All things Trump + Russia Part 4

[Hlafordlaes]

If you honestly believe what President Trump did yesterday was treason I believe your judgement is clouded by hate for him.

Obama is not the President, even if he looms ever larger as the far greater authority on democracy and the rule of law. Bears repeating: Black man, a greater authority than bully white man. (Enjoy!) Regardless, irrelevant to the argument. There is substantiated evidence of a severe and ongoing attack on constitutional democracy, and Trump took a knee. Cowardice and weakness themselves took another, in what may by rights be called Trump's Epic Flail. A pink hanky waving retreat on the world stage. Beat, and bad.

 

[Fudbucker]

If you honestly believe what President Trump did yesterday was treason I believe your judgement is clouded by hate for him.

It was right up to the line. Certainly, I've never seen a president in my lifetime do anything like that.

Do you think Russia was not an enemy of the US when President Obama said "more flexibility after the elections" but they are now? Or was that also an act of treason.

Obama said that in 2012. By then it was clear the GOP's mission in life was to obstruct Obama at every turn. It was also clear that many Republicans were so deranged by their hatred of him, they were convinced Obama was a Muslim from Kenya (as of seven months ago, a majority of Republicans STILL believe that). So any overtures Obama might have made towards Putin during the election would have gotten him tarred-and-feathered by Republicans, and he didn't want that during an election year. That's what I think he was talking about when he was talking about "flexibility after the elections".

 

[LSSBB]

Perhaps. But it's not treason, and unless Congress stands up to him it's his legal right to do it.

The impeachment process was put into the constitution under the assumption that Congress wouldn't be ok with a corrupt President whose primary allegiance seems to be to a foreign power.

That appears to be a faulty assumption on the Founders' part.

I did not say it was Treason.The code on Treason is incomplete: it's not an enemy anymore if you just up and surrender.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Senator Jeanne Shaheen calls for the interpreter at the Trump/Putin meeting to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Cambridge Analytica's Facebook data was accessed from Russia

 

[magellan]

Republicans from the House Intelligence Committee stand by their report's conclusion that the US intelligence agencies used improper analytical methods in order to come up with the erroneous conclusion that Putin preferred Trump in the 2016 election, and say that Putin was lying yesterday when he said he did

I am not a native speaker in english, so the finer points sometimes elude me.

Is "preferred" the same thing as "tried to help"?

A wise statesman once said "The 80ies called. they want their foreign policy back"

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1019389905020051456

#Russia's state TV host:
"It is very bizarre, you can't bash your own country like that - especially when you're the President."
Female host: "When Trump says our relations are bad because of American foolishness and stupidity, he really smells like an agent of the Kremlin."

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I am not a native speaker in english, so the finer points sometimes elude me.

Is "preferred" the same thing as "tried to help"?

A wise statesman once said "The 80ies called. they want their foreign policy back"

In this instance it means that Putin wanted Trump to win the 2016 election.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Russian Defence Ministry issues statement that Russia "is ready for the practical implementation of agreements in the area of global security reached in Helsinki between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump"

As yet, the only Americans who know what was said in the meeting are Trump and the translator.

 

[Drewbot]

As yet, the only Americans who know what was said in the meeting are Trump and the translator.

Right, I would expect nothing less than protection of classified info, perhaps if Hillary was president, we would all know.

 

[Drewbot]

Am I wrong that the Intelligence community that Trump doubts, included James Clapper at the time of the hacking?

Clapper is now regularly appearing on cable shows which, for example, used Clapper’s word as proof that Trump was lying in saying that there was surveillance of Trump Tower carried out by President Barack Obama. CNN and other networks used Clapper’s assurance without ever mentioning that he previously lied about surveillance programs.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...g-congress-jonathan-turley-column/1045991001/

 

[Segnosaur]

Right, I would expect nothing less than protection of classified info, perhaps if Hillary was president, we would all know.

Ummm.. The info is not protected by the u.s. if, as has been suggested in a previously given reference, that the russian defense ministry knows.

Sent from my LG-K121 using Tapatalk

 

[Hlafordlaes]

My oh my, how the frightards cut and run from the facts. Even denials have the lies built in:

“I accept our intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election took place,” Trump also said, before completely undercutting what he had just said.

“It could be other people also,” Trump said. “There’s a lot of people out there.”

Cowering Coward in Chief, leader of the Pink Hanky Parade. If you cannot man up to the facts, you cannot man up, period. Speaks to why they run to beat up on a woman who is not even in power, and treat an ongoing battle as one that is over, so they cannot be seen as abandoning the field, yellow backs turned in panicked flight.

 

[Drewbot]

Can you imagine any scenario, where Trump stands there and throws Putin under the bus in front of the media?

Options
1. You call Putin a liar and go back to the path that isn't working, media attacks for lack of diplomacy.
2. You show Putin you are not calling him a liar in public, and build a relationship with the adversary. Media attacks you anyway.

You take option 2 everytime.

 

[Upchurch]

Can you imagine any scenario, where Trump stands there and throws Putin under the bus in front of the media?

Options
1. You call Putin a liar and go back to the path that isn't working, media attacks for lack of diplomacy.
2. You show Putin you are not calling him a liar in public, and build a relationship with the adversary. Media attacks you anyway.

You take option 2 everytime.

Do I need to point out that this is a false dichotomy?

 

[NoahFence]

Can you imagine any scenario, where Trump stands there and throws Putin under the bus in front of the media?

Options
1. You call Putin a liar and go back to the path that isn't working, media attacks for lack of diplomacy.
2. You show Putin you are not calling him a liar in public, and build a relationship with the adversary. Media attacks you anyway.

You take option 2 everytime.

You forgot about the part where we're supposed to punish people to attack our country.

Why do you hate America?

 

[The Don]

Can you imagine any scenario, where Trump stands there and throws Putin under the bus in front of the media?

Options
1. You call Putin a liar and go back to the path that isn't working, media attacks for lack of diplomacy.
2. You show Putin you are not calling him a liar in public, and build a relationship with the adversary. Media attacks you anyway.

You take option 2 everytime.

3. You wear a tan suit or use Dijon mustard on a burger and it TEOTWAWKI

 

[magellan]

In this instance it means that Putin wanted Trump to win the 2016 election.

from your link:

Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee say they are standing by one of the key conclusions in their report on Russian election interference that questioned whether Russian President Vladimir Putin was trying to help Donald Trump get elected President.
On Monday, Putin said at a news conference alongside Trump in Helsinki, Finland, that he wanted Trump to win the 2016 election over Hillary Clinton, while denying that Russia meddled in the election.

This is not a contradiction.
You can prefer something without helping it to happen.

 

[plague311]

Do I need to point out that this is a false dichotomy?

That implies the person presenting the argument didn't know that in the first place, which he did. It's crazy that Trump has stood on both sides of this issue already, and his supporters have tried to cover for him both times. That can't be healthy to constantly have to betray yourself just to support this *******.

 

[lomiller]

I am not a native speaker in english, so the finer points sometimes elude me.

Is "preferred" the same thing as "tried to help"?

A wise statesman once said "The 80ies called. they want their foreign policy back"

Keep in mind, that wording was created by people actively trying to protect Trump. Other sources, including both Democrats on that same committee and both Republicans and Democrats on the Senate committee are more specific and say that Russia was trying to help Trump win the election.

While preferred could mean that, you are correct in thinking that it’s more open to interpretation than what the intelligence community is actually saying. The use of softer less specific terminology is probably no accident. This type of terminology is less threatening and less likely to create negative sentiment towards Trump while still being a technically valid description of what the intelligence community says happened.