Russians for Trump

Discussion in 'National' started by MackeyDingo, Sep 26, 2016.

  1. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    No, I get it. What I'm disagreeing with you on is that our government does in fact follow the rule of law as consistently as it should. Is it as bad as Russia? Of course not. But a superpower is held to a different standard...Russia is no longer one, and in reality never really was one beyond Potemkin villages.

    As far as gassing goes, other than the Moscow theater (which was sleeping gas) who have the Russians gassed? Even Mattis admits they have no proof the Syrians were doing it, let alone anyone under Russian influence/control.

    Who are you talking about? The media? Every single-issue group out there? This ain't the Russians driving this, sorry.

    Facebook admitted the Russian propaganda spend was minuscule: $46k compared to $81M spent by Trump and HRC. That's like 0.05%, or 1760x less. It is laughable about how much that has been blown out of proportion.

    What Trump is doing is the same thing any politician would do in his situation. For these alleged crimes I am still waiting for proof. THERE HAS BEEN NONE. Until then, I am fully ok with letting the Mueller investigation play out. If he's guilty, then let him fry. In the meantime, it appears there are a whole lot of others that are doing some of the crimes that Trump is being accused of, and worse. If they are guilty, they should fry too.

    *That* is what is considered following the rule of law. Not passing judgement on someone you derisively call Orange Menace just because you don't like him and you think you have all the answers. And by attacking those that don't immediately agree with you. But unfortunately for all of us, he's in your head. And lots on the Left have gone stark raving mad over it.
     
    Hospitalitygirl and MackeyDingo like this.
  2. Jayfar

    Jayfar I'm very old®

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Messages:
    9,389
    Likes Received:
    942
    Not the majority of protests/demonstrations, sure, but it has been documented that Russian-controlled social media accounts have set up specific protests and counter-protests (such as through facebook events).
     
    MackeyDingo likes this.
  3. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    Ok. I guess a better way to state the point is that they aren't creating these issues. Is it good that they are tapping into that division and encouraging it? Certainly not...but again, I'm not condoning or apologizing for it, and my earlier point was that it is something that we have done as well (usually worse) AND it isn't something to start WW3 over. I do agree a stop should be put to it.

    But this is just yet another reason to do your own research based on multiple inputs, be skeptical, craft your own opinion, and don't follow the herd. Because whoever is leading the herd may be taking it off the proverbial cliff...whether it is the Russians, the Orange Menance, HRC, George Soros, Hannity, Schiff, the Pope, whoever.
     
    Hospitalitygirl and MackeyDingo like this.
  4. Jayfar

    Jayfar I'm very old®

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Messages:
    9,389
    Likes Received:
    942
    Basically, most of what the Russians are doing is amplification of the fringes.
     
    Hospitalitygirl, Sean and MackeyDingo like this.
  5. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    That's a very good way to put it
     
  6. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,961
    Likes Received:
    161
    The only way to believe there is "NO PROOF" is to not be paying attention.

    There is a campaign official who has been charged and pleaded guilty and is now cooperating with the investigation. Almost immediately after joining the campaign he starts sending emails about meetings with Russian officials, "including Putin". Some claim these overtures were rejected. And yet media reports this individual subsequently traveled to Greece and met with Putin allies. This individual also told Australian diplomats that Russia had materials on Clinton (which were obtained through criminal acts), which later got back to the US government and led to investigations. Trump now tries to pass him off as a low-level staffer, despite previously name-dropping him as a key foreign policy advisor. This is "NO PROOF"?

    The emails posted above in the thread outline Don Jr.'s willingness to receive the aforementioned Clinton materials from Russian officials. They first claimed this meeting was about adoption policy and then had to change course when the emails were going to be public. The claim was amended to Clinton dirt being the purpose of the meeting, but that they didn't really discuss it. If you actually buy that, then I suppose it is "NO PROOF".

    Getting back to Trump, as I know what the parry will be, his role in and knowledge of the above is still unclear. I think it defies belief that he would have been completely clueless about all of it, especially because he was at meetings where Russian involvement was discussed and later met with the Russian Ambassador - a meeting the Attorney General has lied about his presence at. Why would he do that?

    But we can put all of the above aside, because the crimes that are alleged - not just by internet randos (who are a convenient strawman) - are primarily related to obstruction of justice. Trump has clearly said - and it's on video - he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation, because it is "a made up story". This is "NO PROOF"?

    You can certainly argue that this somehow doesn't represent obstruction, or that the President's power over the FBI supercedes this concern.. that would be incorrect, but you're not even doing that it. You're saying that none of this exists, and passing judgement based on these nonexistent facts is 'stark raving mad'.

    The idea that Trump is just doing what any other politician in his situation would do.. perhaps your judgement has been clouded because of our officials here. Attacking the FBI and DOJ and claiming a conspiracy was Chaka Fattah Jr.'s defense.

    This is only a very brief discussion of some of the facts and legal issues. I strongly recommend reviewing Seth Abramson's work as he is detailed and documents, step-by-step, how he reaches his conclusions.
     
  7. MackeyDingo

    MackeyDingo REALLY Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    399
    Here's the summary from the Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community for the year ahead. Read carefully and you can see them calling out the America first agenda as making us less safe, but even a careless read should inform you that the world is a powderkeg:

    Competition among countries will increase in the coming year as major powers and regional aggressors exploit complex global trends while adjusting to new priorities in US foreign policy. The risk of interstate conflict, including among great powers, is higher than at any time since the end of the Cold War. The most immediate threats of regional interstate conflict in the next year come from North Korea and from Saud/Iranian use of proxies in their rivalry. At the same time, the threat of state and nonstate use of weapons of mass destruction will continue to grow.
    •  Adversaries and malign actors will use all instruments of national power—including information and cyber means—to shape societies and markets, international rules and institutions, and international hot spots to their advantage.
    •  China and Russia will seek spheres of influence and to check US appeal and influence in their regions. Meanwhile, US allies’ and partners’ uncertainty about the willingness and capability of the United States to maintain its international commitments may drive them to consider reorienting their policies, particularly regarding trade, away from Washington.
    •  Forces for geopolitical order and stability will continue to fray, as will the rules-based international order. New alignments and informal networks—outside traditional power blocs and national governments—will increasingly strain international cooperation.
    Tension within many countries will rise, and the threat from Sunni violent extremist groups will evolve as they recoup after battlefield losses in the Middle East. 
    • Slow economic growth and technology-induced disruptions in job markets are fueling populism within advanced industrial countries and the very nationalism that contributes to tension among countries.
    •  Developing countries in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa face economic challenges, and many states struggle with reforms to tamp down corruption. Terrorists and criminal groups will continue to exploit weak state capacity in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia.
    •  Challenges from urbanization and migration will persist, while the effects of air pollution, inadequate water, and climate change on human health and livelihood will become more noticeable. Domestic policy responses to such issues will become more difficult—especially for democracies—as publics become less trusting of authoritative information sources.

    https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Testimonies/2018-ATA---Unclassified-SSCI.pdf
     
    Jayfar likes this.
  8. OldMama

    OldMama Finally retired. Newly married. Kids are gone.

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,989
    Likes Received:
    221
    Trump sat on Air Force One and gave his son a phony excuse to use to cover the meeting with the Russians. Complicit right there.
     
  9. MackeyDingo

    MackeyDingo REALLY Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    399
    Trump Appointee Wray -
    Wray testified that he had never been “specifically directed by the president” to prevent Russia from interfering in our elections.

    Collins asked Wray to address allegations of political bias from Republicans who say that FBI agents mishandled separate investigations into Clinton and Trump.

    Wray offered a fierce defense of the bureau and said that there are more than two ongoing investigations at the FBI.

    “It is the finest group of professionals and public servants I could hope to work for,” Wray said. “Many times a day I’m confronted with unbelievable examples of integrity and professionalism and grit. There are 37,000 people in the FBI who do unbelievable things around the world, and you’d never know it from watching the news, but we actually have more than two investigations and most of them do a lot to keep Americans safe.”​

    Trump appointee Dan Coates -
    "Frankly, the United States is under attack."

    “There should be no doubt that Russia perceived that its past efforts as successful and views the 2018 U.S. midterm elections as a potential target for Russian midterm operations.

    “We need to inform the American public that this is real, that this is going to be happening, and the resilience needed for us to stand up and say we’re not going to allow some Russian to tell us how to vote, how we ought to run our country.”​

    Trump appointee Mike Pompeo -
    Pompeo joined other intelligence officials in stating that the CIA has observed Russian efforts to interfere in this year's midterm elections.

    "We have seen Russian activity and intentions to have an impact on the next election cycle here," Pompeo told Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.).

    Coats, who had previously noted a continued effort to subvert U.S. elections earlier in the hearing, reaffirmed this point of view along with Rogers.​

    Trump appointee Gen Robert Ashley -
    This is not going to change or stop.​

    BUT DONT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. TAKE THE WORD OF THE TRUMP APPOINTEES TELLING US RUSSIA ATTACKED US, IS PLANNING TO DO SO AGAIN, AND THE PRESIDENT IS DOING NOTHING TO STOP IT.

    Hearings | Intelligence Committee

    You could also read it for yourself in the Worldwide Threat Assessment.
    https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Testimonies/2018-ATA---Unclassified-SSCI.pdf



     
    #429 MackeyDingo, Feb 15, 2018
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2018
  10. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,961
    Likes Received:
    161
    The "we are not the good actor" dismissal (exact quote for ya this time) is not unique to this site. I've been seeing it more and more on twitter.
     
  11. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    Are you saying I cribbed it from a talking point somewhere? I didn't. These are my own words based on my own personal research and analysis.

    And for the 1000th time, it isn't a dismissal of anything. It is simply a statement that we should not be moralizing to other countries about things that we have done ourselves. And further, we should stop doing those things.
     
    Hospitalitygirl likes this.
  12. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,961
    Likes Received:
    161
    What I said is that it's something I've seen going around. I'm not commenting or speculating on origins.

    And it is 1000% a dismissal when it is presented in response to "Hey, Russia is messing about in our elections!".

    I gotta say, though, it is incredibly amusing to see the right say that the US should not be moralizing to other countries - though simultaneously scary to see just how quickly they will abandon supposed principles in defense of Trump. (I know, you'll deny this is what you're doing)
     
  13. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    I have subscribed to that philosophy long before Trump came along. Has nothing to do with him. Suggest you stop painting with a wide brush.

    It isn't a dismissal because the two opinions are not mutually exclusive. You can be against moralizing and still for responding to election interference. I think what you are missing is that I am not advocating for starting WW3 over it. There are proportional responses available.
     
  14. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,961
    Likes Received:
    161
    Lazy strawman.. who *is* advocating starting WW3?
     
  15. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    It's a euphemism, however many are indeed advocating a much more aggressive (and even hostile) stance with Russia. Given the situation in Syria, there is opportunity for a flashpoint that would put our militaries in combat against each other:

    US-led forces 'kill dozens of Russians' in Syria air strikes as battlefield tensions rise
    https://nypost.com/2018/02/13/russians-attacked-american-troops-on-putins-orders/

    Thankfully cooler heads are prevailing...for now. If we did have to go to war, I have no doubts that we would beat them, but at what cost? And what is the upside? That isn't even considering the nuke factor.

    Frankly we should be partnering with the Russians against Islamic extremism and using them to do our dirty work for us, but that's the Kissinger in me talking.
     
  16. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,961
    Likes Received:
    161
    Who is advocating hostilities with Russia? Seems like the same strawman, you just turned it down from 11 to 10.. but you don't need to spend the time looking - no one here is discussing warfare with Russia.

    I'm confused as to whether you think we should be responding to Russia's election meddling (proportionally), or partnering with them/using them in to continue to the war against a vague non-state entity. Or do you think they'll go for both? That seems pretty difficult to pull off, even for a master dealmaker.
     
  17. MackeyDingo

    MackeyDingo REALLY Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    399
    This is the equivalent of the #metoo movement attacking Aziz Ansari.

    There are legitimate bad guys in the world. Like Russia, or Harvey Weinstein.
    These are actors who cause pain and abuse their power. They ignore laws. They make the world less safe. These are real-life forces of evil.

    When confused people attack good people (Aziz, America) who made a mistake or did something objectionable, instead of attacking evil people (Putin, Weinstein) who do evil things as a matter of course, these confused people are providing support for evil.

    How? Two ways.
    1. Conflate the bad guy with the good guy. If nobody's good then nobody's bad.
    2. When we are arguing about and shaming good people, we aren't fighting to contain evil.
     
  18. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    An analogy comparing global cloak and dagger with the abuse of power of a Hollywood exec might be the silliest one that I have ever heard. Not to mention that initiating coups and causing death and destruction is NOT just "a mistake or something objectionable".

    You keep pushing this flawed idea that I am exercising moral relativity. In fact I am doing quite the opposite.
     
  19. OldMama

    OldMama Finally retired. Newly married. Kids are gone.

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,989
    Likes Received:
    221
    Watching AG Rosenstein outline charges against 13 Russians for meddling in election. Even Christie is saying it was a well- funded, well-coordinated effort.

    All I want at this point for is for the president to admit there was meddling. That’s all. For now.
     
  20. OldMama

    OldMama Finally retired. Newly married. Kids are gone.

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,989
    Likes Received:
    221
    One more thing - I will never be able to watch The Americans with the same mindset again.
     
  21. Jayfar

    Jayfar I'm very old®

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Messages:
    9,389
    Likes Received:
    942
  22. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    That's it? Will patiently wait for more.

    Although if it was "well-funded and well-coordinated", then I guess that absolves the DNC from any involvement...
     
  23. Templeton

    Templeton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Likes Received:
    82

    "And for the 1000th time, it isn't a dismissal of anything."


    These two statements seem at odds with one another. It's almost like your dismissing some party in the first quote.
     
  24. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    There's a pretty big difference between acknowledging that there was interference and bad action on the part of the Russians (which I have already done, and what the "dismissal" conversation was about) and being underwhelmed by this indictment given the "collusion is a slam dunk" attitudes of many on this board and on the Left side of the aisle in general.

    Like I said, will patiently wait for more.

    BTW, does anyone consider it "interference" when a debate moderator gives questions ahead of time to one side but not the other? Or when one party's national committee actively undermines one of its candidates in favor of the other? Just curious.
     
  25. Templeton

    Templeton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    766
    Likes Received:
    82
    Of course what Donna did was interference, even collusion.

    National parties however, are private orgs and can do whatever they want. They both (RNC, DNC) undermine candidates they deem as non-viable all the time.

    "The Republican National Committee denounced on Tuesday an outspoken Holocaust denier and unambiguous anti-Semite, Arthur Jones, who is poised to become the GOP nominee for a US House seat in Illinois." Republican National Committee condemns Holocaust-denying GOP House candidate

    That being said, you don't expect dems to believe that you really care about poor Bernie do you? Rather than just just toeing the partisan "DNC evil line"?
     
  26. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,961
    Likes Received:
    161
    Butwhatabout HILLARY! Classic stuff.
     
  27. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    No I don't care about Bernie, although I think he is a decent person and one of the few pols at the national level that has a modicum of sincerity behind the platform he pushes. And I wasn't trying to say the DNC was evil...more like it is inept.

    Why does it matter that the party is private? Is that better or worse than private Russian citizens or private companies buying ads and organizing groups on Facebook against one candidate or another? The indictment does not blame the Russian government as far as I can tell.
     
  28. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    How is it not relevant?
     
  29. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,961
    Likes Received:
    161
    Nope, not doing it. Have a good weekend.
     
  30. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,534
    Likes Received:
    793
    You call me solomonic and then blow off the discussion? I see how it is.
     

Share This Page