Jump to content

Trump and Russia


Recommended Posts

I see it as a positive thing that a Presidential contender is opening dialogue with Russia, this is a country that the US needs as a somewhat-friendly ally in this present day and age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Walsh: The Times ‘exposé’ on Donald Trump Jr. is a big yawn.

 

The news was delivered by the New York Times in the breathless tones that might announce a cure for cancer or the discovery of life on Mars:

 

“President Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign, according to three advisers to the White House briefed on the meeting and two others with knowledge of it.”

 

To which a rational response is … who wouldn’t? And also: so, what?

 

According to the younger Trump, the Clinton angle was just a ruse: “Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered,” he told the Times.

 

“The real reason, it seems, was that Veselnitskaya wanted to lobby for the repeal of the Magnitsky Act, an Obama-era law that allows the US to deny visas to Russians thought guilty of human-rights violations.” In retaliation, the Russians promptly ended the adoption of Russian orphans by Americans.

 

And that’s what all the fuss is about? No campaign in its right mind would turn down an offer of information on their opponent. That is what opposition research is all about. You can bet Hillary wouldn’t have hung up on the person who claimed to have dirt on the Donald. After all, the Clinton campaign lobbied the comedian Tom Arnold two days before the election to release potentially embarrassing footage from Trump’s TV show, “The Apprentice.” Arnold declined.

 

But in the end, the lawyer had nothing, gave nothing, got nothing in return, in a meeting that lasted 20 minutes. This is a scandal?

 

 

 

They hope that the rubes will think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The New Yorker has a 10 pager on how the National Enquirer is buying up all kinds of magazine and helped get Trump elected, missed the usual 12 mentions of the Koch Brothers for some reason....

 

It's come to this for them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I hear and read about these Russian allegations of collusion the more I am convinced that this is one of the greatest McCarthy-like nothing burger stories ever to have been incessantly broadcast by the dishonest mainstream media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I hear and read about these Russian allegations of collusion the more I am convinced that this is one of the greatest McCarthy-like nothing burger stories ever to have been incessantly broadcast by the dishonest mainstream media.

 

what'd i read today, not even a pubic hair's width of proof presented so far

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I hear and read about these Russian allegations of collusion the more I am convinced that this is one of the greatest McCarthy-like nothing burger stories ever to have been incessantly broadcast by the dishonest mainstream media.

Well I am sure glad the people in charge of our security are taking this seriously. Anyone tied up with that gang of thugs in the kremlin can't be trusted with our nations secrets. Claiming it's just a media conspiracy shows the outrageous lengths people will go to avoid the truth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I am sure glad the people in charge of our security are taking this seriously. Anyone tied up with that gang of thugs in the kremlin can't be trusted with our nations secrets. Claiming it's just a media conspiracy shows the outrageous lengths people will go to avoid the truth

 

More like the outrageous lengths people will go to fabricate nonstories to stories.

 

You stated:

 

This meeting with jr. is proof they were trying to collude with the Russians and exactly what the Russians wanted in return.

 

 

 

A) Where is the proof of collusion?

B) If this was collusion this lawyer would have to be some sort of a Russian foreign agent. Is she?

C) In order for there to be collusion, there would have to be a quid pro quo. Where is the quid pro quo?

 

You stated definitively that this is proof, now that you've made the claim, explain in detail with facts and respond to each three of the points that I've brought up.

Edited by Magox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You stated definitively that this is proof, now that you've made the claim, explain in detail with facts and respond to each three of the points that I've brought up.

 

Given that Tiberius/gator and baskin are the same person, you will find that asking them to provide details and facts to back their comments is like throwing holy water at a vampire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it as a positive thing that a Presidential contender is opening dialogue with Russia, this is a country that the US needs as a somewhat-friendly ally in this present day and age.

I don't know what to think of Russia and Putin. The general vibe I got from various news outlets over the years is that both Bush and Obama were optimistic in having a positive working relationship with Putin at the beginning of their term only to be disappointed by the end. I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but the intelligent agencies have lied to us before and maybe Trump is right in that Russia didn't hack the election to the extent where meant to believe. Maybe I'm being too naive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what to think of Russia and Putin. The general vibe I got from various news outlets over the years is that both Bush and Obama were optimistic in having a positive working relationship with Putin at the beginning of their term only to be disappointed by the end. I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but the intelligent agencies have lied to us before and maybe Trump is right in that Russia didn't hack the election to the extent where meant to believe. Maybe I'm being too naive.

 

I hope for a world in which the US and Russia would be shaky friends.

 

I await any evidence at all for all the charges that have rained down the last 8 or so months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what to think of Russia and Putin. The general vibe I got from various news outlets over the years is that both Bush and Obama were optimistic in having a positive working relationship with Putin at the beginning of their term only to be disappointed by the end. I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but the intelligent agencies have lied to us before and maybe Trump is right in that Russia didn't hack the election to the extent where meant to believe. Maybe I'm being too naive.

 

It's naive to think the usic has nothing to gain by pushing this narrative, not to suspect them of malfeasance.

 

Elements within the usic - more so than the dems and the MSM - are the primary pushers of the neo McCarthyist narrative because of the desire to prolonge the regime change wars that inflate their budgets.

 

Russia, since they stepped up in Crimea, has been the biggest foe for that policy. Not just in the Ukraine, but in Syria and the rest of the ME - not to mention NK.

 

Imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who thinks Russia is an ally

 

 

 

is seriously mistaken

 

Never thought they were. Most I ever thought is that we had an occasional intersection of interests with them.

 

Don't think they're overtly hostile, as in the old Comintern days, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...