RE: Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
(08-07-2018 12:59 PM)VA49er Wrote: lol, Trump has them spinning every which way they probably haven't even thought of that. They probably think that even if DT is impeached a Dem would take his place. They've obviously learned nothing since the last election
RE: Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
One of the pieces by themselves sure. You guys make sense. The 1000’s of other pieces of evidence. The guy is guilty as sin.
Aliens building the pyramids. I understand the need to ridicule because it looks so bad. But really? Read the article. You could try to dismiss one the 100’s of things? No. Trump is invested with Russia. Just wait til the money laundering aspect of it.
(This post was last modified: 08-07-2018 03:05 PM by Machiavelli.)
RE: Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
(08-07-2018 03:00 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: One of the pieces by themselves sure. You guys make sense. The 1000’s of other pieces of evidence. The guy is guilty as sin.
"It's one of the enduring misconceptions of the Trump-Russia affair.
During the 2016 Republican convention, the story goes, the Trump campaign weakened a critical passage in the GOP platform to go easy on Russia. The Trump team acted, according to this narrative, as part of an ongoing conspiracy with Russian President Vladimir Putin to help Donald Trump win the White House.
But that is not what happened. In fact, an already-tough portion of the Republican platform dealing with Russia was strengthened, not weakened, at the GOP convention. Here is what took place:..."
<article then discusses in detail what happened>
So how did the "Trump weakened the GOP platform" meme get started?
Seizing on the Trump campaign's entirely defensible change of Denman's "lethal defensive weapons" to "appropriate assistance to the armed forces" — neither of which was in the original GOP draft platform — some Democrats, Republican NeverTrumpers, and their allies in the press portrayed the platform meeting in Cleveland as Donald Trump selling out the GOP to Putin.
They were helped in their efforts by a July 18, 2016, story in the Washington Post with the headline, "Trump campaign guts GOP's anti-Russia stance on Ukraine" — a blatantly false description of events.
The narrative spread. "The same month that Trump denied Putin's role in Ukraine, his team weakened the party platform on Ukraine," Democratic Rep. Andre Carson said during a House Intelligence Committee hearing in March.
"This was the same month that several individuals in the Trump orbit held secret meetings with Russian officials, some of which may have been on the topic of sanctions against Russia or their intervention in Ukraine. Now, this is no coincidence, in my opinion."
In addition to being factually wrong, that storyline seems particularly out of place coming from Democrats, because the 2016 Democratic platform, while pledging to "stand up to Russian aggression," said nothing about U.S. sanctions against Russia or about U.S. aid to Ukraine's armed forces, both of which were in the Trump-approved Republican platform. Needless to say, the Democratic platform said not a word about lethal aid to Ukraine.
Yet Democrats, along with GOP NeverTrumpers, press on — and it appears the platform narrative, wrong as it is, will not die. That won't change until people begin to look at what actually happened at that Republican platform meeting in Cleveland."
Was it changed? Why yes it was. Was it to Russia's benefit? I think that changing lethal military to appropriate is to their benefit.
RE: Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
(08-07-2018 03:00 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: One of the pieces by themselves sure. You guys make sense. The 1000’s of other pieces of evidence. The guy is guilty as sin.
Aliens building the pyramids. I understand the need to ridicule because it looks so bad. But really? Read the article. You could try to dismiss one the 100’s of things? No. Trump is invested with Russia. Just wait til the money laundering aspect of it.
Its not an article its an opinion piece. Quit trying to pass it off as some big smoking gun when all it's a person's thoughts and opinions without proof to back it up.
RE: Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
(08-07-2018 07:43 AM)Machiavelli Wrote: : Most Republicans would rather win an election with Putin’s help than lose one without it.
The bolder part above speaks volumes about this room.
It also speaks volumes about you and 'your side', the hypocrisy.
What is alleged is that Putin and the Russians offered 'dirt' on Hillary, and you're more concerned with the messenger of that 'dirt' than on the dirt itself.
If Aliens from another planet had proof of your allegations about Trump, we ALL know that you wouldn't disregard it because of the messenger. You'd rather the exact same thing you accuse 'this room' of above.
If Trump has conspired against the people of the US, then I have no problem frying him. Of course we already have evidence that Hillary did just that... and we keep ignoring this.
The problem you have is the old 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' axiom. Just because neither the right nor the russians wanted Hillary elected doesn't mean that had the same rationale or goals for that.... no matter how you cry and whine and try and claim it is so
(08-07-2018 01:30 PM)Jugnaut Wrote: The title of this thread is misleading. It should say "Dems greatest HOPE: president is russian asset."
Their greatest fear is that Trump was legitimately elected and voters rejected their policies.
This
(08-07-2018 03:23 PM)gdunn Wrote: Its not an article its an opinion piece. Quit trying to pass it off as some big smoking gun when all it's a person's thoughts and opinions without proof to back it up.
and this
all conjecture and allegations... which mach falls for because he believes it
(This post was last modified: 08-07-2018 03:58 PM by Hambone10.)
"It's one of the enduring misconceptions of the Trump-Russia affair.
During the 2016 Republican convention, the story goes, the Trump campaign weakened a critical passage in the GOP platform to go easy on Russia. The Trump team acted, according to this narrative, as part of an ongoing conspiracy with Russian President Vladimir Putin to help Donald Trump win the White House.
But that is not what happened. In fact, an already-tough portion of the Republican platform dealing with Russia was strengthened, not weakened, at the GOP convention. Here is what took place:..."
<article then discusses in detail what happened>
So how did the "Trump weakened the GOP platform" meme get started?
Seizing on the Trump campaign's entirely defensible change of Denman's "lethal defensive weapons" to "appropriate assistance to the armed forces" — neither of which was in the original GOP draft platform — some Democrats, Republican NeverTrumpers, and their allies in the press portrayed the platform meeting in Cleveland as Donald Trump selling out the GOP to Putin.
They were helped in their efforts by a July 18, 2016, story in the Washington Post with the headline, "Trump campaign guts GOP's anti-Russia stance on Ukraine" — a blatantly false description of events.
The narrative spread. "The same month that Trump denied Putin's role in Ukraine, his team weakened the party platform on Ukraine," Democratic Rep. Andre Carson said during a House Intelligence Committee hearing in March.
"This was the same month that several individuals in the Trump orbit held secret meetings with Russian officials, some of which may have been on the topic of sanctions against Russia or their intervention in Ukraine. Now, this is no coincidence, in my opinion."
In addition to being factually wrong, that storyline seems particularly out of place coming from Democrats, because the 2016 Democratic platform, while pledging to "stand up to Russian aggression," said nothing about U.S. sanctions against Russia or about U.S. aid to Ukraine's armed forces, both of which were in the Trump-approved Republican platform. Needless to say, the Democratic platform said not a word about lethal aid to Ukraine.
Yet Democrats, along with GOP NeverTrumpers, press on — and it appears the platform narrative, wrong as it is, will not die. That won't change until people begin to look at what actually happened at that Republican platform meeting in Cleveland."
Was it changed? Why yes it was. Was it to Russia's benefit? I think that changing lethal military to appropriate is to their benefit.
The platform, which was already much stronger than the Democrat's, was made stronger. Now an amendment that would have strengthened it even more was toned down.
"...Finally, Denman's lethal aid suggestion was changed to "appropriate assistance to the armed forces" — a change that put the specific promise of U.S. aid to Ukraine's armed forces in the platform where it had not been originally...."
Note that Trump HAS provided lethal aid (anti-tank weapons) while Obama refused.
(This post was last modified: 08-07-2018 04:06 PM by bullet.)
08-07-2018 04:05 PM
Machiavelli
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity
Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
"It's one of the enduring misconceptions of the Trump-Russia affair.
During the 2016 Republican convention, the story goes, the Trump campaign weakened a critical passage in the GOP platform to go easy on Russia. The Trump team acted, according to this narrative, as part of an ongoing conspiracy with Russian President Vladimir Putin to help Donald Trump win the White House.
But that is not what happened. In fact, an already-tough portion of the Republican platform dealing with Russia was strengthened, not weakened, at the GOP convention. Here is what took place:..."
<article then discusses in detail what happened>
So how did the "Trump weakened the GOP platform" meme get started?
Seizing on the Trump campaign's entirely defensible change of Denman's "lethal defensive weapons" to "appropriate assistance to the armed forces" — neither of which was in the original GOP draft platform — some Democrats, Republican NeverTrumpers, and their allies in the press portrayed the platform meeting in Cleveland as Donald Trump selling out the GOP to Putin.
They were helped in their efforts by a July 18, 2016, story in the Washington Post with the headline, "Trump campaign guts GOP's anti-Russia stance on Ukraine" — a blatantly false description of events.
The narrative spread. "The same month that Trump denied Putin's role in Ukraine, his team weakened the party platform on Ukraine," Democratic Rep. Andre Carson said during a House Intelligence Committee hearing in March.
"This was the same month that several individuals in the Trump orbit held secret meetings with Russian officials, some of which may have been on the topic of sanctions against Russia or their intervention in Ukraine. Now, this is no coincidence, in my opinion."
In addition to being factually wrong, that storyline seems particularly out of place coming from Democrats, because the 2016 Democratic platform, while pledging to "stand up to Russian aggression," said nothing about U.S. sanctions against Russia or about U.S. aid to Ukraine's armed forces, both of which were in the Trump-approved Republican platform. Needless to say, the Democratic platform said not a word about lethal aid to Ukraine.
Yet Democrats, along with GOP NeverTrumpers, press on — and it appears the platform narrative, wrong as it is, will not die. That won't change until people begin to look at what actually happened at that Republican platform meeting in Cleveland."
Was it changed? Why yes it was. Was it to Russia's benefit? I think that changing lethal military to appropriate is to their benefit.
The platform, which was already much stronger than the Democrat's, was made stronger. Now an amendment that would have strengthened it even more was toned down.
"...Finally, Denman's lethal aid suggestion was changed to "appropriate assistance to the armed forces" — a change that put the specific promise of U.S. aid to Ukraine's armed forces in the platform where it had not been originally...."
Note that Trump HAS provided lethal aid (anti-tank weapons) while Obama refused.
That was a bribe. As soon as Trump did that Ukraine stopped helping in the Mueller probe.
RE: Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
(08-07-2018 04:57 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:
(08-07-2018 04:05 PM)bullet Wrote:
(08-07-2018 03:07 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:
(08-07-2018 12:52 PM)bullet Wrote: Well since Tom took the time to pull up a link, here is what really happened on the Republican platform on the Ukraine. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron...and-russia
"It's one of the enduring misconceptions of the Trump-Russia affair.
During the 2016 Republican convention, the story goes, the Trump campaign weakened a critical passage in the GOP platform to go easy on Russia. The Trump team acted, according to this narrative, as part of an ongoing conspiracy with Russian President Vladimir Putin to help Donald Trump win the White House.
But that is not what happened. In fact, an already-tough portion of the Republican platform dealing with Russia was strengthened, not weakened, at the GOP convention. Here is what took place:..."
<article then discusses in detail what happened>
So how did the "Trump weakened the GOP platform" meme get started?
Seizing on the Trump campaign's entirely defensible change of Denman's "lethal defensive weapons" to "appropriate assistance to the armed forces" — neither of which was in the original GOP draft platform — some Democrats, Republican NeverTrumpers, and their allies in the press portrayed the platform meeting in Cleveland as Donald Trump selling out the GOP to Putin.
They were helped in their efforts by a July 18, 2016, story in the Washington Post with the headline, "Trump campaign guts GOP's anti-Russia stance on Ukraine" — a blatantly false description of events.
The narrative spread. "The same month that Trump denied Putin's role in Ukraine, his team weakened the party platform on Ukraine," Democratic Rep. Andre Carson said during a House Intelligence Committee hearing in March.
"This was the same month that several individuals in the Trump orbit held secret meetings with Russian officials, some of which may have been on the topic of sanctions against Russia or their intervention in Ukraine. Now, this is no coincidence, in my opinion."
In addition to being factually wrong, that storyline seems particularly out of place coming from Democrats, because the 2016 Democratic platform, while pledging to "stand up to Russian aggression," said nothing about U.S. sanctions against Russia or about U.S. aid to Ukraine's armed forces, both of which were in the Trump-approved Republican platform. Needless to say, the Democratic platform said not a word about lethal aid to Ukraine.
Yet Democrats, along with GOP NeverTrumpers, press on — and it appears the platform narrative, wrong as it is, will not die. That won't change until people begin to look at what actually happened at that Republican platform meeting in Cleveland."
Was it changed? Why yes it was. Was it to Russia's benefit? I think that changing lethal military to appropriate is to their benefit.
York's article is spin on top of spin. And furthermore, Trump has delayed implementing Russian sanctions https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/timeline...d=50733408 voted on by a GOP led Congress.
The platform, which was already much stronger than the Democrat's, was made stronger. Now an amendment that would have strengthened it even more was toned down.
"...Finally, Denman's lethal aid suggestion was changed to "appropriate assistance to the armed forces" — a change that put the specific promise of U.S. aid to Ukraine's armed forces in the platform where it had not been originally...."
Note that Trump HAS provided lethal aid (anti-tank weapons) while Obama refused.
That was a bribe. As soon as Trump did that Ukraine stopped helping in the Mueller probe.
RE: Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
(08-07-2018 04:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:
(08-07-2018 04:57 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:
(08-07-2018 04:05 PM)bullet Wrote:
(08-07-2018 03:07 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:
(08-07-2018 12:52 PM)bullet Wrote: Well since Tom took the time to pull up a link, here is what really happened on the Republican platform on the Ukraine. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron...and-russia
"It's one of the enduring misconceptions of the Trump-Russia affair.
During the 2016 Republican convention, the story goes, the Trump campaign weakened a critical passage in the GOP platform to go easy on Russia. The Trump team acted, according to this narrative, as part of an ongoing conspiracy with Russian President Vladimir Putin to help Donald Trump win the White House.
But that is not what happened. In fact, an already-tough portion of the Republican platform dealing with Russia was strengthened, not weakened, at the GOP convention. Here is what took place:..."
<article then discusses in detail what happened>
So how did the "Trump weakened the GOP platform" meme get started?
Seizing on the Trump campaign's entirely defensible change of Denman's "lethal defensive weapons" to "appropriate assistance to the armed forces" — neither of which was in the original GOP draft platform — some Democrats, Republican NeverTrumpers, and their allies in the press portrayed the platform meeting in Cleveland as Donald Trump selling out the GOP to Putin.
They were helped in their efforts by a July 18, 2016, story in the Washington Post with the headline, "Trump campaign guts GOP's anti-Russia stance on Ukraine" — a blatantly false description of events.
The narrative spread. "The same month that Trump denied Putin's role in Ukraine, his team weakened the party platform on Ukraine," Democratic Rep. Andre Carson said during a House Intelligence Committee hearing in March.
"This was the same month that several individuals in the Trump orbit held secret meetings with Russian officials, some of which may have been on the topic of sanctions against Russia or their intervention in Ukraine. Now, this is no coincidence, in my opinion."
In addition to being factually wrong, that storyline seems particularly out of place coming from Democrats, because the 2016 Democratic platform, while pledging to "stand up to Russian aggression," said nothing about U.S. sanctions against Russia or about U.S. aid to Ukraine's armed forces, both of which were in the Trump-approved Republican platform. Needless to say, the Democratic platform said not a word about lethal aid to Ukraine.
Yet Democrats, along with GOP NeverTrumpers, press on — and it appears the platform narrative, wrong as it is, will not die. That won't change until people begin to look at what actually happened at that Republican platform meeting in Cleveland."
Was it changed? Why yes it was. Was it to Russia's benefit? I think that changing lethal military to appropriate is to their benefit.
York's article is spin on top of spin. And furthermore, Trump has delayed implementing Russian sanctions https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/timeline...d=50733408 voted on by a GOP led Congress.
The platform, which was already much stronger than the Democrat's, was made stronger. Now an amendment that would have strengthened it even more was toned down.
"...Finally, Denman's lethal aid suggestion was changed to "appropriate assistance to the armed forces" — a change that put the specific promise of U.S. aid to Ukraine's armed forces in the platform where it had not been originally...."
Note that Trump HAS provided lethal aid (anti-tank weapons) while Obama refused.
That was a bribe. As soon as Trump did that Ukraine stopped helping in the Mueller probe.
Oh, dear God.
Hey. They're all Slavs. Russian, Ukrainian, Serbian, what does it matter?
RE: Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
(08-07-2018 07:37 AM)Machiavelli Wrote: Each paragraph below is an excerpt from the article. It’s a long read but incredibly terrifying and plausible.
It was already apparent in 2016 that the highest-profile parts of Russia’s messaging machine, like RT and Sputnik, were biased toward Trump. But now we know that its social-media activity employed precise demographic and geographic targeting — far more precise than a foreign country would be expected to have and notably concentrated on “key demographic groups in areas of the states that turned out to be pivotal,” CNN reported. That information is highly valuable: When a Republican staffer named Aaron Nevins received stolen Democratic Party voter-profile data from Guccifer 2.0, the Russian-backed hacker, that summer, he wrote to the hacker, “This is probably worth millions of dollars.” The Alfa Bank server connection might not have been put to the exact same kind of collaborative purpose, but Russia’s social-media operation needed some fine-grained expertise to direct its targeted messages. It likely got it from somebody connected to Trump and quite possibly used the server to transmit directly with Trump Tower. If that server was transmitting data to and from Moscow, who in Trump Tower was feeding it?
The closest model for how Russia covertly operates may be the Brexit campaign in the U.K., which took place months before the 2016 American election. Driving Britain out of the European Union advanced the decades-long Russian goal of splitting Western nations apart, and Russia found willing allies on the British far right. Not only did Russia use social media to covertly promote Brexit, but Russian officials also met secretly several times with Arron Banks, the millionaire British businessman who supported the Brexit campaign, with the largest political donation in British history. Leaked documents reveal that the Russians discussed letting Banks in on a gold-mining deal that could have produced several billion dollars in easy profit. It might seem preposterous that a national vote that changed the course of British history was determined by a secret Russian operation. British conservatives long dismissed suspicions of covert Russian involvement as a “conspiracy theory.” Yet the conspiracy appears to have been very real.
Why would Manafort, who has a law degree from Georgetown and years of experience around white-collar crime, behave like this? Of all those in Trump’s camp, he is the furthest thing from a true believer, and he lacks any long-standing personal ties to the president or his family, so what incentive does he have to spend most or all of his remaining years in prison rather than betray Trump? One way to make sense of his behavior is the possibility that Manafort is keeping his mouth shut because he’s afraid of being killed.
The latter fear is hardly paranoid. Russia murders people routinely, at home and abroad. In the nine months after Trump’s election, nine Russian officials were murdered or died mysteriously. At least one was suspected to have been a likely source for Steele. The attorney for the firm that hired Steele told the Senate last August, “Somebody’s already been killed as a result of the publication of this dossier.”
Now that he’s in office, Trump’s ties to Russia have attracted close scrutiny, and he has found his room to maneuver with Putin sharply constrained by his party. In early 2017, Congress passed sanctions to retaliate against Russia’s election attack. Trump lobbied to weaken them, and when they passed by vetoproof supermajorities, he was reportedly “apoplectic” and took four days to agree to sign the bill even knowing he couldn’t block it. After their passage, Trump has failed to enforce the sanctions as directed.
And if you’re Putin, embarking upon a coveted summit with the most Russophilic president since World War II, who is taking a crowbar to the alliance of your enemies, why wouldn’t you help him in 2018 and 2020? Ever since the fall of 2016, when Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell privately turned down an Obama-administration proposal for a bipartisan warning to Russia not to interfere in the election, the underlying dynamic has been set: Most Republicans would rather win an election with Putin’s help than lose one without it. The Democrats, brimming with rage, threaten to investigate Russian activity if they win a chamber of Congress this November. For Putin to redouble his attack — by hacking into voting machines or some other method — would be both strategic and in keeping with his personality. Why stop now?
The bolder part above speaks volumes about this room.
RE: Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
(08-07-2018 01:03 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: That opinion piece deals with 100’s of facts that by themselves should or could be suspicious. Added together?????? Man boys..... The Alfa Bank and the Trump Tower????? That should scare the crap out of everybody.
Dude---you need to get hold of yourself. Hillary was a Secretary of State with tons of shady deals in her past. A simple layman could easily post literally 1000's of "facts" and convince you that Hillary and Bill have been working for Putin since the 1990's. There used to be a parlor game called the 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon. It was based on the "six degrees of separation" concept, which posits that any two people on Earth are six or fewer acquaintance links apart. The object was to find the shortest link between an arbitrary actor and prolific actor Kevin Bacon using actors they had worked with in other movies. It was usually shockingly easy to do in less than 6 movies if you were fairly familiar with a few decade of movies. At the level that people like Trump and Hillary are operating---there just are not that many people swimming in those circles. Its easy to fashion "connections" and paint dire conspiracy theories based on people who knew one another and sometimes speak.
About the dumbest theory yet is that the only guy to actually put America first in foreign policy in a generation is actually acting in Russia's best interest. The "Comrad Trump" theory literally falls apart on that basis alone.
(This post was last modified: 08-07-2018 05:34 PM by Attackcoog.)
/
Our biggest fear:What if Trump is a Russian asset?
