Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politicus USA)   Criminal charges? In my Trump administration? It's more likely than you think   ( politicususa.com) divider line
    More: Followup, United States, Trump campaign, criminal charges, Russia, Facebook ads, Facebook, Stanford University, Criminal law  
•       •       •

3330 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Sep 2017 at 1:44 AM (13 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



44 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-09-06 11:48:48 PM  
Weird. On first blush, this seems like small potatoes. But, they say it took an accountant to bring down Al Capone, so maybe it's not such a little deal after all.
 
2017-09-06 11:56:27 PM  
Lol of course Facebook is gonna take down Trump.

They're jealous of all the attention Twitter is getting.
 
2017-09-06 11:59:30 PM  
I would be more surprised if there weren't criminal charges.
 
2017-09-07 01:29:22 AM  
F*ck Donald Trump.
 
2017-09-07 01:47:28 AM  
What is a Facebook? Is that something you put your facepalm on when you're being sworn under oath? weird
 
2017-09-07 01:48:44 AM  
At this point, the appropriate response is "I'll believe it when I see it".
 
2017-09-07 01:50:23 AM  
Eh, throw it on the pile with all the other stuff that should have already lead to criminal charges.
 
2017-09-07 01:52:01 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: At this point, the appropriate response is "I'll believe it when I see it".

 
2017-09-07 02:07:04 AM  
Every day I learn a new thing about President Trump that makes me feel sick. Months of this has not done my liver any favors.
 
2017-09-07 02:07:12 AM  
Like
 
2017-09-07 02:19:37 AM  
FTFA: In other words, if anybody connected to the Trump campaign was aware of what was happening with Russia and, in this case, a massive social media platform, they would face criminal charges.

I mean......that's why there are multiple investigations happening right now. That's what an investigation is.
 
2017-09-07 02:45:11 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: At this point, the appropriate response is "I'll believe it when I see it".


thoughtcatalog.files.wordpress.comView Full Size
 
2017-09-07 02:50:36 AM  
Trump is playing a long game like you wouldn't believe. I don't want to sound like Scott Adams, but I just got stoned and ate some cat shiat out of the litter box thinking it was popcorn so when in Rome.
 Here's what I think is going on.

1 Trump holds close all the evidence that would exonerate him from the Russia thing.
2 Trump conspires with Bannon, Manafort, his kids, the Russians to slowly release all the documents that make him look guilty.
3 Trump gets the press to bite hard on the story.
4 Oct 20 2020 Trump document dumps all the exonerating information on the press
5 Trump is reelected, press is destroyed because they've been reporting on a false story for 4 years.
 
2017-09-07 02:56:59 AM  

Comsamvimes: Eh, throw it on the pile with all the other stuff that should have already lead to criminal charges.


He swore to protect and defend the constitution and is violating the emoluments clause. his refusal to divest should have already lead to his impeachment.
 
2017-09-07 03:01:37 AM  

J.R. 'Bob' Chinaski: Trump is playing a long game like you wouldn't believe. I don't want to sound like Scott Adams, but I just got stoned and ate some cat shiat out of the litter box thinking it was popcorn so when in Rome.
 Here's what I think is going on.

1 Trump holds close all the evidence that would exonerate him from the Russia thing.
2 Trump conspires with Bannon, Manafort, his kids, the Russians to slowly release all the documents that make him look guilty.
3 Trump gets the press to bite hard on the story.
4 Oct 20 2020 Trump document dumps all the exonerating information on the press
5 Trump is reelected, press is destroyed because they've been reporting on a false story for 4 years.


Considering the daily WTF I experience every time I read the news, this would not surprise me. Might make me consider suicide. But would not surprise me

/Aliens could visit and it wouldn't surprise me
//We find out we are in the Matrix. Wouldn't surprise me
///HalfLife 3 is announced... ok, have to draw the line somewhere
 
2017-09-07 03:39:48 AM  

red5ish: Every day I learn a new thing about President Trump that makes me feel sick. Months of this has not done my liver any favors.


No kidding. It's truly amazing, in an awful way.

Even the most awful stone-cold hitman, eventually you learn enough and you find *something* that forces you to at least admit that they're not just one-dimensional evil, that they are (or at least were) *human.* For fark's sake, even Hitler you're forced to admit "dang, he got injured by gas in WWI? Man, nobody deserves that."

Trump? Nada. Absolutely nothing have I ever seen that suggests he is anything but Snidely Whiplash incarnated.
 
2017-09-07 04:04:55 AM  
I absolutely wouldn't be surprised if this was the case, but I think I'll wait for someone of more legal authority than Maddow to confirm it.

I don't get my farking psychological advice from Dr. Phil either.
 
2017-09-07 05:27:15 AM  

orangehat: orangehat: wardog84: So according to Madcow if someone in the trump campaign monitored everyone facebook sold ad space to there could be trouble for trump?
Orrrr you could investigate Dem presidential hopeful Suckerberg for letting his company sell ad space to the DNC's masters in Moscow.

 You're grasp on the English language is slippery.  You need to go back to language school.

 That should say your... but I'm an American who is drunk and arguing with a Russian troll or some cum stain who thinks it's better to have Russian allies then Americans.
The Democrats slogan from now on should be "Hey, at least we're Americans."


I like this... how about 'Democrats: America's Party'? Go the way of the Dallas Cowboys?
 
2017-09-07 05:59:38 AM  
As an ex-magazine journalist, I spent a while trying in vain to get someone to pick up one of my old stories, about how it was Steve Bannon was literally 1-2 degrees of separation from a pedo ring.

Not saying he himself is a pedo, but Bannon was the former CEO who came in to clean up a digital currency company, IGE, that was literally founded by a fugitive child-molester named Marc Collins-Rector who got arrested by Interpol, while dodging payments to his victims and running IGE out of a villa full of kiddie porn and weapons.

See:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ellievhall/found-the-elusive-man-at-the-hear​t​-of-the-hollywood-sex-abus

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/steve-bannon-once-guide​d​-a-global-firm-that-made-millions-helping-gamers-cheat/2017/08/04/ef7a​e442-76c8-11e7-803f-a6c989606ac7_story.html?utm_term=.dd1e6845a185

What a wholesome man...

The Pizzagate crowd wasn't interested because it was more compelling to them to claim that Hillary was pimping children out of the Domino's downstairs from Anthony Weiner's HQ or whatever it was?
 
2017-09-07 06:43:03 AM  
Is this what 2 Squirts was trying to distract from with the end DACA don't end DACA announcement?
 
2017-09-07 06:56:45 AM  
Republicans on Bill Clinton:
He had sex and lied about it. That's an impeaching!

Republicans on Donald Trump:
I see nothing... I know nothing.
 
2017-09-07 07:06:36 AM  

Sid_6.7: F*ck Donald Trump.


Ivanka? Is that you?
 
2017-09-07 07:32:24 AM  
Rachel Maddow warns

Laf.

Wake me when it's a conservative sounding the alarm.  Until then, it's much ado about nothing.
 
2017-09-07 08:04:00 AM  
Nothing will stick. Not when he has an (R) behind his name.
Wake me up when Fox calls him Trump (D)
 
2017-09-07 08:21:11 AM  
Maddow, from TFAYou can't spend foreign money to influence a U.S. election, even just on Facebook ads. And so this is evidence now - direct evidence - confirmed by Facebook of a discreet, clear crime committed in the course of the Russian attack on our election.

I don't watch Maddow but she strikes me as pretty erudite so I'm confident she actually said "discrete."

That said, the thought that some Russian bothered to report to someone in the Trump campaign that they were gonna spend a pittance on FB ads is nearly laughable, so there's that.
 
2017-09-07 08:22:32 AM  

Sid_6.7: F*ck Donald Trump.


This post really added a unique perspective and insight, and deserves many more than eight "smart" votes.
 
2017-09-07 08:59:15 AM  
Manfred J. Hattan:That said, the thought that some Russian bothered to report to someone in the Trump campaign that they were gonna spend a pittance on FB ads is nearly laughable, so there's that.

The $100,000 question isn't so much were Trump/GOP folks passively aware, it's did they actively provide the database for the targeting algorithm used by the Russian bots.
 
2017-09-07 09:07:16 AM  

cranked: Manfred J. Hattan:That said, the thought that some Russian bothered to report to someone in the Trump campaign that they were gonna spend a pittance on FB ads is nearly laughable, so there's that.

The $100,000 question isn't so much were Trump/GOP folks passively aware, it's did they actively provide the database for the targeting algorithm used by the Russian bots.


That would be quite serious.  Unfortunately, you and the other people putting forth that hypothesis simply made it up.  It wasn't part of Maddow's show, it wasn't a part of any of the news stories about this, it wasn't part of what Facebook disclosed.
 
2017-09-07 09:35:15 AM  
Sure, any minute now, just sit tight.....

Any second now the GOP will swoop and shoot themselves in the foot to give liberals what they need.  Any. second. Now.


/Still waiting?  Then you are a farking moron.
 
2017-09-07 09:38:01 AM  
Any. Burger. Now.
 
2017-09-07 10:02:11 AM  

Skeleton Man: I absolutely wouldn't be surprised if this was the case, but I think I'll wait for someone of more legal authority than Maddow to confirm it.



How about the New York Attorney General? Does he have legal bona fides in your estimation?

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/icahn-story-details-could-gi​v​e-ny-ag-schneiderman-jurisdiction-1041010243886
 
2017-09-07 10:08:28 AM  

Pangea: How about the New York Attorney General? Does he have legal bona fides in your estimation?

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/icahn-story-details-could-giv​e-ny-ag-schneiderman-jurisdiction-1041010243886


The one thing in common in all of these politic-erotica articles: the word "could".
 
2017-09-07 10:16:50 AM  

GoldSpider: Pangea: How about the New York Attorney General? Does he have legal bona fides in your estimation?

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/icahn-story-details-could-giv​e-ny-ag-schneiderman-jurisdiction-1041010243886

The one thing in common in all of these politic-erotica articles: the word "could".


That's because they become fact-based history once the operative word stops being "could."

Same reason you always find something in the last place you look.
 
2017-09-07 11:22:24 AM  

Pangea: GoldSpider: Pangea: How about the New York Attorney General? Does he have legal bona fides in your estimation?

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/icahn-story-details-could-giv​e-ny-ag-schneiderman-jurisdiction-1041010243886

The one thing in common in all of these politic-erotica articles: the word "could".

That's because they become fact-based history once the operative word stops being "could."

Same reason you always find something in the last place you look.


And like others have said, the Republican congress couldfind a conscience tomorrow and start impeachment proceedings, but there's another word that comes into play:  "likely".
 
2017-09-07 11:24:36 AM  

Manfred J. Hattan: That would be quite serious.


Agreed.

Unfortunately, you and the other people putting forth that hypothesis simply made it up.

That maybe comes across more Baghdad Bob than you intended? There's so much smoke coming off the grill that it's hard to see if it's a 50lb burger or just accumulated grease. I guess we'll find out eventually, eh?
 
2017-09-07 11:44:09 AM  

GoldSpider: Pangea: GoldSpider: Pangea: How about the New York Attorney General? Does he have legal bona fides in your estimation?

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/icahn-story-details-could-giv​e-ny-ag-schneiderman-jurisdiction-1041010243886

The one thing in common in all of these politic-erotica articles: the word "could".

That's because they become fact-based history once the operative word stops being "could."

Same reason you always find something in the last place you look.

And like others have said, the Republican congress couldfind a conscience tomorrow and start impeachment proceedings, but there's another word that comes into play:  "likely".


I'll be content with this destroying his brand, significantly damaging his finances, Kushner's family holdings being decimated, and the ruin of Ivanka's political aspirations.

I'm not getting my hopes up over the idea of impeachment or incarceration of any family members. There are definitely some non-family insiders that might face state prosecution though. It would be a nice bonus.
 
2017-09-07 11:48:33 AM  

erik-k: red5ish: Every day I learn a new thing about President Trump that makes me feel sick. Months of this has not done my liver any favors.

No kidding. It's truly amazing, in an awful way.

Even the most awful stone-cold hitman, eventually you learn enough and you find *something* that forces you to at least admit that they're not just one-dimensional evil, that they are (or at least were) *human.* For fark's sake, even Hitler you're forced to admit "dang, he got injured by gas in WWI? Man, nobody deserves that."

Trump? Nada. Absolutely nothing have I ever seen that suggests he is anything but Snidely Whiplash incarnated.


The only member of that entire pustulent family for whom i've got any sympathy is Barron.

 That poor kid never signed up for this, he doesn't deserve it and his therapy bills are going to be the stuff of legend.

Every other member of that family either by blood, or marriage deserves exactly what they get and then some. They knew.
 
2017-09-07 12:14:05 PM  
cranked:
That maybe comes across more Baghdad Bob than you intended?

Nope.  That whole area of exploration of Trump and the Russians rests on two beliefs:  that the Russians are a bunch of dummies who would never know how to target an advertising campaign and that the Trump campaign are a bunch of sharpies who understand a sophisticated media targeting strategy.  The opposite is true.  The Russians are savvy propagandists spreading FUD in the US and elsewhere, for whom Trump was a gift of unimaginable generosity.  Trump and his guys are morons, flailing around for whatever scraps of anything they can find.
 
2017-09-07 12:49:47 PM  

Manfred J. Hattan: Nope.  That whole area of exploration of Trump and the Russians rests on two beliefs:  that the Russians are a bunch of dummies who would never know how to target an advertising campaign and that the Trump campaign are a bunch of sharpies who understand a sophisticated media targeting strategy.


No, it does not rest on those two beliefs.

The opposite is true. The Russians are savvy propagandists spreading FUD in the US and elsewhere, for whom Trump was a gift of unimaginable generosity.  Trump and the GOP are habitually greedy morons, flailing around for whatever scraps of advantage and grift they can find.

It rests on these two facts.
 
2017-09-07 01:01:25 PM  
cranked: The Russians are savvy propagandists spreading FUD in the US and elsewhere, for whom Trump was a gift of unimaginable generosity.  Trump and the GOP are habitually greedy morons, flailing around for whatever scraps of advantage and grift they can find.

I have to apologize.  I try my best not to argue with the developmentally disabled; I clearly failed to do so this time.  Carry on.
 
2017-09-07 01:17:17 PM  
FTA: "You can't spend foreign money to influence a U.S. election, even just on Facebook ads. And so this is evidence now - direct evidence - confirmed by Facebook of a discreet, clear crime committed in the course of the Russian attack on our election. ... If any American knew that crime was happening, if any American was part of the effort to make that happen, that American could absolutely be criminally charged on that matter."

How did FB not know this was going on?  Don't they vet advertisers, esp. when it's related to the election?  Wouldn't that make FB staff criminally liable, and how far up the mgmt chain would it go?
 
2017-09-07 02:29:17 PM  
what will be the result if it is found the ads that were purchased were in favor of then candidate Clinton?
 
2017-09-07 03:11:39 PM  

NutSack: what will be the result if it is found the ads that were purchased were in favor of then candidate Clinton?


You must have missed the part about this only mattering if the campaign was aware of who funded the ads, and was in communications about them. Surely you can't be lazily deflecting via baseless whataboutism on the Internet. Nobody would do that.
 
2017-09-07 03:48:49 PM  

Manfred J. Hattan: cranked: Manfred J. Hattan:That said, the thought that some Russian bothered to report to someone in the Trump campaign that they were gonna spend a pittance on FB ads is nearly laughable, so there's that.

The $100,000 question isn't so much were Trump/GOP folks passively aware, it's did they actively provide the database for the targeting algorithm used by the Russian bots.

That would be quite serious.  Unfortunately, you and the other people putting forth that hypothesis simply made it up.  It wasn't part of Maddow's show, it wasn't a part of any of the news stories about this, it wasn't part of what Facebook disclosed.


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article16080361​9​.html

...investigators doubt Russian operatives [...] could have independently "known where to specifically target ... to which high-impact states and districts in those states."

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article160803619​.html#storylink=cpy
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report