Manafort Accused of Sharing Trump Polling Data With Russian Associate

[iguanaman]

So the Trump campaign secretly shared private, election related data with the Russians, as the Russians were engaged in a massive, illegal, coordinated attempt to sway the election in favor of Donald Trump.

They also lied about it (the campaign has repeatedly denied any/all such contacts in public).
Manafort was willing to commit a felony in trying to cover this up.

That could easy be participating in a conspiracy against the united states, complete with intent in the form of secrecy, obfuscation, culminating in making false statements in an attempt to cover it up. They could have been sharing all public data, it's irrelevant. The data shared is not the crime, although there may be national security concerns here, and/or civil issues with what they shared. But materially coordinating to commit the crime of Russia interfering with our election, is the potential crime. The data itself doesn't have to be illegal.

The data was also stolen.

https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-cambridge-analytica-data-mining-and-trump-what-you-need-to-know/

 

[iguanaman]

Is that what you believe, that the voting machines were hacked and the voting totals were altered?

I'm curious because I know a very good freind pf mine believes that and until he told me that I wasnt aware that anyone thought that happened.

If that is a real concern I am curious why there wasnt a larger outcry from people demanding the states cooperate with the election commission Trumps administration formed after the elections.

I have been under the impression that the allegation has been that Russia tricked people into voting for trump by using stolen data from the DNC and spreading propaganda on the internet.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

The Russian hacked voters minds using data stolen from Facebook by Cambridge Analytica. The Russian GRU pulled out all the stops for Trump.

The drama began when the $500 billion company admitted earlier in March that data analysis firm Cambridge Analytica, which has close ties to President Trump’s election campaign and right-leaning megadonors, used data that had been collected from millions of users without their consent. Facebook has since suspended Cambridge Analytica’s access to its platform.

What to Know About Facebook'''s Cambridge Analytica Problem | Time

 

[Mach]

I'm asking what do you think was the outcome of the sharing? i.e. what was the point

Since your question is irrelevant to the of the facts in the OP, I too assume you're simply trying to troll on this.
Maybe you aren't...but then, why would you be asking that?

If someone coordinates in a plan to murder someone, even if they don't through with it, it's a crime. Do you not understand this, or are you trolling? The outcome, is irrelevant to whether or not it's illegal in such instances.
Similarly, the outcome of the sharing is irrelevant. The conspiracy has already been established in court documents, and it has *nothing* to do with the outcome, simply the act.

It would be the same if you engaged in rampant ballot stuffing but your opponent still won the election. You'd be here trying to say that because you didn't change the outcome, it's not a big deal. And we'd be telling you that you'll look good in orange.

Trump's campaign was secretly coordinating with Russians, giving them material, private, polling data regarding the election, as Russia was actively breaking the law in interfering in the 2016 election in favor of Trump's campaign.
How can anyone argue they would not in fact be part of that conspiracy...a conspiracy that has already been established as a crime in court documents?

Maybe no one will be charged with it, that's entirely possible. But there is certainly no good reason to believe that's not possible here, and that's not possible in other cases (Stone, for example).

 

[year2late]

So the Trump campaign secretly shared private, election related data with the Russians, as the Russians were engaged in a massive, illegal, coordinated attempt to sway the election in favor of Donald Trump.

They also lied about it (the campaign has repeatedly denied any/all such contacts in public).
Manafort was willing to commit a felony in trying to cover this up.

That could easy be participating in a conspiracy against the united states, complete with intent in the form of secrecy, obfuscation, culminating in making false statements in an attempt to cover it up. They could have been sharing all public data, it's irrelevant. The data shared is not the crime, although there may be national security concerns here, and/or civil issues with what they shared. But materially coordinating to commit the crime of Russia interfering with our election, is the potential crime. The data itself doesn't have to be illegal.

All this is certainly very possible. It will be interesting to see how Mueller and team connect the dots.

Perhaps Trump will come off clean...but at the very least he has intentionally surrounded himself with people of questionable character. who now find themselves in ongoing legal battles.

 

[Mach]

The data was also stolen.
https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-cambridge-analytica-data-mining-and-trump-what-you-need-to-know/

Cherry on top if true!

 

[OpportunityCost]

That's another attempt to move the goal post: "Convince me that we share the same definition of collusion. Oh, and I won't share my own definition because I may need to move the goal posts again next week."

Again, anybody following trump supporters down these bottomless rabbit holes is engaging in masochism.

When the goal posts are undefined as somewhere between Washington DC and New Jersey, seeking to have them defined isn't asking them to be moved, its asking that they stop moving.

 

[iguanaman]

Cherry on top if true!

If there is one thing we should have learned by now about this conspiracy, it is that if it quacks like a duck it is always a duck.

Cambridge Analytica, a political data firm hired by President Trump’s 2016 election campaign, gained access to private information on more than 50 million Facebook users. The firm offered tools that could identify the personalities of American voters and influence their behavior.

Cambridge has been largely funded by Robert Mercer, the wealthy Republican donor, and Stephen K. Bannon, a former adviser to the president who became an early board member and gave the firm its name. It has pitched its services to potential clients ranging from Mastercard and the New York Yankees to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/facebook-cambridge-analytica-explained.html

 

[Mach]

All this is certainly very possible. It will be interesting to see how Mueller and team connect the dots. Perhaps Trump will come off clean...but at the very least he has intentionally surrounded himself with people of questionable character. who now find themselves in ongoing legal battles.

True, but I wouldn't say Trump can come off clean. When a mob boss skates because their underlings take the fall and all end up in jail, I don't consider the mob boss to be *clean*

In thinking about it, there are two broad conspiracies established by the Special Counsel that I recall. Looking them up (there could be more I missed but I think these are the relevant ones:

The internet research indictment of Russians had this as its primary conspiracy:
Conspiracy to Defraud the United States - defendants *along with others*, knowingly and intentionally conspired to defraud the United States by impairing, obstruction, and defeating the lawful functions of the FEC, the DOJ, and State Department in administering federal requirements for disclosure of foreign involvement in certain domestic activities.

The hacking indictment of Russians had this in contrast:
Conspiracy to Commit an Offense against the United States
Object: To hack into the computers of U.S. persons and entities involved in the 2016 U.S. election, steal documents, and stage the release of the stolen documents to interfere with the 2106 presidential election.

So far it looks like Trump's former campaign chairman, Manafort, is part of the first conspiracy.
And possibly Trump's former campaign advisor and long time friend and political dirty-trickster, Roger Stone( and maybe Corsi), are part of the second conspiracy.

Any American knowingly helping them in either of those endeavors, in secret, and trying to cover it up (which would show intent/knowledge of it being wrong) appears to me to be part of that conspiracy. That's Trump's campaign. Good enough for me I suppose

 

[year2late]

True, but I wouldn't say Trump can come off clean. When a mob boss skates because their underlings take the fall and all end up in jail, I don't consider the mob boss to be *clean*

In thinking about it, there are two broad conspiracies established by the Special Counsel that I recall. Looking them up (there could be more I missed but I think these are the relevant ones:

The internet research indictment of Russians had this as its primary conspiracy:
Conspiracy to Defraud the United States - defendants *along with others*, knowingly and intentionally conspired to defraud the United States by impairing, obstruction, and defeating the lawful functions of the FEC, the DOJ, and State Department in administering federal requirements for disclosure of foreign involvement in certain domestic activities.

The hacking indictment of Russians had this in contrast:
Conspiracy to Commit an Offense against the United States
Object: To hack into the computers of U.S. persons and entities involved in the 2016 U.S. election, steal documents, and stage the release of the stolen documents to interfere with the 2106 presidential election.

So far it looks like Trump's former campaign chairman, Manafort, is part of the first conspiracy.
And possibly Trump's former campaign advisor and long time friend and political dirty-trickster, Roger Stone( and maybe Corsi), are part of the second conspiracy.

Any American knowingly helping them in either of those endeavors, in secret, and trying to cover it up (which would show intent/knowledge of it being wrong) appears to me to be part of that conspiracy.

I have no clue how the dots will connect...but sure as heck looks bad for POTUS.

But the ongoing circle jerk of plausible deniability is strong with this administration.

 

[Cardinal]

When the goal posts are undefined as somewhere between Washington DC and New Jersey, seeking to have them defined isn't asking them to be moved, its asking that they stop moving.

Trump supporters last week: "Prove that the goal post is between Washington DC and New Jersey."

Trump supporters today: "Prove that the goal post is between New York and Vermont."

 

[OpportunityCost]

Trump supporters last week: "Prove that the goal post is between Washington DC and New Jersey."

Trump supporters today: "Prove that the goal post is between New York and Vermont."

As the goal posts remain undefined, your reasoning by analogy is flawed. Define the goal posts first, not for each argument or new piece of information.

 

[Cardinal]

As the goal posts remain undefined, your reasoning by analogy is flawed. Define the goal posts first, not for each argument or new piece of information.

Goal post last week "Prove that collusion happened."

Goal post today: "Prove that the collusion is significant."

I addressed the original demand, and that's sufficient. I'll let other people follow you down your rabbit hole.

 

[OpportunityCost]

Goal post last week "Prove that collusion happened."

Goal post today: "Prove that the collusion is significant."

I addressed the original demand, and that's sufficient. I'll let other people follow you down your rabbit hole.

Since it remains alleged, I don't know you have proven anything, nor do you.

 

[trouble13]

The Russian hacked voters minds using data stolen from Facebook by Cambridge Analytica. The Russian GRU pulled out all the stops for Trump.

That has nothing to do with the voting machines

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[iguanaman]

That has nothing to do with the voting machines

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

No, it is far more devious than that and very illegal.

 

[Mach]

That has nothing to do with the voting machines
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

And voting machines have nothing to do with the OP/discssion.

Cardinal's mention of voting machines was an intentionally absurd example of what some really ****ing stupid Trump supporter might try to move the goal posts to, in avoiding the OP implications.
Did you do just that?

 

[trouble13]

And voting machines have nothing to do with the OP/discssion.

Cardinal's mention of voting machines was an intentionally absurd example of what some really ****ing stupid Trump supporter might try to move the goal posts to, in avoiding the OP implications.
Did you do just that?

No I did not. I asked him a direct question in relationship to his post and offered a brief explination of why I was asking. No big mystery.

Is that what you believe, that the voting machines were hacked and the voting totals were altered?

I'm curious because I know a very good freind of mine believes that and until he told me that I wasnt aware that anyone thought that happened.

If that is a real concern I am curious why there wasnt a larger outcry from people demanding the states cooperate with the election commission Trumps administration formed after the elections.

I have been under the impression that the allegation has been that Russia tricked people into voting for trump by using stolen data from the DNC and spreading propaganda on the internet.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[trouble13]

No, it is far more devious than that and very illegal.

Perhaps and I have no issue with it being investigated. I'm not familiar enough with the privacy laws or election laws to determine that.

I do question if Trump is guilty of the alleged crime I'm having a hard time seeing how Clinton isnt guilty of the same thing. As I said I'm not a legal expert and I am remaining open minded about this thing but I really dont see a distinction that Clinton isnt just as dirty and possibly more if the gov was breaking the rules in her favor.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[trouble13]

No, it is far more devious than that and very illegal.

One more thing how do you figure it's more devious than if vote totals were changed inside the machines to alter the outcome of the election? I would say if that is proved, that's really bad.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Mach]

No I did not. I asked him a direct question in relationship to his post and offered a brief explination of why I was asking. No big mystery.

So you did take his absurd example, and act as though you thought he might be serious. And strangely enough, he was correct, because here you are still writing about voting machines hacking.

 

[iguanaman]

One more thing how do you figure it's more devious than if vote totals were changed inside the machines to alter the outcome of the election? I would say if that is proved, that's really bad.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Because hacking people's minds changes vote totals without any evidence. But even the attempt at this by Russians is just as illegal as hacking voting machines and the Trump campaign is also just as guilty for helping them do it. Mueller does not need to prove that they changed a single vote only that they used illegal means to try to influence the election.

 

[iguanaman]

Perhaps and I have no issue with it being investigated. I'm not familiar enough with the privacy laws or election laws to determine that.

I do question if Trump is guilty of the alleged crime I'm having a hard time seeing how Clinton isnt guilty of the same thing. As I said I'm not a legal expert and I am remaining open minded about this thing but I really dont see a distinction that Clinton isnt just as dirty and possibly more if the gov was breaking the rules in her favor.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Huh? The crime is illegally using a foreign Govts. help to influence an election. What foreign Govt. was helping Hillary?

 

[trouble13]

So you did take his absurd example, and act as though you thought he might be serious. And strangely enough, he was correct, because here you are still writing about voting machines hacking.

Yes I asked him if he thought that happened because I know a person who does think exactly that happened. What's the problem?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[trouble13]

Because hacking people's minds changes vote totals without any evidence. But even the attempt at this by Russians is just as illegal as hacking voting machines and the Trump campaign is also just as guilty for helping them do it. Mueller does not need to prove that they changed a single vote only that they used illegal means to try to influence the election.

What your saying sounds like something from a sci-fy novel.maybe the Russians hacked manafort's mind and he was an unwitting accomplice?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[trouble13]

Huh? The crime is illegally using a foreign Govts. help to influence an election. What foreign Govt. was helping Hillary?

Did she not hire a British spy to gather opposition research on Trump from the Russian gov? Surely you must want that to be prosecuted.

We also have indications that our own gov may of abused their authority in order to gain information against trump. You must want that investigated and prosecuted too, No?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk