Nixon resigning instead of being impeached like, oh uh, Bill Clinton was.

a reply to: Ahabstar

For a group of people that supposedly hated Nixon.

Trump haters sure outdone him.

Must be some be some brainwashed cultists or Russian trolls in this thread straight up claiming "the left" somehow framed Russia for all this. You're siding with Russia over all of the intelligence agencies? Cray and y'all are only in for more deep disappointment in life.

a reply to: Isurrender73

What corruption? There was nothing in the emails but boring business schedules.
I don't think half you guys read a single email. You're borrowing outrage on something you don't know about. Someone said OMG so you're all OMG.