Cont: All things Trump + Russia Part 2

[BobTheCoward]

Donald is not about fair. He is about hitting back.

Which is what the sanctions were.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

This would have taken place after Trump's undisclosed, second Putin meeting where he also claimed "adoptions" were discussed.

Maybe Putin suggested the excuse to use.

 

[Oystein]

Which is what the sanctions were.

The sanctions were - what? Fair? The sanctions imposed for Russia's meddling with the election? Those sanctions?
Or are you saying the sanctions are hitting back? Hitting back at Russia for meddling with the election? Those sanctions that are not Trump's, for he doesn't even want them?

Bob, I think you just shot yourself in the foot, I just haven't figured out yet, which

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The amateurs got trapped. Mice don't collude.

There are several avenues of investigation needed to be completed before one can say there was no collusion. The weakest case is that the Trump people suggested the dates to release the DNC and Podesta emails.

But there is also a connection between Kushner's computers and the Russian Bank when no such communications should have occurred. And don't forget the attempts to connect to the Kremlin out of earshot of the CIA and NSA. That has the potential for a lot more collusion than just which dates the emails were released.

And that's not including Trump's obstruction of the investigation.

 

[BobTheCoward]

The sanctions were - what? Fair? The sanctions imposed for Russia's meddling with the election? Those sanctions?
Or are you saying the sanctions are hitting back? Hitting back at Russia for meddling with the election? Those sanctions that are not Trump's, for he doesn't even want them?

Bob, I think you just shot yourself in the foot, I just haven't figured out yet, which

If they are not his sanctions then the Russians are not hitting him. If they are him hitting then he is hitting back.

Further, Russians making it more difficult to get what they want is not hitting the US, just punching themselves in the face.

 

[trustbutverify]

Further, Russians making it more difficult to get what they want is not hitting the US, just punching themselves in the face.

I guess even the most threatening cloud has a silver lining.

 

[chrispy]

And this is interesting...

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...-lawyer/ar-AApdk8c?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

Summary: The President dictated that misleading memo that his son provided about that meeting with the Russian lawyer.

This really makes Trump look guilty of something.

So far, still no smoking gun, but there's a real whiff of gunpowder in the air.

Well, to be fair, we always knew he wanted to be a dictator.

 

[trustbutverify]

It seems that all the WH top guys, particularly the family members, spend an extraordinary amount of time on this matter. Along with their teams of lawyers. Which makes me wonder: Who pays for all these lawyers?

Chumps?

 

[BobTheCoward]

I guess even the most threatening cloud has a silver lining.

What is the harm in the ejection?

 

[Arcade22]

Trumps personal right-wing evangelical celebrity lawyer is on the record lying utterly and completely about Trump not being involved with drafting the response into the NYT expose:

President Trump's personal lawyer, Jay Sekulow, has some explaining to do.

The Washington Post reported Monday night that the president himself was responsible for the drafting of Donald Trump Jr.'s misleading statement after the New York Times revealed that the younger Trump had arranged a meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016. Sources say White House advisers had decided to be transparent about the meeting, but the president changed the game plan at the last minute to misleadingly suggest that the meeting was about adoption. The full truth soon came out that the meeting was arranged to discuss compromising information, supposedly from the Russian government, about Hillary Clinton.

The problem for Sekulow? He denied at least twice, pretty unequivocally, that the president played any role in the drafting of that statement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-involved-in-trump-jr-s-statement-but-he-was/

Whatever narrative they try to build up is a complete house of cards that topples at the slightest touch.

 

[Civet]

Trumps personal right-wing evangelical celebrity lawyer is on the record lying utterly and completely about Trump not being involved with drafting the response into the NYT expose:



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-involved-in-trump-jr-s-statement-but-he-was/

Whatever narrative they try to build up is a complete house of cards that topples at the slightest touch.

Couple of things about that. First, people lie to their lawyers a lot and Trump lies like it's going out of style. Entirely possible he told Sekulow some fabrication and Sekulow parroted that. Second, the story revealing Trump's involvement in drafting the statement is another one of those that's entirely sourced from anonymous types whose honesty cannot be trusted. These are people who work (or worked) closely for Trump and therefore cannot be presumed to be of good character. They could be lying for some reason.

 

[acbytesla]

Trumps personal right-wing evangelical celebrity lawyer is on the record lying utterly and completely about Trump not being involved with drafting the response into the NYT expose:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-involved-in-trump-jr-s-statement-but-he-was/

Whatever narrative they try to build up is a complete house of cards that topples at the slightest touch.

Lawyer lies, news at 11. Lawyers lie all the time and Trump’s lawyers have a lot of practice.

 

[trustbutverify]

What is the harm in the ejection?

Wasn't referring to the ejection, but the era of Trump as a whole.

 

[magellan]

Donald is not about fair. He is about hitting back.

FFS
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/...nzen-nach-diplomaten-ausweisung-15129773.html

Just because it isn't on page 1 (Because it would go against the "RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA"-narrative doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

 

[Babbylonian]

FFS
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/...nzen-nach-diplomaten-ausweisung-15129773.html

Just because it isn't on page 1 (Because it would go against the "RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA"-narrative doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Are we supposed to be shocked or embarrassed that Europeans don't want to get into it with Russia? It's a state run by criminals and for criminals, and supporting the regime is wrong.

 

[magellan]

Are we supposed to be shocked or embarrassed that Europeans don't want to get into it with Russia? It's a state run by criminals and for criminals, and supporting the regime is wrong.

Huh?
Sanctions where never popular in europe.
It was mainly the US poodles (Germany, UK) that advocated for them.
UK is out, and merkel needs to be elected in germany, not the US.
So yeah, it's not suprising that sanity starts to surface again.

 

[Oystein]

There are several avenues of investigation needed to be completed before one can say there was no collusion.

Since the one making a positive claim bears the burden of evidence, you ought to have said: "There are several avenues of investigation needed to be completed before one can say there was collusion."

The weakest case is that the Trump people suggested the dates to release the DNC and Podesta emails....

The emails smell like part of the cheese in the trap.

 

[Oystein]

If they are not his sanctions then the Russians are not hitting him.

Non sequitur.
The staffers that Putin orders out are Trump's staffers, as they belong to the State Department, i.e. Administration.
So Putin does, in fact, hit him - the Trump administration - more than Congress.

If they are him hitting then he is hitting back.

But he is NOT, in fact, hitting back, as I originally pointed out. Or do you see him hitting back?

Further, Russians making it more difficult to get what they want is not hitting the US, just punching themselves in the face.

How is Russia making it more difficult to get what they want when Trump is not, in fact, hitting back?

 

[Oystein]

Chumps?

Sorry, as a non-native speaker, I have to look this word up. It apparently has several meanings. Do you mean "fools"? Do you mean "small change"? Do you mean "steaks of lamb"? Do you mean "chunks"?

 

[Oystein]

What is the harm in the ejection?

If these people are of no use, why did Trump not pull them (and their peers in all the other 189 nations) back? Would have saved much more money than banning transgender service members!

So presumption ought to be that the ejection does harm, or having these people were of no use to start with, and Tillerson would be responsible for continuing this waste.

Do you favor giving Tillerson the boot?
Or do you agree that the null hypothesis ought to be "there is harm in the ejection"?
Try to be consisten.