Russians Compromising Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So will we ever get the details, or will they be released to the Ryan Presidential library in 2020?

FIFY

This Administration is not legitimate. Ryan should be sworn in and none of these cabinet picks should be codified. None.

Ryan!? F*ck that guy

Can't be Trump or Pence. They are illegitimate. Ryan is next in line as Speaker of the House.

Yeah, I don't think Pence can take oath of office without Trump taking it first.

God damn it if Paul Ryan engineers a coup to be POTUS!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So will we ever get the details, or will they be released to the Ryan Presidential library in 2020?

FIFY

This Administration is not legitimate. Ryan should be sworn in and none of these cabinet picks should be codified. None.

Ryan!? F*ck that guy

Can't be Trump or Pence. They are illegitimate. Ryan is next in line as Speaker of the House.

I'm gonna posit he's part of
This corrupt administration and has to go too

NEXT

Technically, he isn't part of the Administration, as much as I agree with you. In a moment of Constitutional Crisis, he is what the document calls for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No comment from Trump team until they figure out how to spin it or deflect.

Cue spinmeister Kellyanne Conway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I am missing something but this excerpt from the link seems to suggest the information was already available:

CNN has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. The memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats.

Available but not corroborated enough to make it public. Now it's been corroborated by UK Intelligence.

Gee, given Brexit, why would the Brits chime in? Hmmm I wonder...

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I am missing something but this excerpt from the link seems to suggest the information was already available:

CNN has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. The memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats.

From this article:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html

Some of the memos were circulating as far back as last summer. What has changed since then is that US intelligence agencies have now checked out the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe and find him and his sources to be credible enough to include some of the information in the presentations to the President and President-elect a few days ago.

Help me out: is the suggestion that the Russians have found additional information over and beyond what opposition research surfaced?

My understanding is that we don't know exactly what the Russians have and, in fact, they might not have anything. What was discovered were claims by the Russians to have compromising information as well as contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians. Again, as I understand it, a former British spy gathered the information. There is no new information. What is new is that US intelligence agencies have vetted the former British spy and found that his information is likely believable.

I see two issues: if there was contact between the Trump campaign and the Russians that involved illegality, it would be serious and highly damaging quite apart from potential criminality.

But, unless I am missing something, all we seem to know is that there was oppo research which made up the synopsis that has been referenced and that the Russians have the information according to the MI6 contact. I don't see any suggestion that the Russians actually have other information which is not to say that they do have such information.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I am missing something but this excerpt from the link seems to suggest the information was already available:

CNN has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. The memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats.

From this article:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html

Some of the memos were circulating as far back as last summer. What has changed since then is that US intelligence agencies have now checked out the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe and find him and his sources to be credible enough to include some of the information in the presentations to the President and President-elect a few days ago.

Help me out: is the suggestion that the Russians have found additional information over and beyond what opposition research surfaced?

My understanding is that we don't know exactly what the Russians have and, in fact, they might not have anything. What was discovered were claims by the Russians to have compromising information as well as contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians. Again, as I understand it, a former British spy gathered the information. There is no new information. What is new is that US intelligence agencies have vetted the former British spy and found that his information is likely believable.

If there is really evidence of this, the Russians contacting and presumably extorting the Trump campaign, it would be treasonous on his part right? He could be impeached for it?

[Anonymous]

Let's make him potus and undermine him slowly but surely.
I like a slow death for my enemies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I am missing something but this excerpt from the link seems to suggest the information was already available:

CNN has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. The memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats.

Available but not corroborated enough to make it public. Now it's been corroborated by UK Intelligence.

Gee, given Brexit, why would the Brits chime in? Hmmm I wonder...

They want the beer we were holding back?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I am missing something but this excerpt from the link seems to suggest the information was already available:

CNN has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. The memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats.

From this article:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html

Some of the memos were circulating as far back as last summer. What has changed since then is that US intelligence agencies have now checked out the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe and find him and his sources to be credible enough to include some of the information in the presentations to the President and President-elect a few days ago.

Help me out: is the suggestion that the Russians have found additional information over and beyond what opposition research surfaced?

My understanding is that we don't know exactly what the Russians have and, in fact, they might not have anything. What was discovered were claims by the Russians to have compromising information as well as contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians. Again, as I understand it, a former British spy gathered the information. There is no new information. What is new is that US intelligence agencies have vetted the former British spy and found that his information is likely believable.

I see two issues: if there was contact between the Trump campaign and the Russians that involved illegality, it would be serious and highly damaging quite apart from potential criminality.

But, unless I am missing something, all we seem to know is that there was oppo research which made up the synopsis that has been referenced and that the Russians have the information according to the MI6 contact. I don't see any suggestion that the Russians actually have other information which is not to say that they do have such information.

The second allegation is that the Russians claim to have personal and financial information compromising to Trump. US intelligence services find this allegation to be credible. However, whether the Russians are being truthful about their claims is a separate issue and we don't have any information showing the credibility of those claims. Presumably, the information the Russians may or may not have is in addition to knowledge of Trump campaign contacts with the Russian government. It would be easy to believe that the Russians have knowledge of shady financial transactions involving Trump.

[Anonymous]

This is not good. Why should we even chance allowing Trump to take the oath of office given the very real possibility that Russian interference will continue into a Trump Presidency via blackmail?

[Anonymous]

Here is the full document

https://www.buzzfeed.com/kenbensinger/these-reports-allege-trump-has-deep-ties-to-russia?utm_term=.uqjq13jlaq#.ubyN9DwnvN

[Anonymous]

Trump will soon be President, with his own people in place and a cowardly Republican Congress. What's to stop him from covertly shutting down or at least influencing these investigations?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is not good. Why should we even chance allowing Trump to take the oath of office given the very real possibility that Russian interference will continue into a Trump Presidency via blackmail?

I don't know...

Maybe, as suggested elsewhere, ?make him POTUS and demand #Garland SC appointment over impeachment, so it's not just Putin blackmailing @realDonaldTrump ??

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I am missing something but this excerpt from the link seems to suggest the information was already available:

CNN has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. The memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats.

From this article:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html

Some of the memos were circulating as far back as last summer. What has changed since then is that US intelligence agencies have now checked out the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe and find him and his sources to be credible enough to include some of the information in the presentations to the President and President-elect a few days ago.

Help me out: is the suggestion that the Russians have found additional information over and beyond what opposition research surfaced?

My understanding is that we don't know exactly what the Russians have and, in fact, they might not have anything. What was discovered were claims by the Russians to have compromising information as well as contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians. Again, as I understand it, a former British spy gathered the information. There is no new information. What is new is that US intelligence agencies have vetted the former British spy and found that his information is likely believable.

I see two issues: if there was contact between the Trump campaign and the Russians that involved illegality, it would be serious and highly damaging quite apart from potential criminality.

But, unless I am missing something, all we seem to know is that there was oppo research which made up the synopsis that has been referenced and that the Russians have the information according to the MI6 contact. I don't see any suggestion that the Russians actually have other information which is not to say that they do have such information.

The second allegation is that the Russians claim to have personal and financial information compromising to Trump. US intelligence services find this allegation to be credible. However, whether the Russians are being truthful about their claims is a separate issue and we don't have any information showing the credibility of those claims. Presumably, the information the Russians may or may not have is in addition to knowledge of Trump campaign contacts with the Russian government. It would be easy to believe that the Russians have knowledge of shady financial transactions involving Trump.

Let me just say that I never doubted for a moment the Russians had probably hacked databases that have information relating to Trump and his businesses. I also suspect they have information from HRC's private server and also the Clinton Foundation.

The issue really is whether the information they have is of a nature that would seriously compromise Trump and/or his family. If all they have is the oppo research that Trump's opponents had, I would think that if there was something seriously damaging it would have surfaced during the primaries and the presidential campaign.

So, it is intriguing for sure though I think more information needs to surface before we really understand the repercussions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump will soon be President, with his own people in place and a cowardly Republican Congress. What's to stop him from covertly shutting down or at least influencing these investigations?

Not much.