• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Reports on Russian connections to Trump [Summaries in OP] #GoldenShowers

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would never waste my trump card on a Platinum game that isn't Vanquish 2 or Metal Gear Rising 2

I always knew Bronson was good people.

Don't worry, even if these bozo's produce this 'dossier' myself and the smartest Gaffers will head an inquiry as to how they are MOD LIES trying to silence THE TRUTH. We'll also sell steaks.

#baleedat
 

faisal233

Member
Them saying that basically means they have no legs to stand on - i.e. The report is likely true
I dunno about the entire dossier being true. I don't mean to say that it's faked, but it is raw human intelligence. Reports like this are usually analyzed by an army of analysts who corroborate against signal intel, other sources and rate the confidence of the sources in the report.

It came from an experienced Intel officer, some or all of it is likely true but it is a raw product.
 

Mully

Member
NPR's Fresh Take did an interview with Politico reporter Michael Crowley about Trump and his campaign staff's intimate relationships with Russia, Putin, and Putin's inner oligarch circle a few weeks back, before all of this new information came out.

Link with audio and full transcript.

It's a 45 minute interview, but it really draws some light on how close Trump is to Russia and has for a long time attempted to include himself with Putin; going as far as Twitter inviting the Russian leader to his Miss Universe contest. Putin didn't attend, but sent flowers. He goes on to talk about how Trump attempted to start an MMA league with a famous Russian MMA fighter which was likely funded by Russian oligarchs.

It's a really interesting interview, and if you listen to it, you can kinda hear Crowley hint at the idea that Russia likely has a kompromat in Trump based on what happened in Moscow in 2013.

Here are a few choice quotes from Crowley about his investigation into Trump's relations with Russia:

So Manafort is part of this story. He was essentially the political consultant to Yanukovych who was driven out by the uprising in Ukraine in early 2014 that set off this chain of events that really poisoned the U.S.-Russia relationship.

....And Manafort was Yanukovych's guy. So Manafort was intimately involved in the politics there. And there are other figures that he's connected to. He's done work for a Russian oligarch who is very, very close to Putin.

We also know that at the Republican convention this past summer, at which time Manafort was still running the campaign, there was an effort to put in tough language about Ukraine into the Republican Party platform. And Trump campaign officials blocked that effort. I believe that the language would have endorsed sending weapons to Ukraine to fight the Russian-backed insurgency.

...There was speculation that that's the kind of thing that would likely have come from Manafort's level - that Trump wouldn't have been intimately involved in drawing up the platform. So, you know, a data point like that was a cause for concern for many observers. But we can't know for sure precisely what influence Manafort had.

I would also just briefly add that there were other people in Trump's orbit, including Carter Page, who was a named campaign foreign-policy adviser, was on the board of Gazprom, which is a Russian energy company, traveled to Moscow during the campaign. The Trump team has since kind of disowned Carter Page. But Manafort was one of a handful of people with ties that really raised eyebrows.

On Trump's visit to Moscow in 2013 said:
If he, in some way - if Putin has leverage on him that could be personal. Some people have raised the fact that Trump traveled to Moscow in 2013. And on that trip, he would have been, you know, surveilled by the Russians. They would've probably been trying to hack into all his communications. So some people say, do the Russians have something on him? This is all very speculative. The positive thing is it's an amazing and fascinating story.

My favorite part of this - and this goes back, Terry, to what I was saying a couple of minutes ago about the dark matter and the mysterious attraction to Putin - when he was headed over there, he started tweeting about Vladimir Putin and essentially inviting Putin to attend the pageant via Twitter. And in one kind of remarkable tweet that was almost written in the voice of, like, a teenage boy he said something to the effect of, you know, really excited for the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow tomorrow night or whenever it was. Do you think Vladimir Putin will come, and will he be my best friend?

Apparently Trump thought Putin might actually attend. Putin did not attend, but he sent a gift, some kind of like an ornate jewelry box or something to that effect and a note. So Putin was aware that Trump was there and wanted him to come, but did not actually attend the pageant.

It's the way Trump talks about Putin and Russia. There's something mysterious about it. There's something that I think we don't completely understand. And I like to talk about it in terms of - you know, there's this concept in astrophysics, dark matter in the universe. And it's this stuff that holds the universe together. But we can't see it. We know it's out there. We know it has some kind of gravitational pull. But we can't define exactly what it is.

...There's other theories out there. Even the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko, the Russian who drank polonium from a tea cup in London and died after that - he was a big Putin critic. Trump has been asked about that - same thing. We don't know. We don't know. He seems almost, you know, willfully blind to this pattern of Putin's actions in a way that doesn't add up. It makes you think that there's something going on that we don't completely understand. And that's really frustrating and, I think, for a lot of people, very troubling.

On the possibility that Russia has compromising information on Trump said:
Potentially. I mean, I can't say that I know that there is specific information that would be used that way. I can say that there is - I mean, any sane person who's following this can understand how easy it is to get material that's compromising, that embarrasses people. And when you talk to security experts and foreign policy experts, they all seem to think that the odds are very high that the Russians have a lot more stuff and that we don't know what it is.

And that would fit a Russian pattern. They blackmail people all the time. They [Russia] destroy opponents with embarrassing information or videotapes. They even plant false information. The word is kompromat. The New York Times did an excellent story a week or two ago about a - I believe he was, like, a Russian political dissident living outside of the country who had child pornography found on his computer by the authorities. And there seems to be compelling evidence that it was planted on him.

So we need to have smart conversations now about how the press will deal with that stuff when it happens again. But I fear that the media ecosystem now is so atomized and so decentralized that even that conversation may not really provide thoughtful guidance as opposed to just a frenzy in the moment.
 

Audioboxer

Member
Nah; I think them suing would indicate the report is likely untrue. Not suing isn't as telling IMO; lots of reason not to sue.

If it's hogwash any sane person would want to take out legal action for having their name dragged through a bed of piss.

The only thing I'll say is has ANY President ever been involved in a lawsuit whilst in term? Not that being unpresedential has ever stopped Trump.
 

faisal233

Member
It's interesting, would have expected them to sue regardless. No one is protecting buzzfeed right now.
There must definitely be something.
Not really. This isn't a rich private citizen bankrolling a grudge against a small corporation like the gwaker suit. This would be the president, suing for personal libel, against a corporation who's defense would be bankrolled by powerful private groups who have a vested interest in seeing all of Trump's affairs dragged out in open court.
 

-Plasma Reus-

Service guarantees member status
Not really. This isn't a rich private citizen bankrolling a grudge against a small corporation like the gwaker suit. This would be the president, suing for personal libel, against a corporation who's defense would be bankrolled by powerful private groups who have a vested interest in seeing all of Trump's affairs dragged out in open court.
What evidence do you have that Trump wouldnt sue now that he is president? There is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.
 
As somebody who began the election cycle caucusing for Bernie Sanders, and spent most of the election cycle cruising news threads and PoliGAF OTs, this is just not true in any shape or form. If you made a thread about fucking emails or The Clinton Foundation being a slush fund, you were probably taken to task. If you complained that her messaging was weak, or that she didn't give enough press time, or that Democrats weren't managing their money in the right places, you were indulged and even agreed with on a regular basis.

People who say "wow, NeoLIB drank so much Hillary Kool Aid you couldn't say anything without getting banned!!" were probably saying stuff like "she killed those people in Benghazi" or "she's just as bad as Trump". There are a lot of passionate progressives here and a lot of well-educated conservatives. The reason HRC was so popular here was because, once she secured the nomination, she was the only reasonable and moral choice for the presidency.

You had a lot to prove if you thought DJT should be president, and you still do, and if you can't make that argument without falling apart, your argument sucks and so do you.

And, like, come on. There is nothing "far-left" about Hillary Clinton. She was a pragmatic centrist who was much too moderate for millions of liberals who took comfort in Bernie Sanders in the meantime.

She had my vote and I was happy to eventually vote for her. But calling her supporters "far-left" is only an indication of how far-right the republicans have gone.

This is a good post. She's what I'd consider a centrist big-business-friendly neoliberal democrat. Relative to her competition, she's the status quo. which isn't ideal but also isn't horrifyingly evil.

It became clear that Trump, after winning the Republican Primary, was going to be an enabler for crazy evangelical tea party Republicans, not this so called "wild card" the media portrays him as. And that is exactly what is terrifying about him: he is a completely empty vessel to be purchased at any moment by the highest bidder. What wasn't initially clear was how he is also being completely controlled by Putin, whose own agenda lines up nicely with that of the American White Nationalists (i.e., the crazy evangelical tea party Republicans).
 

RawNuts

Member
I have a hypothetical question for people who know more about this than I do.

Suppose that enough of the information in the document can be verified to show a clear link that Trump has ties to Russia. What else could happen other than impeachment? He has already made his cabinet choices and such, and anyone he has hand-picked could also be compromised. Do we even have a course of action designed for such a scenario?
 

Gutek

Member
I have a hypothetical question for people who know more about this than I do.

Suppose that enough of the information in the document can be verified to show a clear link that Trump has ties to Russia. What else could happen other than impeachment? He has already made his cabinet choices and such, and anyone he has hand-picked could also be compromised. Do we even have a course of action designed for such a scenario?

We're in uncharted territory here.
 
What evidence do you have that Trump wouldnt sue now that he is president? There is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.
^
Trump would, if in the presidency, try and sue CNN for lying about not being allowed to cover his stuff because "I gave them a shot. Believe me, They had a chance, and they blew it. Blew it right up with those false accusations, those fake things they claimed about me and Putin. They're liars, all the way through, liars and cheats."
 
Got to say, I'm eternally grateful for GAF for that. I probably would have sunk into the right wing news quagmire if it wasn't GAF and the Ferguson live stream threads when the protests were happening. I don't think I would have ever found those or looked for them on my own if I wasn't on GAF

GAF gave me a window to many things that would have never crossed my breast otherwise. It got me up close and involved in conversations I never would have had. GAF forced me to form an opinion on things I never thought about before. NeoGAF made me a much more introspective and critical person, and I liked to think I already was one to begin with.

I came here for Smash Bros. I stayed for the demanding daily perspective-check.
 
So glad this material wasn't top secret otherwise this would have never seen the light of day. The whistleblower would have been chopped up to little pieces and fed to pigs before anything would leak.
 

Ac30

Member
Doesn't mean it's true, but they would open themselves up to discovery. Which would air out a lot of shit.

I dunno about the entire dossier being true. I don't mean to say that it's faked, but it is raw human intelligence. Reports like this are usually analyzed by an army of analysts who corroborate against signal intel, other sources and rate the confidence of the sources in the report.

It came from an experienced Intel officer, some or all of it is likely true but it is a raw product.

Nah; I think them suing would indicate the report is likely untrue. Not suing isn't as telling IMO; lots of reason not to sue.

So, it suggests it's not untrue, at the very most? Well it's something at least
 
I have a hypothetical question for people who know more about this than I do.

Suppose that enough of the information in the document can be verified to show a clear link that Trump has ties to Russia. What else could happen other than impeachment? He has already made his cabinet choices and such, and anyone he has hand-picked could also be compromised. Do we even have a course of action designed for such a scenario?

It's unprecedented, I am not aware of any protocol for it.
 

Woo-Fu

Banned
Lying through his damn teeth and people believe it. I need to see him crumble.

Actually I think most Trump supporters were aware of his lying and simply didn't care. It makes sense, after all, why should they put any more value in the truth than Trump himself does?
 

Soroc

Member
"It's over, just grab your ankles and take it" ~Jeffrey Lord

I've never wished for someone to get hit by a truck, but I'm getting close...
 
there is no point in debating people like jeffrey lord. Even when they know what their saying is bullshit, they will fall on Trumps dick till the end of time.
 
I have a hypothetical question for people who know more about this than I do.

Suppose that enough of the information in the document can be verified to show a clear link that Trump has ties to Russia. What else could happen other than impeachment? He has already made his cabinet choices and such, and anyone he has hand-picked could also be compromised. Do we even have a course of action designed for such a scenario?

We have never experienced anything like this. The electoral college was established to make sure we would never have to and that safety mechanism failed.

Its absolutely unheard of and they would most likely have to hold trial for each cabinet member or have evidence that the entire cabinet was hand picked by Russia.
 

Soroc

Member
He said this on live TV? goddamn

Not exactly that, but thats what he was implying

He kept saying Its over, get over it, the people voted him president. Implying that anyone that even voted for him can't question anything Trump does.
 

Ac30

Member
Not exactly that, but thats what he was implying

He kept saying Its over, get over it, the people voted him president. Implying that anyone that even voted for him can't question anything he does.

Ah, I thought he literally said we should all just take it up the ass. That would've been something alright

Yes, of course, don't question your elected officials.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom