Support NeoGAF

[DunDunDunpachi]

Just saw this and figured it was worthy of discussion.

11 defendants are being charged with multiple charges including money laundering, fraud, identity theft, and attempts to interfere with our Presidential election. Charges against 2 defendants for conspiracy to infiltrate systems used for the adminstration of elections. They also call for the seizure of property related to these charges.

"There is no allegation in this inditement that any American citizen committed a crime. There is no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result" he said at the end before opening up the floor for questions.

 

[Corderlain]

It's the day before Trump meets Putin. This is just a political move by members of an intelligence agency hostile to its own head of state.

E: Important to note. Those being inducted are officers in the Russian Military.

E2: how can they even indict people when they still have never had access to the servers that were supposedly hacked? Are our top officials really falling for phising? This is just a bad set up all around.

 

[eclipze]

So this is no big deal? DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 isn’t relevant? Interesting.

 

[NickFire]

I'm not sure if this was a message to Trump before he meets Putin, or a message to Putin before he meets Trump (with possibly a request by Trump behind the scenes to delay announcement until today for pressure on Putin). Either way though, seems like a waste of resources to me. My money says all the money leading to this investigation goes down the tubes when Putin refuses to extradite his operatives for prosecution. I guess perhaps there could be value in reiterating there's no actual evidence of collusion with US citizens, but thee media will be sure to make sure those dividends are not paid.

 

[norm9]

The real big is news is a bit in the report-
"On or about August 15, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0 received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for US Congress. The Conspirators responded using the Guccifer 2.0 persona and sent the candidate stolen documents related to the candidate's opponent."

Somebody is in real big trouble.

And yes, this is a big deal.

 

[NickFire]

The real big is news is a bit in the report-
"On or about August 15, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0 received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for US Congress. The Conspirators responded using the Guccifer 2.0 persona and sent the candidate stolen documents related to the candidate's opponent."

Somebody is in real big trouble.

And yes, this is a big deal.

Hmm, that is actually interesting. Politically I would expect that to be a big deal. Not sure if it would be criminally unless there was a quid pro quid, or if there is a statute criminalizing use of wires to receive stolen property. Possible also state charges for attempted or actual receipt of stolen property I suppose.

 

[TheShadowLord]

The real big is news is a bit in the report-
"On or about August 15, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0 received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for US Congress. The Conspirators responded using the Guccifer 2.0 persona and sent the candidate stolen documents related to the candidate's opponent."

Somebody is in real big trouble.

And yes, this is a big deal.

what do I get the feeling tc forgot to mention this?

 

[norm9]

Hmm, that is actually interesting. Politically I would expect that to be a big deal. Not sure if it would be criminally unless there was a quid pro quid, or if there is a statute criminalizing use of wires to receive stolen property. Possible also state charges for attempted or actual receipt of stolen property I suppose.

Handling stolen data (afaik) is illegal. A candidate for Congress soliciting stolen data? I believe that is prison time.

Now we can speculate who in Congress asked the Russians. I've got a couple ideas.

 

[NickFire]

Handling stolen data (afaik) is illegal. A candidate for Congress soliciting stolen data? I believe that is prison time.

Now we can speculate who in Congress asked the Russians. I've got a couple ideas.

I couldn't tell you with any certainty. I know the feds are able to criminalize a lot of stuff by reference to use of wires (interstate commerce falls under fed control). Wouldn't be surprised if that somehow ties in. Part of me says it must be a crime somehow, but the other part of me says then why didn't they indict the candidate who may or may not be a current member of congress?

 

[PkunkFury]

Handling stolen data (afaik) is illegal. A candidate for Congress soliciting stolen data? I believe that is prison time.

Now we can speculate who in Congress asked the Russians. I've got a couple ideas.

definitely something Pelosi would do

that's the Democrats for you

 

[pramod]

Handling stolen data (afaik) is illegal. A candidate for Congress soliciting stolen data? I believe that is prison time.

Now we can speculate who in Congress asked the Russians. I've got a couple ideas.

Bernie Sanders?

 

[NickFire]

Bernie Sanders?

No way. It was August and from someone running for congressional election in a couple months. Not sure if Sanders senate seat was on the line that election or not, but regardless the notion that he of all people would have done that is too tough to believe.

 

[norm9]

I couldn't tell you with any certainty. I know the feds are able to criminalize a lot of stuff by reference to use of wires (interstate commerce falls under fed control). Wouldn't be surprised if that somehow ties in. Part of me says it must be a crime somehow, but the other part of me says then why didn't they indict the candidate who may or may not be a current member of congress?

They're collaring lower level people in hopes of catching bigger fish. Who else knew what the Congressman did? This will certainly make everyone on that weird Russia trip over the 4th of July sweat a bit. This will also make all those people (Rohrbacher, Ryan, etc.) in that leaked audio about being in Russia's pocket sweat as well.

 

[NickFire]

They're collaring lower level people in hopes of catching bigger fish. Who else knew what the Congressman did? This will certainly make everyone on that weird Russia trip over the 4th of July sweat a bit. This will also make all those people (Rohrbacher, Ryan, etc.) in that leaked audio about being in Russia's pocket sweat as well.

Yep, could see that being part of the plan. But, to play devil's advocate, on what planet would they expect these Russian nationals who will never step foot on US soil again to flip? Wouldn't it make more sense to indict the person or someone who they can actually prosecute if they want someone to flip?

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

The real big is news is a bit in the report-
"On or about August 15, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0 received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for US Congress. The Conspirators responded using the Guccifer 2.0 persona and sent the candidate stolen documents related to the candidate's opponent."

Somebody is in real big trouble.

And yes, this is a big deal.

Oh wow! Yeah, that's a very big deal. Curious to hear who the candidate is and what further involvement they may have had. The fact that it was someone from Congress is disturbing...

 

[Chiggs]

I wish the Mueller investigation all the best, and for all we know he and his team might end up being true heroes when all is said and done.

That said, this news is a whole lot of nothing, and it will continue to be a whole lot of nothing until we see direct links to Trump. Anyone who didn't think Russians were involved at some level were clearly delusional or willfully ignorant.

No fan of halting the investigation, but there is some truth to the sentiment that it is making a divided country even more divided (something that Trump also seems to have quite the knack for). I hope we see something major before the elections, be it good or bad. Just something that speaks directly to the question that everyone wants answered: what are the ties between Putin and Trump, and is there any reason to believe Trump acted in a treasonous manner. If so, get him out immediately. If not, oh boy...there are no easy answers there.

 

[NickFire]

Oh wow! Yeah, that's a very big deal. Curious to hear who the candidate is and what further involvement they may have had. The fact that it was someone from Congress is disturbing...

I agree it will be a big deal politically if they are a member of Congress (they could have been the loser), and quite possibly that it was criminal. I'd be lying if I said I found it disturbing though. To be disturbed I would need to not already believe it was par for the course.

 

[gunslikewhoa]

I find it pretty difficult to believe that they are anywhere within a hundred miles of making Trump a target of anything having to do with Russia when Rosenstein briefed him on these indictments earlier in the week.

 

[Death Dealer]

It's the day before Trump meets Putin. This is just a political move by members of an intelligence agency hostile to its own head of state.

At this point, I'll take Assange's word over Rosenstein's.

An indictment means little, show me the evidence.

 

[PkunkFury]

Yep, could see that being part of the plan. But, to play devil's advocate, on what planet would they expect these Russian nationals who will never step foot on US soil again to flip? Wouldn't it make more sense to indict the person or someone who they can actually prosecute if they want someone to flip?

I think it's more likely this info was released as a preemptive counter to the recent push Putin is making to become America's best friend. Trump's about to meet with Putin and Putin is about to get an interview with Fox news. These are attempts by Putin to normalize himself to American voters, in an effort to keep Russia's needs high on American voter's priority lists for the next election. The intelligence community felt the need to remind everyone that, yes, there are reasons we shouldn't trust Putin. Note that these indictments are for members of Russia's intelligence division, thus their activities are connected to Putin directly. As far as I'm aware, this is the first time Putin has been directly implicated

No doubt they're holding back indictments for US persons, for a variety of reasons. Probably in part to avoid pardons, in part to ensure they've built an air tight case, in part to prevent the investigation from being shut down, and in part to try to get more leverage/info out of those they know are involved. This runs deep, and they are only going to get one shot to route out the problem. Plus, the people they are looking into are the people who have the power to shut them down. Other US members are implicated in the statement, including the congressman, a reporter who did something similar with Black Lives Matter documents, and someone close to Trumps campaign (who seems likely to be Roger Stone). What this is pointing to is that a network of people in the US were involved, as the indictment specifically mentions the congressman reached out to the hackers (thus the congressman had to have learned to do so from elsewhere)

This quote is getting bandied about in dishonest ways right now: "There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime. There is no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result". The intelligence community is clever. The key word here is 'this'. The statement is redundant. We already knew all people indicted today were Russians, and we already knew changing the vote count wasn't part of the indictment. This is a summary of today's indictments, not a summary of the investigation

 

[eclipze]

At this point, I'll take Assange's word over Rosenstein's.

An indictment means little, show me the evidence.

You have to present extremely solid evidence of a crime to the Grand Jury for them to give hand down an indictment. So, contrary to your biased opinion, these indictments mean a lot.

 

[gunslikewhoa]

At this point, I'll take Assange's word over Rosenstein's.

An indictment means little, show me the evidence.

And that's the thing. We have a dozen hacking indictments here with zero forensic evidence. The FBI was never given the opportunity to examine the DNC servers. Slippin' Jimmy would probably get this thrown out.

 

[Chiggs]

As far as I'm aware, this is the first time Putin has been directly implicated

What a scoop! Before this announcement, here I was thinking that Russia's meddling in the 2016 U.S. Election was carried out by a rogue group of villains that had nothing to do with Putin. Good thing that was cleared up today!

In all seriousness, I read your post thoroughly, and if your assessment of what our intelligence agencies are trying to do is correct, then it's no wonder that Putin is playing this country for a bunch of fools. We're playing checkers; he's playing chess.

 

[PkunkFury]

What a scoop! Before this announcement, here I was thinking that Russia's meddling in the 2016 U.S. Election was carried out by a rogue group of villains that had nothing to do with Putin. Good thing that was cleared up today!

In all seriousness, I read your post thoroughly, and if your assessment of what our intelligence agencies are trying to do is correct, then it's no wonder that Putin is playing this country for a bunch of fools. We're playing checkers; he's playing chess.

Oh yeah, Putin's certainly running circles around the US and winning at every turn. Please don't misunderstand what I posted. I am in no way saying we just "got" Putin. We are playing catchup, and this is the FBI's best attempt to stop the bleeding. Putin is still getting that interview, he's still meeting with Trump, and he's still got half of America cheering him on. Don't forget, America is at a distinct disadvantage fighting this. Members of their own government do not want this investigation to succeed. Putin's entire game is to make democracy look week and he is specifically using democracy to highlight the system's own flaws

The key with the indictment is that for the longest time people have been saying there's "no proof" Russia was involved at the higher levels. This indictment is meant to curb that narrative, though it likely still doesn't prove enough to the people who've bought that narrative

 

[norm9]

The key with the indictment is that for the longest time people have been saying there's "no proof" Russia was involved at the higher levels. This indictment is meant to curb that narrative, though it likely still doesn't prove anything to the people who've orchestrated that narrative

This nor anything else will ever prove to some people taht something shady is going on. Indictments on campaign officials, now indictments on russian hackers, implying dirty Congressman seeking stolen data, etc. The people getting implicated is getting bigger as they go further up the chain.

I hope that people who are steadfast in that this is a nothing burger will swallow that pride and eat that burger when it's toppling over with condiments.

 

[hammysaurusrex]

The thread from back in March declaring the whole thing as finished and wrapping up soon has aged beautifully in such a short amount of time.

 

[PkunkFury]

I should add that another purpose of announcing these indictments now is likely to see if the sitting president will request the extradition of those who committed crimes against his government during his upcoming meeting with their leader

My money's on "he wont"

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

I should add that another purpose of announcing these indictments now is likely to see if the sitting president will request the extradition of those who committed crimes against his government during his upcoming meeting with their leader

My money's on "he wont"

Actually...

We'll have to wait and see if he does it, of course.

 

[Chiggs]

I hope that people who are steadfast in that this is a nothing burger will swallow that pride and eat that burger when it's toppling over with condiments.

Just my opinion, but today's "revelation" is a nothing burger. And I'm quite convinced of Russian meddling (because I have a functional brain). Look, I don't expect Mueller to act like a stooge and take to Twitter every second he's discovered something, but with the amount of accusations that have been flung at Trump from his opponents about high treason, there's got to be a put up or shut up day...and for the sake of this country, let us hope that day comes within the next few months, no matter the outcome.

As far as Trump's base goes, many of them will absolutely flip if/when that day comes. But, boy oh boy, the facts had better match the rhetoric, which isn't exactly fair to Mueller and team; they're not the people that have been declaring Trump the worst thing since Adolf Hitler, and The End of America as we know it. Sorry, but stuff on the level of Paul Manafort's financial crimes, while reprehensible, will simply not cut it.

And please don't misconstrue this next part as press-hating, but I feel this is where the media have failed tremendously: they've cried wolf over every goddamn thing Trump has done, making it so that many Americans are so fatigued by Trump news and creating the impression they are out to "get him." That allows Trump to do what he does best--play the con and act like the victim...the underdog fighting for America, which works to a breathtaking degree.

I swear to God, this country had better learn its lessons from this madness. If we don't, we're the biggest bunch of morons the world has yet seen.

 

[PkunkFury]

Actually...

We'll have to wait and see if he does it, of course.

nice, then the FBI's tactics are working

We'll see if Trump puts any actual investment in this topic during the summit, or if he just does what's required to get it out of the way as he's done in the past. And I seriously doubt Trump will request extradition (it's not mentioned in this article), but I'd be happy to be proven wrong

 

[Death Dealer]

You have to present extremely solid evidence of a crime to the Grand Jury for them to give hand down an indictment.

Wrong.

There’s a facetious saying in legal circles about the ease with which prosecutors can secure indictments in grand jury cases: You can get a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/indict...on-the-menu-for-judges-prosecutors-1527863063

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

nice, then the FBI's tactics are working

We'll see if Trump puts any actual investment in this topic during the summit, or if he just does what's required to get it out of the way as he's done in the past. And I seriously doubt Trump will request extradition (it's not mentioned in this article), but I'd be happy to be proven wrong

I also doubt that he will publicly request extradition but that's hardly a mark against him. Those sort of things are typically negotiated behind closed doors, especially if Russia happens to want something in exchange.

 

[PkunkFury]

I also doubt that he will publicly request extradition but that's hardly a mark against him. Those sort of things are typically negotiated behind closed doors, especially if Russia happens to want something in exchange.

agreed, I'm assuming this would come up between them in private, although if Trump did it publicly he stands to look very good in the face of those who distrust him over this matter. Either way, we will hear if the extradition is carried out or denied

and I'm perfectly willing to believe Trump remains off the radar in this investigation. However, it's inarguable that Trump his shown no interest in dealing with this matter in the past. The FBI may be doing this to force Trump to finally act; their goal is to protect the country, and Trump has so far presented himself as an obstacle rather than a conduit towards doing so. If they get Trump to clamp down on Russia, mission accomplished

 

[NickFire]

You have to present extremely solid evidence of a crime to the Grand Jury for them to give hand down an indictment. So, contrary to your biased opinion, these indictments mean a lot.

You are seriously misinformed if you believe that. Just start googling "indict a" and "indict a ham sandwich" will be recommended. Its an old joke about how easy it is to indict someone. Bear in mind indictments are secret, based on selective presentation of documents and testimony, and the accused is not even present (never mind given an opportunity to cross examine). Indicting someone is relatively easy. Its proving the crime after the indictment that is incredibly difficult at times.

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

Wrong.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/indict...on-the-menu-for-judges-prosecutors-1527863063

While looking up the origin of the phrase:

The Judge Who Coined “Indict a Ham Sandwich” Was Himself Indicted

http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_...dict_a_ham_sandwich_was_himself_indicted.html




Also DunDunDunpachi

This:

There is no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result"

Is not the same as what's in your title:

no evidence that actual election results were affected

People did the same thing when the first round of indictments came in.

 

[n0razi]

I swear to God, this country had better learn its lessons from this madness. If we don't, we're the biggest bunch of morons the world has yet seen.

I would like to wager on "we're the biggest bunch of morons the world has yet seen"

 

[Composer]

Dundundunpachi's spin: Nothing to see here!
Reality: Alot to see here.

 

[rokkerkory]

Lots of witches found so far.

 

[eclipze]

You are seriously misinformed if you believe that. Just start googling "indict a" and "indict a ham sandwich" will be recommended. Its an old joke about how easy it is to indict someone. Bear in mind indictments are secret, based on selective presentation of documents and testimony, and the accused is not even present (never mind given an opportunity to cross examine). Indicting someone is relatively easy. Its proving the crime after the indictment that is incredibly difficult at times.

You are seriously misinformed if you think that Federal indictments are just thrown around like ham sandwiches when the conviction rate as recent as 2015 was 99.8%. If you are dumb enough to do something to get indicted by a Federal Grand Jury, you are going to be convicted or plea, and you are going to Federal pound you in the ass Prison.

 

[Forthefuture]

Lots of witches found so far.

No witch, no witch. You are the witch.

Anyway this investigation seem to be still going. Lets see where it leads. Hopefully no one "fights back" against the bi-partisan investigators doing their jobs.

 

[Corrik]

A candidate for Congress seems to imply to me it was someone that lost their race.

 

[NickFire]

You are seriously misinformed if you think that Federal indictments are just thrown around like ham sandwiches when the conviction rate as recent as 2015 was 99.8%. If you are dumb enough to do something to get indicted by a Federal Grand Jury, you are going to be convicted or plea, and you are going to Federal pound you in the ass Prison.

First of all, let's see some receipts on this 99.8% conviction rate. The feds are high, but I've never heard they are at 99% high.

Second, you are moving the goal posts. I did not say that they are thrown around like ham sandwiches. What I said was that it is easy to actually indict someone via a grand jury, and gave you reasons why, all of which are 100% accurate. You are 100% correct that the feds are very selective on who they indict and what they indict for, and that they have a very good track record of convictions. But that is because of strategic decision to ensure their conviction rate stays high, and, of course, because they take very seriously their proprietorial obligation to not bring charges that they don't feel they can prove at trial. But none of that changes the basic premise that indicting someone via grand jury is not all that difficult, hence the joke about you can indict ham sandwiches if you want to.

And um, you are also wrong if you think everyone indicted is going to jail. Not everyone is convicted, and not every convict goes to jail. In this particular case, I highly suggest you do not place any wagers on any of those indicted today going to jail. Almost a certainty that not a single one will spend a single minute in a US prison, unless they are still on US soil or dumb enough to be on the soil of a country with an extradition treaty.

Edit: Prosecutorial obligations, not proprietorial

 

[rokkerkory]

No witch, no witch. You are the witch.

Anyway this investigation seem to be still going. Lets see where it leads. Hopefully no one "fights back" against the bi-partisan investigators doing their jobs.

2x indictments against russians means no witches. Sure... u support russians?

 

[i_am_ben]

Lol what an embarrassing takeaway from the OP.

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

First of all, let's see some receipts on this 99.8% conviction rate. The feds are high, but I've never heard they are at 99% high.

Second, you are moving the goal posts. I did not say that they are thrown around like ham sandwiches. What I said was that it is easy to actually indict someone via a grand jury, and gave you reasons why, all of which are 100% accurate. You are 100% correct that the feds are very selective on who they indict and what they indict for, and that they have a very good track record of convictions. But that is because of strategic decision to ensure their conviction rate stays high, and, of course, because they take very seriously their proprietorial obligation to not bring charges that they don't feel they can prove at trial. But none of that changes the basic premise that indicting someone via grand jury is not all that difficult, hence the joke about you can indict ham sandwiches if you want to.

And um, you are also wrong if you think everyone indicted is going to jail. Not everyone is convicted, and not every convict goes to jail. In this particular case, I highly suggest you do not place any wagers on any of those indicted today going to jail. Almost a certainty that not a single one will spend a single minute in a US prison, unless they are still on US soil or dumb enough to be on the soil of a country with an extradition treaty.

Edit: Prosecutorial obligations, not proprietorial

http://justicedenied.org/wordpress/archives/3190

To be fair, who wouldn't indict a ham sandwich?

 

[eclipze]

First of all, let's see some receipts on this 99.8% conviction rate. The feds are high, but I've never heard they are at 99% high.

Second, you are moving the goal posts. I did not say that they are thrown around like ham sandwiches. What I said was that it is easy to actually indict someone via a grand jury, and gave you reasons why, all of which are 100% accurate. You are 100% correct that the feds are very selective on who they indict and what they indict for, and that they have a very good track record of convictions. But that is because of strategic decision to ensure their conviction rate stays high, and, of course, because they take very seriously their proprietorial obligation to not bring charges that they don't feel they can prove at trial. But none of that changes the basic premise that indicting someone via grand jury is not all that difficult, hence the joke about you can indict ham sandwiches if you want to.

And um, you are also wrong if you think everyone indicted is going to jail. Not everyone is convicted, and not every convict goes to jail. In this particular case, I highly suggest you do not place any wagers on any of those indicted today going to jail. Almost a certainty that not a single one will spend a single minute in a US prison, unless they are still on US soil or dumb enough to be on the soil of a country with an extradition treaty.

Edit: Prosecutorial obligations, not proprietorial

https://www.justice.gov/usao/resources/annual-statistical-reports

 

[ProfessorLobo]

Lol what an embarrassing takeaway from the OP.

Rosenstein press conference - 11 charges
- No Trump indiction
- No Peepee tape provided with press conference
- No evidence provided that the Holocaust actually happened

 

[i_am_ben]

Rosenstein press conference - 11 charges
- No Trump indiction
- No Peepee tape provided with press conference
- No evidence provided that the Holocaust actually happened

No proof of Pizzagate either.

And where is Seth Rich?

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Dundundunpachi's spin: Nothing to see here!
Reality: Alot to see here.

Lol what an embarrassing takeaway from the OP.

Nothing is stopping either of you from adding to the conversation, unless your intellect is constrained. Sorry if that's the case.

I'm very happy no Americans were charged and that our election wasn't tampered with. Aren't you?

I wonder if people would've been happier with a result that aligned with their political biases...

 

[Texas Pride]

The real big is news is a bit in the report-
"On or about August 15, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0 received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for US Congress. The Conspirators responded using the Guccifer 2.0 persona and sent the candidate stolen documents related to the candidate's opponent."

Somebody is in real big trouble.

And yes, this is a big deal.

That is a huge deal imo. Wonder who it was and if that will eventually be brought to light? Right or Left they need to be made an example of publicly.