Mueller Indicts 13 Russians Accused of Election Meddling | NBC New York

[PeteWasLucky]

https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/national-international/Russian
s-Indicted-US-Election-Meddling-Mueller-474309733.html
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[calim...@gmx.de]

On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 8:33:25 PM UTC+1, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/national-international/Russian
> s-Indicted-US-Election-Meddling-Mueller-474309733.html


I don't think they will face jail time.


Max

[soccerfan777]

Does that list include *shitpiss?

[The Iceberg]

Lol Mueller wastes tax layers money on fake news report just like the corrupt liar Jill Stein and her false lying recount!

[calim...@gmx.de]

On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 9:55:23 PM UTC+1, The Iceberg wrote:
> Lol Mueller wastes tax layers money on fake news report just like the corrupt liar Jill Stein and her false lying recount!

Mueller is wrapping his investigation up.


Max

[Brian W Lawrence]

He won't finish for several months yet.

He's only just interviewed Bannon.

Rick Gates is helping the inquiry

"On February 16, 2018, Mueller's office unsealed that Richard Pinedo, of
California, has accepted a plea agreement on Feb 2, in which he pleaded
guilty to identity fraud, and using the identity of other persons for
"unlawful activity". Pinedo also agreed to cooperate with the
investigation, but faces up to fifteen years in prison and a fine of
$250,000."

[calim...@gmx.de]

On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 11:24:21 AM UTC+1, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
> On 16/02/2018 21:01, calim...@gmx.de wrote:
>
> > On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 9:55:23 PM UTC+1, The Iceberg wrote:
> >> Lol Mueller wastes tax layers money on fake news report just like the corrupt liar Jill Stein and her false lying recount!
> >
> >
> > Mueller is wrapping his investigation up.
>
> He won't finish for several months yet.
>
> He's only just interviewed Bannon.

If Bannon had anything damning to tell Trump would not have him cut loose.

> Rick Gates is helping the inquiry

Who is that?

> "On February 16, 2018, Mueller's office unsealed that Richard Pinedo, of
> California, has accepted a plea agreement on Feb 2, in which he pleaded
> guilty to identity fraud, and using the identity of other persons for
> "unlawful activity". Pinedo also agreed to cooperate with the
> investigation, but faces up to fifteen years in prison and a fine of
> $250,000."

Who is that?
And lawyers know what „up to“ means.
With all your slandering people here on RST you would face up to 5 years in prison in Germany.


Max

[Brian W Lawrence]

On 17/02/2018 10:36, calim...@gmx.de wrote:
> On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 11:24:21 AM UTC+1, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
>> On 16/02/2018 21:01, calim...@gmx.de wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 9:55:23 PM UTC+1, The Iceberg wrote:
>>>> Lol Mueller wastes tax layers money on fake news report just like the corrupt liar Jill Stein and her false lying recount!
>>>
>>>
>>> Mueller is wrapping his investigation up.
>>
>> He won't finish for several months yet.
>>
>> He's only just interviewed Bannon.
>
> If Bannon had anything damning to tell Trump would not have him cut loose.

If that were true why is he likely to face contempt charges from the
House Intelligence Committee, since he's refused to answer their
questions. If he knew nothing why can't he answer? Of course the White
House are trying to prevent him answering questions, so presumably
they are worried what he might reveal.

>> Rick Gates is helping the inquiry
>
> Who is that?

"Richard W. Gates III (born April 27, 1972) is an American political
consultant and lobbyist.
He is a longtime business associate of Paul Manafort and served as
deputy to Manafort when the
latter was campaign manager of the Donald Trump presidential campaign in
2016. He and Manafort
were indicted in October 2017 on charges related to their consulting
work with political
figures in Ukraine."

>> "On February 16, 2018, Mueller's office unsealed that Richard Pinedo, of
>> California, has accepted a plea agreement on Feb 2, in which he pleaded
>> guilty to identity fraud, and using the identity of other persons for
>> "unlawful activity". Pinedo also agreed to cooperate with the
>> investigation, but faces up to fifteen years in prison and a fine of
>> $250,000."
>
> Who is that?

Someone who assisted some of the 13 indicted Russians to commit crimes.
No known links to anyone else, but he's cooperating with Mueller, so
maybe there is.

> And lawyers know what „up to“ means.
> With all your slandering people here on RST you would face up to 5 years in prison in Germany.

Bringing a case of slander is a bit difficult unless the claims are
demonstrated to be false.

[calim...@gmx.de]

On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 12:09:30 PM UTC+1, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
> On 17/02/2018 10:36, calim...@gmx.de wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 11:24:21 AM UTC+1, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
> >> On 16/02/2018 21:01, calim...@gmx.de wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 9:55:23 PM UTC+1, The Iceberg wrote:
> >>>> Lol Mueller wastes tax layers money on fake news report just like the corrupt liar Jill Stein and her false lying recount!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Mueller is wrapping his investigation up.
> >>
> >> He won't finish for several months yet.
> >>
> >> He's only just interviewed Bannon.
> >
> > If Bannon had anything damning to tell Trump would not have him cut loose.
>
> If that were true why is he likely to face contempt charges from the
> House Intelligence Committee, since he's refused to answer their
> questions. If he knew nothing why can't he answer? Of course the White
> House are trying to prevent him answering questions, so presumably
> they are worried what he might reveal.
>

Then why does Bannon talk to Mueller and doesn‘t invoke the 5th amendment like Obama administration people?

> >> Rick Gates is helping the inquiry
> >
> > Who is that?
>
> "Richard W. Gates III (born April 27, 1972) is an American political
> consultant and lobbyist.
> He is a longtime business associate of Paul Manafort and served as
> deputy to Manafort when the
> latter was campaign manager of the Donald Trump presidential campaign in
> 2016.

Manafort was campaign manager for a few weeks only. A sleaze bag indeed, some kind of Sid Blumenthal.

> He and Manafort
> were indicted in October 2017 on charges related to their consulting
> work with political
> figures in Ukraine."
>
> >> "On February 16, 2018, Mueller's office unsealed that Richard Pinedo, of
> >> California, has accepted a plea agreement on Feb 2, in which he pleaded
> >> guilty to identity fraud, and using the identity of other persons for
> >> "unlawful activity". Pinedo also agreed to cooperate with the
> >> investigation, but faces up to fifteen years in prison and a fine of
> >> $250,000."
> >
> > Who is that?
>
> Someone who assisted some of the 13 indicted Russians to commit crimes.
> No known links to anyone else, but he's cooperating with Mueller, so
> maybe there is.
>
> > And lawyers know what „up to“ means.
> > With all your slandering people here on RST you would face up to 5 years in prison in Germany.
>
> Bringing a case of slander is a bit difficult unless the claims are
> demonstrated to be false.

Didn‘t you call me a Nazi?


Max

[Brian W Lawrence]

On 17/02/2018 11:34, calim...@gmx.de wrote:
> On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 12:09:30 PM UTC+1, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
>> On 17/02/2018 10:36, calim...@gmx.de wrote:
>>> On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 11:24:21 AM UTC+1, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
>>>> On 16/02/2018 21:01, calim...@gmx.de wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 9:55:23 PM UTC+1, The Iceberg wrote:
>>>>>> Lol Mueller wastes tax layers money on fake news report just like the corrupt liar Jill Stein and her false lying recount!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mueller is wrapping his investigation up.
>>>>
>>>> He won't finish for several months yet.
>>>>
>>>> He's only just interviewed Bannon.
>>>
>>> If Bannon had anything damning to tell Trump would not have him cut loose.
>>
>> If that were true why is he likely to face contempt charges from the
>> House Intelligence Committee, since he's refused to answer their
>> questions. If he knew nothing why can't he answer? Of course the White
>> House are trying to prevent him answering questions, so presumably
>> they are worried what he might reveal.
>>
>
> Then why does Bannon talk to Mueller and doesn‘t invoke the 5th amendment like Obama administration people?

I can't answer that.

> Manafort was campaign manager for a few weeks only. A sleaze bag indeed, some kind of Sid Blumenthal.

He was on the campaign team for about 6 months though.

>>> With all your slandering people here on RST you would face up to 5 years in prison in Germany.
>>
>> Bringing a case of slander is a bit difficult unless the claims are
>> demonstrated to be false.
>
>
> Didn‘t you call me a Nazi?

Certainly not. I'm rarely abusive - except calling Icey an idiot
occasionally.

[TennisNut]

PWL, TT, Brian, Pelle

Carry on the good work. It is a unfair fight when you come armed with facts and logic to fight against people with an IQ of an iceberg lettuce armed only with BS they hear on fox news offered by school / college dropouts.

They still refuse to accept that the indictment (tip of the iceberg) already claims that there was "unwitting" collusion between Trump associates with the Russians. His next step is to prove "witting" collusion.

It was not a 400 lb guy in his mother's basement as suggested by their Dear leader.

[The Iceberg]

With any luck Trump will just pardon them all, that would be classic, it's all a waste of time anyway, Hillary spent more than TWICE as much money on the election than Trump and had the whole MMS, Wall St, Big business on her side, why pretend Russians had anything to do with her sore losing?

[calim...@gmx.de]

Oh, sorry ...


Max

[calim...@gmx.de]

On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 4:38:58 PM UTC+1, TennisNut wrote:
> On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 2:33:25 PM UTC-5, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> > https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/national-international/Russian
> > s-Indicted-US-Election-Meddling-Mueller-474309733.html
> > --
> >
> >
> > ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
> > http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
>
> PWL, TT, Brian, Pelle
>
> Carry on the good work. It is a unfair fight when you come armed with facts and logic to fight against people with an IQ of an iceberg lettuce armed only with BS they hear on fox news offered by school / college dropouts.
>

> They still refuse to accept that the indictment (tip of the iceberg) already claims that there was "unwitting" collusion between Trump associates with the Russians. ...


The indictment doesn't claim that, you little liar ...


Max

[Brian W Lawrence]

On 17/02/2018 17:06, The Iceberg wrote:

> With any luck Trump will just pardon them all, that would be classic,

Yeah, classic Trump stupidity. Anyway, the Presidential Pardon is for
people convicted of something.

it's all a waste of time anyway, Hillary spent more than TWICE as much
money on the election than Trump and had the whole MMS, Wall St, Big
business on her side, why pretend Russians had anything to do with her
sore losing?

Perhaps because that was their intent, as recognised by all 17
US Intelligence Agencies, the House & the Senate, etc.

[calim...@gmx.de]

On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 7:52:03 PM UTC+1, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
> On 17/02/2018 17:06, The Iceberg wrote:
>
> > With any luck Trump will just pardon them all, that would be classic,
>
> Yeah, classic Trump stupidity. Anyway, the Presidential Pardon is for
> people convicted of something.

Not only for convicted.

> it's all a waste of time anyway, Hillary spent more than TWICE as much
> money on the election than Trump and had the whole MMS, Wall St, Big
> business on her side, why pretend Russians had anything to do with her
> sore losing?
>
> Perhaps because that was their intent, as recognised by all 17
> US Intelligence Agencies, the House & the Senate, etc.

Not by all 17 US Intelligence Agencies, only by a few. Most of them never gave an opinion.


Don't read only WaPo and watch only CNN. You get a very narrow world view.


Max

[TennisNut]

On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 2:33:25 PM UTC-5, PeteWasLucky wrote:

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

Does this need to be in german for you to understand? "Unwitting" communication by Trump campaign officials with Russians has been explicitly mentioned. Mueller is playing this brilliantly. He is letting every dimwit with an iceberg lettuce IQ think "no collusion" for a few days / weeks / months while he is collecting the proof needed to show "witting" communication / collusion.

"Some Defendants, posing as U.S. persons and without revealing their Russian
association, communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign and with other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities. "

[calim...@gmx.de]

Does it need to be in Chinese for you to understand that I don‘t collude with you when I communicate with you, TennisNutter?


Max

[The Iceberg]

Except Hillary spent over $500MILLION MORE THAN TRUMP + the MMS, Saudi, Wall St etc backing her yet we're expected to believe Russia had bigger influence HahahahahhahahahahHhh
You're too funny

[The Iceberg]

The political activities involved a few fake news adverts on Facebook and a rude story about the Demorats, this has far more effect on the election that Hillary spending over $500 MILLION MORE on advertising how Good she was than Trump Hahahahahhahahahhahahhahhahhahha

[Brian W Lawrence]

On 18/02/2018 00:45, The Iceberg wrote:

> Except Hillary spent over $500MILLION MORE THAN TRUMP

That's a bold claim, can you back it up with actual data?

> + the MMS, Saudi, Wall St etc backing her yet we're expected to believe Russia had bigger influence HahahahahhahahahahHhh
> You're too funny

I won't bother with Saudi Arabia 'backing Clinton', 'cept I'd love to
see your sources for that too. Lol

The Trump/Pence & Clinton/Kaine campaigns both spent considerable
amounts of money - what did they spend it on?

[calim...@gmx.de]

On Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 9:19:25 AM UTC+1, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
> On 18/02/2018 00:45, The Iceberg wrote:
>
> > Except Hillary spent over $500MILLION MORE THAN TRUMP
>
> That's a bold claim, can you back it up with actual data?
>

It was about $ 570 million more.

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-fundraising/


So the 1 % the Russkies spent can‘t have made a huge difference.


Max

[Brian W Lawrence]

On 18/02/2018 09:12, calim...@gmx.de wrote:
> On Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 9:19:25 AM UTC+1, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
>> On 18/02/2018 00:45, The Iceberg wrote:
>>
>>> Except Hillary spent over $500MILLION MORE THAN TRUMP
>>
>> That's a bold claim, can you back it up with actual data?
>>
>
>
> It was about $ 570 million more.
>
> https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-fundraising/

Is that Icey's source too? Are you helping him out today?

Bloomberg says it took its data from the FEC (Federal Election
Commission), which is the independent body that administers and
enforces campaign financial law. It would seem to be the definitive
source for campaign expenses. Yet, if you check the numbers on
their website here:


<https://www.fec.gov/data/candidates/president/?election_year=2016&cycle=2016&election_full=true>

They show that the Clinton/Kaine campaign raised $585.7m, spending
$585.6m; while the Trump/Pence campaign raised $350.7m and spent
$343.0m. That's a diff. of $242.6m. Those figures relate to the
period 2013-16. I believe Clinton declared her candidacy in April
2015 while Trump did so the following June. So the 'official'
data covers about two years before either candidate was actually
known to be running and a couple of months after the election.

Clearly Bloomberg are including data that we might term 'unofficial'.

I note that they include $215.1m spent by Clinton Super-PACs and
$85.5m by Trump Super-PACs. AFAIK Super-PACs cannot contribute to
candidates or parties, though they can raise and spend money for
their own purposes - polling for example. It's still a topic of
debate I believe, though it would seem to me that the Clinton/Kaine
campaign didn't have access to the $215m and Trump/Pence did not
have access to the $85m, and, in fact, Trump also did not endorse
any Super-PACs.

The FEC data is interesting though, since you can see what the
campaigns were spending money on. The Trump campaign paid several
Trump companies for accomodation, food, etc. Most of the money
went on payroll, consultancy, security, travel, events and so on.

[The Iceberg]

You can pretend all you like, fact is Hillary spent over $500million more than Trump and she still LOST. It funny how you keep making excuses but can't change she LOST! Lol

[bob]

brian, sigh. it's common knowledge that the clinton campaign spent an
ungodly amount, and trump with all his free tv time, spent nearly
zilch til the very end. and he paid the primary from his own pocket.

just face it: hillary lost a "sure thing" and that's what's so tough
to take. she had the media 90%, she had the $ by a huge margin, she
had the demographics, she had the support of her own party brass.
trump had none of that. and she still lost. i can see why you can't
take it.

bob

[bob]

On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 09:06:01 -0800 (PST), The Iceberg
<iceber...@gmail.com> wrote:

>With any luck Trump will just pardon them all, that would be classic, it's all a waste of time anyway, Hillary spent more than TWICE as much money on the election than Trump and had the whole MMS, Wall St, Big business on her side, why pretend Russians had anything to do with her sore losing?

spot on

bob

[bob]

you still fail to reaize, despite me telling you for almost 2yrs now,
that we're in a bit of a war here. true card carrying democrats , incl
all media, are at a war with this administration and you keep slopping
up their biased stories.

bob

[Brian W Lawrence]

On 18/02/2018 13:31, bob wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 12:40:01 +0000, Brian W Lawrence

> brian, sigh. it's common knowledge that the clinton campaign spent an
> ungodly amount, and trump with all his free tv time, spent nearly
> zilch til the very end. and he paid the primary from his own pocket.

The Bloomberg article says he spent half a billion. That seems like
an ungodly amount too - although I'm not sure what ungodly means
with regards to campaign finance.

> just face it: hillary lost a "sure thing" and that's what's so tough
> to take. she had the media 90%, she had the $ by a huge margin, she
> had the demographics, she had the support of her own party brass.
> trump had none of that. and she still lost. i can see why you can't
> take it.

Can't take what? Hillary lost, Donald won, some 487 days ago. That's
a fact whatever anyone thinks about it. It has no effect on me at all,
or none that I can think of. My life didn't change for better or worse,
it wouldn't have changed if Clinton had won either.

I have been reading this NG for years because of an interest in tennis,
I rarely posted. In 2016 people began posting about the GE, and I have
an interest in electoral process, so I made a few observations. My
opinions are hardly relevant, although I hope some may find them useful
or interesting.

Of course being critical of the president doesn't sit well with his
supporters, which is perfectly understandable.

stay safe bob

[calim...@gmx.de]

I think most of his supporters know that he is a boorish clown.
They just support him because they consider the current Democratic party even worse for the USA.


Max

[Guypers]

It affects me, a boor, moron, laughing stock of the world, Putinski’s puppet, destroying fbi, doj, corrupt piece of trash!!

[calim...@gmx.de]

You think the orange clown is even more flexible towards the Russians than Obama?
And more destroying the FBI than Comey, McCabe, Ohr, Strzok, Page did?


Max

[Brian W Lawrence]

Well I guess you would say that, but I consider the opposite point of
view to have considerably more merit, but I'm biased of course and you
aren't.

[calim...@gmx.de]

I'm right in the middle - I call Trump an orange clown, dislike him personally with a vengeance, but I also realize what dangerous people Hillary, Pelosi, Ellison, Schumer are.


Max

[bob]

On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:49:25 +0000, Brian W Lawrence
<brian_w_...@msn.com> wrote:

>On 18/02/2018 13:31, bob wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 12:40:01 +0000, Brian W Lawrence
>
>> brian, sigh. it's common knowledge that the clinton campaign spent an
>> ungodly amount, and trump with all his free tv time, spent nearly
>> zilch til the very end. and he paid the primary from his own pocket.
>
>The Bloomberg article says he spent half a billion. That seems like
>an ungodly amount too - although I'm not sure what ungodly means
>with regards to campaign finance.
>
>> just face it: hillary lost a "sure thing" and that's what's so tough
>> to take. she had the media 90%, she had the $ by a huge margin, she
>> had the demographics, she had the support of her own party brass.
>> trump had none of that. and she still lost. i can see why you can't
>> take it.
>
>Can't take what? Hillary lost, Donald won, some 487 days ago.

yes. which is why i can't believe so many people, you included, still
are suffering so much over the details.

and btw, hillary's campaign spending dwarfed trump's. was nowhere
close.

>That's
>a fact whatever anyone thinks about it. It has no effect on me at all,
>or none that I can think of. My life didn't change for better or worse,
>it wouldn't have changed if Clinton had won either.
>
>I have been reading this NG for years because of an interest in tennis,
>I rarely posted. In 2016 people began posting about the GE, and I have
>an interest in electoral process, so I made a few observations. My
>opinions are hardly relevant, although I hope some may find them useful
>or interesting.
>
>Of course being critical of the president doesn't sit well with his
>supporters, which is perfectly understandable.

there's nothing wrong with criticism of trump, or any other president.

but when it's biased criticism focusing solely on anything perceived
as bad, while ignoring anything perceived as good, it's not
understandable anymore. and you seem to fit that bill unfortunately.

>stay safe bob

you too.

bob

[bob]

On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 19:36:39 +0000, Brian W Lawrence

thank you for admitting you're biased and that's why you read what you
do and believe what you do.

bob

[Brian W Lawrence]

Lol

[Brian W Lawrence]

Well, that's true of most US media. Never read WaPo in print, though an
occasional online article, but they want you register to read more than
that, which I won't do, same with NYT.

You ARE right about convictions though, but it would be unusual I think.

[Carey]

Cover of Time magazine, 24 June 2001: Yanks to the Rescue- The Secret Story of How American Advisors Helped Yeltsin Win:

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,136204,00.html


LA Times, 21 December 2016: The US is no stranger to interfering in foreign elections:

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-us-intervention-foreign-elections-20161213-story.html






"That's different."








heh

[bob]

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:37:32 -0800 (PST), Carey <carey...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

good find carey. and in fact, often we're not "influencing" elections
we're downright rigging them or assassinating dictators.

i swear, this russkie thing has been the best entertainment value for
the buck that i can recall. podesta responds to "phishing" from the
"google team" and hillary's server is exposed, classified emails
expose her paranoia, and just like that she loses an election!

entertainment that tops any streep movie or cher concert i could
fathom!

bob

[Carey]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change

[The Iceberg]

Didn't change your life? You now spend most of your day watching CNN, scouring NYT and researching things to diss President Trump about! Brian rec.sport.tennis post count :

2015 Jul - Dec 21
2016 Jan - Jun 28
2016 Jul - Dec 87
2017 Jan - Jun 154
2017 Jul - Dec 457
2018 Jan - Feb 295

You breaking more records than the Pyongchang Olympics! Lolol

[The Iceberg]

Most of that's just mass media lies, it a shame you affected by that hype and rubbish, the economy is Powering on thanks to Trump, the real world has more respect for somebody that does stuff and stands up to guys like Kim Jo Une or whatever his name is too. Trump rules!

[The Iceberg]

You can't honestly buy the nonsense CNN come out with, can you?! Just watch that Mark Dice vid I posted, it shows how the anchors and presenters pretend to be upset and then hype-up their false upset at an obvious joke Trump makes. It like watching Michael Macintyre's "no juice" joke and crying on tv about how he said mean things about Jews.

[Brian W Lawrence]

kewl

Am I #1 yet?

How many were responses to idiots?

How many did you post? Should I check?

[Brian W Lawrence]

On 20/02/2018 11:03, The Iceberg wrote:

> Most of that's just mass media lies, it a shame you affected by that hype and rubbish, the economy is Powering on thanks to Trump, the real world has more respect for somebody that does stuff and stands up to guys like Kim Jo Une or whatever his name is too. Trump rules!

Keep going you're on a roll today :-)

[The Iceberg]

You only say you dislike Trump cos you were a bit slow in realising what a brilliant president he is, like Whisper and bob had been saying for nearly 3 years.