TrumPutinGate

#22,278
#22,278
hog88 said:
Trump the prosecutor or law enforcement in that case?
Click to expand...

I thought we were talking about bios and crooks?

Trying to paint Mueller as a bad guy and trump as a good guy is simply laughable. You seem like a reasonable guy at times, I'd recommend that you give it up on this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#22,279
#22,279
General Jack said:
I thought we were talking about bios and crooks?

Trying to paint Mueller as a bad guy and trump as a good guy is simply laughable. You seem like a reasonable guy at times, I'd give it up on this one.
Click to expand...

I've never once said Trump is a good guy or wasn't crooked. You were trying to paint Mueller as pure as teh wind driven snow and he is not. You don't rise to the director of a federal bureaucracy without some serious skeletons in your closet.
 
#22,280
#22,280
carlos86 said:
Free riding??? They have been fight with us in Afghanistan for 17 years.
Click to expand...

There is difference between contribution and equitable contribution. The fact that they had to make the pledge in 2014 shows they knew the deal needs tweaking.

Trump is not the only person to conclude that the burden isn't shared as equitably as it could be.
 
#22,281
#22,281
hog88 said:
I've never once said Trump is a good guy or wasn't crooked. You were trying to paint Mueller as pure as teh wind driven snow and he is not. You don't rise to the director of a federal bureaucracy without some serious skeletons in your closet.
Click to expand...

That's not what I said but we are wasting keystrokes at this point.

Mueller is infinitely more credible and trustworthy than trump, period; its a losing argument to press otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#22,282
#22,282
volinbham said:
There is difference between contribution and equitable contribution. The fact that they had to make the pledge in 2014 shows they knew the deal needs tweaking.

Trump is not the only person to conclude that the burden isn't shared as equitably as it could be.
Click to expand...

Conclude what?? He doe st even know how much money the U.S. contributes to the NATO budget.
 
#22,284
#22,284
General Jack said:
That's not what I said but we are wasting keystrokes at this point.

Mueller is infinitely more credible and trustworthy than trump, period; its a losing argument to press otherwise.
Click to expand...

I think both are crooked as a dogs hind leg and neither is trustworthy.
 
#22,285
#22,285
carlos86 said:
Conclude what?? He doe st even know how much money the U.S. contributes to the NATO budget.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that his foreign policy has a tendency to benefit Putin. Good cover-story or not, if anyone is not applying a healthy dose of suspicion, I question their ability to do anything but blindly follow this idiot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#22,286
#22,286
Stew Cook said:
Not to mention that his foreign policy has a tendency to benefit Putin. Good cover-story or not, if anyone is not applying a healthy dose of suspicion, I question their ability to do anything but blindly follow this idiot.
Click to expand...

Example please.
 
#22,287
#22,287
volinbham said:
They always have a goal and I explicitly said it was wrong.

Wittingly or unwittingly the reaction of the "Resistance" is part of the sabotage - so maybe pay attention to that as well and see the big picture. Had Hillary won they had a plan to sabotage her as well.
Click to expand...

Well, again, there is a difference between resistance to the goal as in Trump, versus resistance to them achieving their goal, whatever it is.

Both are possible. But even if it is just the system resisting Trump as some level, or by specific people, that does not give him or the Russians a pass.

I've seen more than enough so far to feel confident that there were people in Trump's campaign, at the highest levels, who were colluding to some degree or another with the Russians to help Trump win.

Some did it fully aware of the shadiness of it --Manafort being the best example. He did it for the money.

Some probably suspected that it was wrong, but did it anyway. See e.g. Flynn trying to coddle the Russians to make everyone happy. He was blinded by the opportunity to have some power. Or at least he rationalized it that way.

Some I believe did it because of a combination of greed, hubris, and naivete. I'm thinking of Don Jr. and Kushner. They may not have realized it was criminally wrong. They might have thought that this is the way the system works.

The problem is that, once they found out what was really going on, rather than 'fess up and go "oh my gosh, we got played, how can we make them pay a price for this?" they shut down and covered up. They lied to protect themselves. Very foolish.

And so we get to Trump. We don't know yet what role he played personally. Cohen may have some info on that, but not as much as others and he might stay away from that at the upcoming hearing as it is still being investigated. But its hard to imagine that Manafort on his own was working with the Russians to figure out where and how to target areas or groups. It seems to me he would have shared that with Trump and gotten his blessing.

We also don't know whether in fact Trump had any direct communications with Russians to seek their help. Or directly, or through others, offered to do them favors, if elected.

I am suspicious that he did because of his ever-evolving story on this. As Gowdy said, he keeps acting guilty. He does the things liars do -- lie more, get caught, and lie more. Distract. Attack the motives of the people investigating it. And then lie some more.

If this is just a string of unconnected coincidences, the odds against that are so huge as to be inconceivable. Trump's reactions to news and subsequent actions to block or discredit the investigation tell me that it is not all coincidence. And his lying to about it so much tells me he was not an innocent dupe to the actions of those around him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: samanderson and General Jack
#22,288
#22,288
hog88 said:
You mean like a campaign ad?
Click to expand...
Not really at all. I think people already expect campaign adds to be biased and bordering on fraudulent. In order for it to be fraud, there must be a presumption of truth.
There would obviously be gradients, like with most everything, it lies on a continuum. Sort of like willful negligence. Might have to be left for a jury to decide. Or congress (as representatives of the American people).
 
#22,290
#22,290
hog88 said:
Example please.
Click to expand...

Syria, Afghanistan.. the earlier said parroted propoganda about Afghanistan, Russia wants back in. NATO if he hadn't had pushback, and I doubt he's done with that.

We can touch on his inability to understand that Crimea doesn't belong to Russia, just because they speak Russian in Crimea.

Don't worry, they will keep coming.
 
#22,291
#22,291
General Jack said:
And further Opinion | Smearing Robert Mueller

"Was Robert Mueller, the special counsel, complicit in one of the worst scandals in the F.B.I.’s history — the decades-long wrongful imprisonment of four men for a murder they didn’t commit?...

"There is no evidence that the assertion is true. I was the federal judge who presided over a successful lawsuit brought against the government by two of those men and the families of the other two, who had died in prison. Based on the voluminous evidence submitted in the trial, and having written a 105-page decision awarding them $101.8 million, I can say without equivocation that Mr. Mueller, who worked in the United States attorney’s office in Boston from 1982 to 1988, including a brief stint as the acting head of the office, had no involvement in that case. He was never even mentioned. "
Click to expand...
Mueller most likely knew and had a hand in it.

Alan Dershowitz: Maybe Mueller should be investigated
 
#22,292
#22,292
Stew Cook said:
Not to mention that his foreign policy has a tendency to benefit Putin. Good cover-story or not, if anyone is not applying a healthy dose of suspicion, I question their ability to do anything but blindly follow this idiot.
Click to expand...

How did you feel about Obama’s red lines? Being more flexible (with Russia) after the election? Sending pallets of cash to Iran? Releasing terrorists? Pardoning traitors?
 
#22,293
#22,293
C-south said:
How did you feel about Obama’s read lines? Being more flexible (with Russia) after the election? Sending pallets of cash to Iran? Releasing terrorists? Pardoning traitors?
Click to expand...

Tough talk, wanted Congress to back his actions, I think he should have pulled the trigger. I doubt he would have Tweeted about the missiles coming in, if he had.
 
#22,294
#22,294
luthervol said:
Not really at all. I think people already expect campaign adds to be biased and bordering on fraudulent. In order for it to be fraud, there must be a presumption of truth.
There would obviously be gradients, like with most everything, it lies on a continuum. Sort of like willful negligence. Might have to be left for a jury to decide. Or congress (as representatives of the American people).
Click to expand...

So I read an article in the WSJ about this situation. I'm not getting where you see the crime? There's no indication that the guy who was hired to manipulate polls committed any crime and the closest thing to a crime (though a minor one) would be possible failure to report the spending to the FEC.

Before you freak; I'm not condoning the behavior but claiming this is can be prosecuted as fraud is just wishful thinking on your part.
 
#22,296
#22,296
volinbham said:
So I read an article in the WSJ about this situation. I'm not getting where you see the crime? There's no indication that the guy who was hired to manipulate polls committed any crime and the closest thing to a crime (though a minor one) would be possible failure to report the spending to the FEC.

Before you freak; I'm not condoning the behavior but claiming this is can be prosecuted as fraud is just wishful thinking on your part.
Click to expand...
You may be right. It may be nothing more than a failed attempt at fraud.
 
#22,297
#22,297
C-south said:
How did you feel about Obama’s red lines? Being more flexible (with Russia) after the election? Sending pallets of cash to Iran? Releasing terrorists? Pardoning traitors?
Click to expand...

The rest of that is more rhetoric than fact.. Pallets of cash, debts owed and sanctioned accounts moneys returned according to multinational agreement.
 
#22,298
#22,298
C-south said:
How did you feel about Obama’s red lines? Being more flexible (with Russia) after the election? Sending pallets of cash to Iran? Releasing terrorists? Pardoning traitors?
Click to expand...
Red line in syria. What's Trump's response to line steppers, Tuck tail and run? I don't want you to forget about how Trump called obama stupid for telegraphing military movements.
 
  • Like
Reactions: General Jack
#22,299
#22,299
hog88 said:
Example please.
Click to expand...
Seriously?

If Putin had a wish list of 7 foreign policy goals for the United States to follow, wouldn't it look something like this? :

1) Weaken and divide the transatlantic alliance by undermining the U.S. relationships with European allies and call into question the U.S. commitment to NATO. That is what Trump has done from the start.

2) Disrupt American leadership of the global economic order. Trump is eagerly pushing for an all-out trade war with Europe.

3) Build global resentment and distrust towards the U.S. and stoke anti-American sentiment. America's closest allies are explicitly suspicious and distrusting of the U.S. because of Trump's rhetoric and actions.

4) Relieve economic and domestic political pressure from U.S. sanctions on Russia. Trump has tried to roll back, impede, and blunt the impact of sanctions on Russians at every step. See Oleg Deripaska.

5) Legitimize the Putin regime in the eyes of the world. Trump repeatedly praises and defends Putin, lending the weight of the U.S. presidency providing validation towards Putin's cause.

6) Revive Russia's status as a great power and gain international recognition for its illegal seizure of Crimea. Trump publicly says that Crimea is part of Russia and calls for Russia to be welcomed back into the international community (the G8) with no concessions whatsoever.

7) Continue to sow discord in Western democracies and avoid repercussions for interfering in U.S. and European elections. Trump has repeatedly dismissed Russian interference into the 2016 U.S. Presidential election and sought to discredit his own intelligence community while publicly siding with Vladimir Putin over Dan Coats such as he did at the Helsinki press conference last July.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lawgator1, luthervol, tvolsfan and 1 other person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top