Russian charged with breaching U.S. firms says FBI attempted

>>139605
I don't believe Mr. Nikulin in this case. Also, why does this story include a picture of Hillary dressed like a pimp?

>>139612
yeah, but you know every trump supporter is itching to believe this is true, so they'll take the fact that there's an official statement, no matter whom the source, as gospel.

>>139614
And every anti-Trumper will never accept any evidence against the Russia narrative, because they want to believe it so so badly lol

>>139625
To a point, I think that's fair.

I have my reservations with the claims that Trump colluded with parties working for the Russian government in order to leverage their support. A lot of folks are sure Trump is guilty without any hard evidence and I think that's a mistake. Even if you don't like Trump, it's a mistake, because one is setting themselves up for disappointment, because this White House has made a habit of relying on diversion as their strategy for outmaneuvering their ideological opposition and it's very likely this could all just be more diversion.

But Turmp working with the Rusussians is different from Russians favoring one party in the election, which is well established by evidence, from independent expert consensus, our intelligence agencies, global historic precedent. At this point, to deny Russians have attempted to influence political outcomes in this country and elsewhere in this world would be delusional.

>>139628
I think alot of evidence, especially the fact the the Russia stories litterally popped into reality from thin air after he won the election, points to it being a slam peice by the Dems.

Remember all of the women claiming Trump molested them? They all dropped their claims after every judge tossed out the cases from thin evidence. Each of the three women had a Clintonite (former) as their lawyer.

WikiLeaks starts leaking on the DNC with insider. Seth Rich, DNC staffer, killed. The DNC then claims the Russians gave the info to WikiLeaks, with zero information other than "it's something they would do".

Now everyone who's done business with Russians, eaten dinner with Russians, or spoken with Russians is a "connection". Gimme a break. Just wait. Once it's revealed that Comey and Loretta Lynch signed off on spying on Flynn and Trumps cabinet, the lids gonna blow.

>>139625
One side has evidence and the other side has clickbait and Charles Krauthammer.

>>139634
There is a witch hunt aspect to the whole thing. But Russia hacking the DNC was not an invention of the dems. If you think the dems have that much control over independent government agencies you are overestimating their power. What the dems are doing is just spinning the story to be more about collusion than the hacking.

On the topic of the OP story, this would hurt the dem narrative of FBI GOP bias. Though the story isn't very believable. By confessing to hacking the DNC, you'll be granted citizenship? That sounds more like the kind of thing that would get someone punished.

>>139634
Good luck pushing the "nothing to see here, it;'s all over!" false narrative. Comey said the FBI investigation has just started. he was requesting more resources for it when he got fired.

>>139634

>especially the fact the the Russia stories litterally popped into reality from thin air.

Why would an effort to sabotage Trump happen after the election?

>after he won the election, points to it being a slam peice by the Dems.

The whole thing, including expert consensus from intelligence experts from the CIA, FBI, as well as Europeans, was a slam piece by the democrats? That's going to require quite a lot of evidence to establish as a convincing possibility.

>Remember all of the women claiming Trump molested them? They all dropped their claims after every judge tossed out the cases from thin evidence. Each of the three women had a Clintonite (former) as their lawyer.

I don't have any knowledge of this, but it's got nothing of significance to do with Trump campaign's potential collusion with a foreign government, no?

>WikiLeaks starts leaking on the DNC with insider. Seth Rich, DNC staffer, killed. The DNC then claims the Russians gave the info to WikiLeaks, with zero information other than "it's something they would do".

These anecdotes just don't register on the spectrum when it comes to the strength of evidence that the Russian government attempted to influence our last general election,

>Now everyone who's done business with Russians, eaten dinner with Russians, or spoken with Russians is a "connection".

It's suspect for a connection, of course, given what's already been established by the behavior of Russia during the last election. That's why there's an investigation.

>Gimme a break. Just wait. Once it's revealed that Comey and Loretta Lynch signed off on spying on Flynn and Trumps cabinet,

Why do you assume there wouldn't be good reason to spy on them? All conversations going outside of the country are fair game for being tapped; Trump's campaign isn't a special case. If they're doing any more to American citizens, that would require a court order, not something the FBI director can decide at a whim..

>>139637
The collusion and the hacking are both part of the greater interference story. Also the shady concurrent business deals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections
>Inn January 2017, a U.S. intelligence community assessment expressed "high confidence" that Russia favored Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, and that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally ordered an "influence campaign" to denigrate and harm Clinton's electoral chances and potential presidency.

>>139640
>That's why there's an investigation.
Not disagreeing, but aren't there like 3 separate investigations in the US alone? and then some others overseas?

>>139634
>Now everyone who's done business with Russians, eaten dinner with Russians, or spoken with Russians is a "connection".
This is a funny opinion considering it felt like the people peddling the opposite opinion we're pizzagate fags

>>139641
Well, exactly. That's the "story." These things all are interference, if they happened, but they're still separate claims. This is the narrative Dems are successfully pushing. Especially firing Comey, which absolutely reinforced the connection Americans are making of hacking = collusion = business deals = tax returns.

Dems are spinning the story, that's what politicians do. But nothing here but flavor is the invention of the dems. The Dems don't have the resources or influence to pull such a conspiracy off. At least not without leaving evidence.

>>139649
>Americans making connection
>hacking = collusion = business deals = tax returns
This is literally the first I'm hearing about there being anything beyond hacking being collusion

>>139640

1) the effort began as a last ditch hail Mary to seize the presidency / impeach the Pres

2) "Expert consensus" is akin to "sayso" by partisan political players gunning for their pony to win the race. The former FBI and CIA directors, who were ready in hot water for various scandals, most likely we're worried that the Trump administration would find out things they did on behalf of the previous administrations.

3) my point is it's not beneath the Dems to make shit up to win an election or have their way

4) influence, not hack, and they influence as much as any other nation does - using news peices on the internet. The hacking shit is a misnomer.

5) their so called behavior is just introspection. They're no actual evidence. Even if you look into the reports done by the alphabet agencies, it's all "patterns" and "typical behavior". There is zero actual evidence. All of this given that the CIA has the ability to change their IP addresses and that info leaked out in vault 7.

6) they committed a felony. Even if Trump is found guilty, it's a felony to spy and unmask, and then lie about it to Congress.

And if Trump is not found guilty ( which I'll bet money on) it means treason and death.

>>139655
>1) the effort began as a last ditch hail Mary to seize the presidency / impeach the Pres

Demonstrably false; the leaks were on the news every single day. Trump himself patronized the fact that Russians had some hand in influencing the dialectic: " If you're listening, I hope you find Hillary Clinton's missing emails.". The idea that we just started investigating the matter at the end of the election is totally unfounded.

>2) "Expert consensus" is akin to "sayso" by partisan political players gunning for their pony to win the race. The former FBI and CIA directors, who were ready in hot water for various scandals, most likely we're worried that the Trump administration would find out things they did on behalf of the previous administrations.

More conspiracy theory. It's OK to suspect conspiracy because sometimes there is a conspiracy theory. But it's just not likely that everyone in government and intelligence is in on a giant conspiracy to sabotage Trump. You're going to need some serious evidence for such an extreme possibility, but you're not even willing to consider the alternative. You have a conclusion that any evidence that comes out that makes Russia or Trump suspect is part of a complex conspiracy and you're not willing to consider the conclusion of our intelligence agencies or the opinion of independent foreign intelligence experts or historic precedent if they argue to the contrary. So why bother debating the matter? Your mind is made up no matter who comes out with new evidence of any sort.

>my point is it's not beneath the Dems to make shit up to win an election or have their way

OK, but we're not just talking about the testimony of democrats.

>influence, not hack, and they influence as much as any other nation does - using news peices on the internet. The hacking shit is a misnomer.

Again, we already have the great preponderance of evidence that the hacks of private emails to compromise the election, just like the hacks of Macron, exhibited clear fingerprints of Russian involvement.

>5) their so called behavior is just introspection. They're no actual evidence. Even if you look into the reports done by the alphabet agencies, it's all "patterns" and "typical behavior". There is zero actual evidence. All of this given that the CIA has the ability to change their IP addresses and that info leaked out in vault 7.

Not for Flynn; he's now liable to be prosecuted for treason. Also, Sessions also lied under oath. Putting all that aside, let's have an independent investigation with all the resources it needs so we can clear the other Trump associates and restore faith in the White House after their flubs thus far.

>6) they committed a felony. Even if Trump is found guilty, it's a felony to spy and unmask, and then lie about it to Congress.

Who did this? Comey? When did this happen? Are we talking about Flynn again? Aren't Trump supporters glad he was outed? Why would they want the NatSec adviser to collude with the Russians?

>And if Trump is not found guilty ( which I'll bet money on) it means treason and death.

Sure, I agree. If someone committed treason, let's string 'em up, whether trump or comey.

>>139659
You can't claim something is demonstrably false without evidence it's false.

Fact: Russia links stories did not begin until after Trump secured presidency. Look it up, there's not a single story until after the election results.

Fact: Trump claimed weeks before the election that there might be "vote manipulation" and "hacking" going on -

the media outcry was swift and feirce, claiming it was "impossible to hack an election" and that "denying the results was an assault on democracy".

Fact: former CIA director denies evidence of Russian links before dismissal when questioned.

Fact: Comey refused to aknowledge the unmaskings as a felony and refuses to inform Congress wether or not they are investigating the Trump administration of Russian ties, stating security reasonings

Fact: Loretta Lynch and Clapper discuss Benghazi and podesta/wiener/Clinton foundation Email leaks with Bill Clinton. Hillary's assistants and IT support are let go as potential eyewitness through immunity deals that went against FBI protocol and we're not discovered until supenoed by Congress.

Fact: Comey let's Huma, Weiner, and Clinton off the hook of multiple aggregious security violations and felony charges finding "no intent" - a defense that legally cannot hold water in any court of law.

Fact: Comes brother works for the Clinton Foundations chief Law Firm

I could go on.

>>139666
>I could go on.
please list everything you got. honestly I am open-minded.

>>139667
Just dig around. There are monsters on the edges of the world

>>139649
The true masterpiece of obfuscating is trying to conflate "Dem charges" with congressional intelligence committee testimony. Dems aren't the ones making the charges, the intelligence agencies around the world are.

>>139612
>I don't believe Mr. Nikulin in this case

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA delusional sucker.

>>139666
The difference between what trump claims about vote manipulation and what the media claims bout vote manipulation is clear and well documented. Trump has alleged that people voted illegally in the millions, and points to voter fraud. The media claims that the DNC hack influenced popular opinion.

You are trying to contort this into some kind of flip-flop. It's not.

>>139672
I obviously don't trust him now, but if evidence that corroborated his claim came out I would take it more seriously. I mean, if all we have to go on is this guy's word, why believe it?

>>139666
Russia link evidence didn't exist before the election, so of course stories wouldn't (apart from trump finances, which were widely published).

>>139673

The only "hack" Is that WikiLeaks released DNC emails. Nothing Russian about it, just password phising and public awareness.

The "Russian Influence" is an ever elusive smoky assertion that retains no water and is vague, so very vague as to be able to make implications without having to back them up outright.

>>139685
>The only "hack" Is that WikiLeaks released DNC emails. Nothing Russian about it, just password phising and public awareness.

And later Macron's emails.

>just password phising

that was established as a bullshit story

>The "Russian Influence" is an ever elusive smoky assertion that retains no water and is vague, so very vague as to be able to make implications without having to back them up outright.

Except that it's been well researched and established by both our intelligence agencies:
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

And corroborated by european intelligence experts, and bears all the traits of Russia's past efforts to influence campaigns in eastern europe.

>>139612
1.) He's probably in the right as the Dems have a history of lying.
2) She has horrific fashion taste.

>>139640
>Why would an effort to sabotage Trump happen after the election?

All the claims are about pre-election spying though.

>>139640
Because pre-election you had (((media))), most of internet, sjws, obama and the fucking avengers being anti-trump. And in fact it worked... only on popular vote. Pre-election you had these stuff too at minor scale.

>If they're doing any more to American citizens, that would require a court order
CIA did the same breaking ethics on different purposes and it was only leaked because of watergate.

>>139640
I see this dumbass gets his information from the same Clinton New Network, like all the other progressive liberals. Good thing we run these progressive atheist assholes out of this Country, back in 1776.

>>139691

1. WikiLeaks has a perfect accuracy rating. Theyve never leaked fake documents.

2. Julian Assange rebuffs any claims of Russian involvement

3. Seth Rich, DNC staffer, is shot thrice in the back in DC days after the leak

4. Password phishing was never established as a BS story?

5. Globalists want everyone to buy the Russian bs, but they offer little to no proof. I'm sorry, but the CIA does not have a great track record in honesty and the "take our word for it" won't cut it.

In an interview with Italian newspapers, Assange had this to say about Russia vs the West:

>In Russia, there are many vibrant publications, online blogs, and Kremlin critics such as [Alexey] Navalny are part of that spectrum. There are also newspapers like "Novaya Gazeta", in which different parts of society in Moscow are permitted to critique each other and it is tolerated, generally, because it isn't a big TV channel that might have a mass popular effect, its audience is educated people in Moscow. So my interpretation is that in Russia there are competitors to WikiLeaks, and no WikiLeaks staff speak Russian, so for a strong culture which has its own language, you have to be seen as a local player.

>"My conclusion is that Western power structures are deeply incompetent and corrupted, staffed by people who don't really believe in their institutions and that most power is the projection of the perception of power. And the more secretively it works, the more incompetent it is, because secrecy breeds incompetence, while openness breeds competence, because one can see and can compare actions and see which one is more competent. To keep up these appearances, institutional heads or political heads such as presidents spend most of the time trying to walk in front of the train and pretending that it is following them, but the direction is set by the tracks and by the engine of the train. Understanding that means that small and committed organisations can outmanoeuvre these institutional dinosaurs, like the State Department, the NSA or the CIA".

Russia is the only true Democracy. They remain an open, educated, and vibrant society that wishes to oppose globalism and multiculturalism even as they reignite the fires of imperialism. Imperialism has become a dirty word thanks to liberals, but I ask you, what was the golden age of European civilization but the 19th century of colonial empire?

>>139759
Like I agree with you here especially the quote about openness secrecy and imperialism.

But dude do you even look at Russia it's worse then we are when it comes to shutting downs peoples rights and free speech they are increadably secretive. What kind of vodka coolaid are you drinking here bro.

>>139759
Sure ivan

>>139805
And yet, are any American MSM willing to give Wikileaks its own show:

https://youtu.be/zacWhPT-Ngo?list=PL19A6F6A10DCFB253

That's what I thought. If Assange, someone who has spent his whole life criticizing those in power, is willing to be a host on RT, then that tells you something about all the trust he puts into their press over ours. I'd also like to say that Western-skeptic journalist like Glenn Greenwalde have moved out of the US in fear of their lives.

>>139837
No, that just goes to show that he's a shill. In a shill vs shill fight, the only proper response is to not take a side.

>>139837
Hey I never said America wasn't a shitfest either. But you should know damn well any political activists life is in danger in Russia as well as here. For all we know assange could have a gun to the back of the head.

The whole world is fucked and everyone in power has already drunk the coolaid.dont put your faith in anyone or any government no matter how good they may look.

>>139805
>>139759
19th century style imperialism with nukes is a recipe for human extinction.

>>139845
It's just more about nationalist and humanistic identity and furvor. We need people working for there country and people rather then them selves in governance and in really all professions. This heavily individualist and globalist culture is bad for sustainability and supessing corruption.

Not saying some parts if it aren't good just the pros outweigh the cons.

It really wouldn't be that bad about wars and such. The main thing preventing wars now has more to do with mutually assured destruction then any sense of globalism.

Frankly I feel if we could have a nationalist zeal as a species for our species would be the best solution. But it's hard to remove the lines we make for ourselves to separate from eachother such as race gender and culture.

>>139845
Nukes aren't actually that big ya know

>>139853
Libs just like to talk about muh nuclear winter. If we were actually willing to drop a few nukes or commit a few war crimes like ISIS does, maybe then we'd be feared and people would take us seriously.

>>139869
>not wanting to haphazardly launch nukes makes someone a bleeding heart now a days.
There is no threat that currently justifies a preemptive nuclear strike, not even north korea.

>>139849
>then any sense of globalism.
It's not a sense, it's an economic reality.

I don't think nationalism is going to be able to really address automation or the 4th Industrial Revolution. Upside is is that automation will mostly kill job exporting since it'll be cheaper to open up factories back home. Bad news is is that it'll still obsolete a huge percentages of jobs anyways, and you'll have tons of unemployment for at least a generation or two.

>>139605
That is a pretty sweet outfit. She would have won if she'd worn that to the debates.

>>139668
>I could go on.
>"Okay, please do."
>Uh, nevermind.

>>139989
If you're not willing to do a cursory investigation on your own time, then I'm wasting mine

>>139638
No shit, they're going to drag this shit out for months or even years because until the FBI figures out what they want to do, you can have cute little political cartoons with Trump as Putin's puppet and Dem's accusing Trump of treason and threatening impeachment, while any attempt to mend relations with Russia is immediately suspect. Not only do you have Dem's frothing at the mouth over any little thing to rile up their base, you have a bunch of asshurt neocons like McCain and Graham bitching and throwing stones because they're hawkish on Russia too.

>>139640
"Expert consensus" is merely an appeal to authority. Until there is evidence put forward, I won't take anyone's word for it. Any "evidence" will probably be classified anyway.

I never understand this line of argument anyway, do you really expect people that elected or at least support a complete outsider president to trust some bureaucrat? Though, admittedly, you may have some appeal to retards that voted for Trump because he had an R next to his name.

MSM refuses to report on this? How bizarre, any little fart that jumps out of Trump's ass is reported by MSM as a "possible Putin link fart!?!?;!!one"

This is the biggest conspiracy against an acting US president in history. And they want this buried. I guarantee you, this man will end up missing. They have to shut him up.

A: Interestingly enough I found out that the man is being held in Prague's Pankrac prison.

B: The court hearing was held inside the prison grounds which is unusual for normal procedure.

C: His attorney is named Martin Sadelik and I can find absolutely no information on him at all.

D: Sadelik requested a stay of proceedings claiming he didn't even know the US issued a INTERPOL RED LETTER request for his extradition.

E: The judge presiding over the proceedings is named Jaroslav Pytloun, also can't find any information on him.

F: Comey was fired Tuesday and the letters Yevgeniy Nikulin sent to the Russian media arrived Thursday.

G: Yevgeniy Nikulin’s is facing 20 years in the US and is facing 10 years in Russia for computer related crimes.

>>139673
>Media claims DNC hack influenced popular opinion

I never understood this. By definition the media does this every single election, but it is suddenly wrong when someone else does it? When Wikileaks reports on illegally acquired information it is foreign meddling, but when the media in this country does it's investigative journalism?

All the DNC hacks did was show how politicians act when they think no one is watching. This should be lauded and hopefully give pause to politicians who blatantly lie to the public and hold different views in private then those they espouse to the gullible public. Get over all of this fucking cancerous partisanship which allows them to blind you. Am I happy the Democrats got hacked? Hell yes, and I wish the Republicans did as well so we could root all the snakes out.

>>140052
Oh course it's not really an issue. Onama openly influenced elections.

The left always does this. Even watergate was not that bad, but they destroyed him. Lots of presidents before him did similar shit.

Leftists gonna left. Honor does not suit everybody.

This comes out, and now the Seth Rich thing comes out. I think the DNC must be in damage control mode