Сделаем Америку снова великой! Trump - Russia megathread

[Chizzang]

But Hilary... oh wait I mean Obama

Good thing you'll not run for political office, Clirz.

Because if you did, your relationship with me would certainly be revealed


"He had a close relationship with an American in the intelligence community who had sympathies for Russia"

I'm sorry... I forgot, who are you again..?

[houndawg]

The real issue is that POTUS is in deep to the Russian mob.

Dude

There is no way to have relationships with ANY Russians- business or otherwise- without being tied to the Russian mafia

You do business with Russians, you do business with the mob - the entire country is run on that business model

They are all OG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh. Nevermind then.

I

[89Hen]

To be totally honest, I avoid the news and talk radio (except sports) so I'm probably a little behind on this and I think it smells from all sides, but what I'm having a hard time understanding is that a candidate's advisor was asked if he wanted information from the Russian government on his candidate's opponent that incriminated her with Russian ties. That seems to be the heart of this, yes? If so, isn't that kind of exact information that the candidate's (now official's) opponents are trying to dig up on him?

So no help here?

[CID1990]

I'm not ruling out anything here. I believe in the rule of law. There are things you can do and things you can't do. If you break the law, you need to pay a price. Whether that is Flynn, Trump Jr, Trump, etc., it does not matter.
What I won't do is get overly excited about bits and pieces of information. Telling me that a QB threw an interception and a running back gained 13 yards on a play tells me nothing about the outcome of the game. Wake me up when people doing the real investigation is ready to reveal their findings.

* are

I'm mostly with you. I'm mostly in it for theatre.

Curious regarding CID's post... Does limited government include a far reaching, vast foreign policy where deals must be struck with mafiosos regarding finance, foreign and domestic development, and oil extraction half a world away? Seems tough to do without a very large government.

I would think big government would be inimical to doing business with Russians, Nigerians, Vietnamese or anyone else with endemic corruption


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

To be totally honest, I avoid the news and talk radio (except sports) so I'm probably a little behind on this and I think it smells from all sides, but what I'm having a hard time understanding is that a candidate's advisor was asked if he wanted information from the Russian government on his candidate's opponent that incriminated her with Russian ties. That seems to be the heart of this, yes? If so, isn't that kind of exact information that the candidate's (now official's) opponents are trying to dig up on him?

So no help here?

Obviously, the thing that's causing all the fuss isn't that the Trump campaign was trying to dig up information on Hillary. It's that Trump Jr. got an e mail describing a desire on the part of the Russian government to help the Trump campaign then another one about scheduling a meeting with a "Russian government attorney."

Then Trump Jr., along with the Trump campaign manager and the Trump campaign official in charge of data analytics, went to a meeting they saw as being a meeting with a Russian government attorney.

That all happened in the context of all the talk about collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign. At the very least, the information pretty much provides incontrovertible evidence that key members of the Trump campaign at least ATTEMPTED collusion with the Russian government. And at this point anything people associated with the Trump campaign SAY about what the meeting actually entailed is pretty much worthless because they've lied so much.

And it's not just me saying they lied so much. See my last post in the thread about CNN. Even people like Shepherd Smith and Chris Wallace on Fox News along with Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard are saying it. At this point if you are a person that continues to believe what people from the Trump Administration say you are just being intentionally obtuse.

[GannonFan]

At this point if you are a person that continues to believe what people from the Trump Administration say you are just being intentionally obtuse.

Has "intentionally obtuse" now replaced "basket of deplorables"? Insulting a good chunk of the electorate seems to always be such a winning strategy.

[kalm]

At this point if you are a person that continues to believe what people from the Trump Administration say you are just being intentionally obtuse.

Has "intentionally obtuse" now replaced "basket of deplorables"? Insulting a good chunk of the electorate seems to always be such a winning strategy.

Is JSO running for office?

In any event, he's aligning now with the likes George Will and Charles Krauthammer and starting to sound more justified by the day.

[houndawg]

To be totally honest, I avoid the news and talk radio (except sports) so I'm probably a little behind on this and I think it smells from all sides, but what I'm having a hard time understanding is that a candidate's advisor was asked if he wanted information from the Russian government on his candidate's opponent that incriminated her with Russian ties. That seems to be the heart of this, yes? If so, isn't that kind of exact information that the candidate's (now official's) opponents are trying to dig up on him?

So no help here?

Not here. I'm still trying to figure out how why a certain normally rabidly anti-communist demographic thinks it's a good thing that our biggest adversary got the President they wanted.

[houndawg]

At this point if you are a person that continues to believe what people from the Trump Administration say you are just being intentionally obtuse.

Has "intentionally obtuse" now replaced "basket of deplorables"? Insulting a good chunk of the electorate seems to always be such a winning strategy.

A deep question worthy of a different thread.

Schooled by JSO.....

[Chizzang]

So no help here?

Not here. I'm still trying to figure out how why a certain normally rabidly anti-communist demographic thinks it's a good thing that our biggest adversary got the President they wanted.

This ^ is actually pretty funny

[kalm]

Not here. I'm still trying to figure out how why a certain normally rabidly anti-communist demographic thinks it's a good thing that our biggest adversary got the President they wanted.

This ^ is actually pretty funny

Indeed. It's like deficit spending...

[Ivytalk]

This ^ is actually pretty funny

Indeed. It's like deficit spending...

Ther's nothing funny about deficit spending.

[kalm]

Indeed. It's like deficit spending...

Ther's nothing funny about deficit spending when Democrats are in control. .

Totally agree!

[Ivytalk]

Ther's nothing funny about deficit spending when Democrats are in control. .

Totally agree!

Quit doctoring my posts!

There's nothing funny about deficit spending under either party.

[CID1990]

Totally agree!

Quit doctoring my posts!

There's nothing funny about deficit spending under either party.

Just like a true progressive..... doctoring history to fit a narrative


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Quit doctoring my posts!

There's nothing funny about deficit spending under either party.

Just like a true progressive..... doctoring history to fit a narrative


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So deficits DO matter?

Cool!

[CID1990]

Just like a true progressive..... doctoring history to fit a narrative


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So deficits DO matter?

Cool!

Of course

That was never an issue other than the one you tried to make it into, Rocinante


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

Just like a true progressive..... doctoring history to fit a narrative


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So deficits DO matter?

Cool!

Look at my fvcking siggy.

[JohnStOnge]

At this point if you are a person that continues to believe what people from the Trump Administration say you are just being intentionally obtuse.

Has "intentionally obtuse" now replaced "basket of deplorables"? Insulting a good chunk of the electorate seems to always be such a winning strategy.

You reminded me to change my signature back to the "No One Came" quote.

If a good chunk of the electorate is insulted by the truth, so be it.

Another thing: Clinton was basically right in what she said with that "deplorables" comment. She split Trump supporters into two groups. She clearly said that many Trump supporters were not among what she was calling "deplorables." But she was absolutely correct when she said that there is a core of Trump supporters who truly are in a "basket of deplorables."

It was a political mistake on her part. But it was the truth.

[kalm]

So deficits DO matter?

Cool!

Of course

That was never an issue other than the one you tried to make it into, Rocinante


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank god! Glad the 6% of of true conservatives that don't vote Republican out of regard for principled economics still think it's an issue!

[CID1990]

Of course

That was never an issue other than the one you tried to make it into, Rocinante


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank god! Glad the 6% of of true conservatives that don't vote Republican out of regard for principled economics still think it's an issue!

You really should stop trying to pull that off

You're bad at it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Thank god! Glad the 6% of of true conservatives that don't vote Republican out of regard for principled economics still think it's an issue!

You really should stop trying to pull that off

You're bad at it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't take it personally.

[houndawg]

So deficits DO matter?

Cool!

Of course

That was never an issue other than the one you tried to make it into, Rocinante
?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dick Cheney said deficits don't matter. And he's a smart guy.

[Skjellyfetti]

To be totally honest, I avoid the news and talk radio (except sports) so I'm probably a little behind on this and I think it smells from all sides, but what I'm having a hard time understanding is that a candidate's advisor was asked if he wanted information from the Russian government on his candidate's opponent that incriminated her with Russian ties. That seems to be the heart of this, yes? If so, isn't that kind of exact information that the candidate's (now official's) opponents are trying to dig up on him?

So no help here?

I don't follow what you're getting at.

The part in bold is key - which of Trump's opponents are getting dirt on him from the Russian government?

And, seems the ones doing the most digging on the Russia story are (1) the investigations (Senate, House, Mueller's Justice League) and (2) the Lamestream Media. Both of which have a lot more latitude than a political campaign.

[Col Hogan]

So no help here?

Not here. I'm still trying to figure out how why a certain normally rabidly anti-communist demographic thinks it's a good thing that our biggest adversary got the President they wanted.

Hey Dawg, the 1980's are calling...they want your paranoia back...