What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[LaCroix]

LaCroix, do you realize how much of an ass you're making of yourself?

Alfa/Alpha Group is a translation, with both spellings commonly used (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Group).  The report isn't made inauthentic because it doesn't refer to the unit exclusively as:



Oh, and regarding the use of the Bharvika, the only thing claiming that it's "open" is its website, and it's not like it's utilized by the president of a nation known to manipulate its own image to exaggerate/create a fictitious upper class lifestyle for public consumption.

So, basically, it's the Russian Mar-a-Lago.  Technically open, but don't think you're getting in without the President's approval.

DSB, insulting posters for allegedly being wrong can be semi-acceptable depending on the circumstance, but only when you're actually right

you linked to russia's counter-terrorism unit. the alfa group in the docs is the investment group led by fridman. see page 25. while russia's counter-terrorism unit can be either "alfa" or "alpha," the investment group is only "alfa."

re: bharvika, wikipedia also suggests it's open, so bharvika's website is not the "only thing claiming that it's 'open.'" if it wasn't so late, I'd consider looking deeper in this one, but you'll have to be left with wikipedia

[DontSayBanana]

So apparently 4Chan is claiming someone there made up the story...

What a mess.

Except not.  What's been happening is the 4chan folk keep editing in additional things that weren't part of the genuine memo and trying to convince people they fabricated the whole thing.

Rule #1: 4chan lies.

[DontSayBanana]

DSB, insulting posters for allegedly being wrong can be semi-acceptable depending on the circumstance, but only when you're actually right

you linked to russia's counter-terrorism unit. the alfa group in the docs is the investment group led by fridman. see page 25. while russia's counter-terrorism unit can be either "alfa" or "alpha," the investment group is only "alfa."

re: bharvika, wikipedia also suggests it's open, so bharvika's website is not the "only thing claiming that it's 'open.'" if it wasn't so late, I'd consider looking deeper in this one, but you'll have to be left with wikipedia

Fair point on Spetsgruppe A.  Like you said, it's late- clear swing and a miss, there.  Though with the name similarity, given somebody was working on Russian intel, one might wonder if somebody writing the report might be forgiven for a typo in getting the names mixed up.

And like I said, Bharvika looks like it's "open," but only open the same way Mar-a-Lago is.  It can be listed as "open" to a highly restricted clientele.  You're making what sounds to me like a distinction without a difference.  Also, considering neither of us has tried to reserve some time at either resort, neither of us is in any more expert a position than the memo's author.

[Syt]

Stop giving LaCroix shit, clearly he's just following Kellyanne Conway's request to look at what's in Trump's heart, not what comes out of his mouth.

Politico: Conway: Judge Trump by what's in his heart, not what comes out of his mouth

[Razgovory]

LaCroix, do you realize how much of an ass you're making of yourself?

Alfa/Alpha Group is a translation, with both spellings commonly used (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Group).  The report isn't made inauthentic because it doesn't refer to the unit exclusively as:



Oh, and regarding the use of the Bharvika, the only thing claiming that it's "open" is its website, and it's not like it's utilized by the president of a nation known to manipulate its own image to exaggerate/create a fictitious upper class lifestyle for public consumption.

So, basically, it's the Russian Mar-a-Lago.  Technically open, but don't think you're getting in without the President's approval.

I think they are referring to the bank.  Also, I don't think it's CIA.  It's British intelligence.

[Razgovory]

The difference between you and grumbler is that

Oooh, what's the difference between Grumbler and Me?

[LaCroix]

apparently RFK is not chairing a presidential commission 

[grumbler]

apparently RFK is not chairing a presidential commission 

yeah, not even 48 years of death could prepare him to work with trump! 

[The Minsky Moment]

Stop giving LaCroix shit, clearly he's just following Kellyanne Conway's request to look at what's in Trump's heart, not what comes out of his mouth.

Politico: Conway: Judge Trump by what's in his heart, not what comes out of his mouth

I'm all for that.  After the recent news I have no desire at all to look at what might be in Trump's mouth.

[viper37]

 

[derspiess]

So this was all a hoax??  Man, I don't know what to believe anymore.

[The Brain]

I choose to believe.

[garbon]

So this was all a hoax??  Man, I don't know what to believe anymore.

NYT has your back.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/trump-intelligence-report-explainer.html?_r=0

What We Know and Don't Know About the Trump-Russia Dossier

What We Know

• Last year, a Washington political research firm, paid by Mr. Trump's Republican rivals, hired a retired British intelligence officer to investigate the candidate's ties to Russia.

• After it became clear that Mr. Trump would be the Republican nominee, Democratic clients began to pay the firm for this same "opposition research," standard practice in politics.

• The former British spy, who had long experience in Russia and a network of connections there, compiled dozens of reports detailing what he heard from his contacts. The memos he wrote, mostly one to three pages long, are dated from June to December.

• The memos contain unsubstantiated claims that Russian officials tried to obtain influence over Mr. Trump by preparing to blackmail him with sex tapes and bribe him with business deals. They also claim that the Trump campaign met with Russian operatives to discuss the Russians' hacking and their leaking of emails and documents from the Democratic National Committee and from Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John D. Podesta.

The Washington firm and the former British spy, not identified here because of a confidential source agreement with The New York Times, gave the memos first to their clients but later to the F.B.I. and multiple journalists at The Times and elsewhere. The memos, totaling about 35 pages, also reached a number of members of Congress.

• Last week, when the F.B.I., C.I.A. and National Security Agency gave a classified report on the Russian hacking and leaking and efforts to influence the presidential election to Mr. Obama, Mr. Trump and congressional leaders, they attached a two-page summary of the unverified allegations in the memos.

What We Don't Know

• Whether any of the claims in the memos are true. American intelligence agencies have not confirmed them, and Mr. Trump has said they are a complete fabrication. In addition, one specific allegation — that Mr. Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, met with a Russian official in Prague in August or September — has been denied by both Mr. Cohen, who says he has never been to Prague, and the Russian, Oleg Solodukhin.

• Who concocted the information in the memos, if it is entirely false or partially so, and with what purpose. Did the British intelligence officer accurately report what he heard? Who gave him the information that, if false, amounts to a very sophisticated fabrication?

• What exactly prompted American intelligence officials to pass on a summary of the unvetted claims to Mr. Obama, Mr. Trump and Congress? Officials have said they felt the president-elect should be aware of the memos, which had circulated widely in Washington. But why put the summary in a report going to multiple people in Congress and the executive branch, virtually assuring it would be leaked?

• What will happen now. The F.B.I. has been investigating the claims in the memos, and Democrats are demanding a thorough inquiry into the reports that Trump representatives met with Russian officials during the campaign. But as of Jan. 20, Mr. Trump will be in charge of the bureau and the other intelligence agencies, and he may not approve such an investigation.

[garbon]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2017/jan/11/trump-dossier-russia-has-compromising-material-on-president-elect-live-updates

Rubio asks: Is Vladimir Putin a war criminal?

"I would not use that term," Tillerson says.

Rubio says, let me read you a description of Russian atrocities in Syria. He does and then moves on to the bombing of Chechens in Grozny.

Tillerson is staring at Rubio and blinking. Rubio is hammering him a bit, with descriptions of Putin's war crimes, which is an interesting fix for the secretary of state nominee to find himself in, pressed in the direction of defending Putin.

Rubio: "But he's not a war criminal?"

Tillerson: "Those are very very serious charges to make, and I would want to have much more information before reaching a conclusion."

Tillerson says he'd want "to be fully informed about what's happening."

Rubio: "It should not be hard to say that Vladimir Putin's military has committed war crimes in Aleppo. I find it discouraging your inability to cite that."

Rubio asks Tillerson whether he accepts that Putin has had dissidents shot, poisoned and killed.

Tillerson said "it's important in dealing with information" and "I am not willing to make conclusions with what is publicly available."

Rubio: "None of this is classified Mr Tillerson. These people are dead."

[HisMajestyBOB]

Damn, Rubio.