With the Russian/Trump Connections in the Media (again)...

[suncowiam]

Sure, I'll take a swing.

Putin is a dictatorial thug whose enemies keep dropping dead of "unfortunate accidents." He is pushing towards fully re-establishing the totalitarianism of the old Soviet Union. Under the guidance of his shirtless, macho leadership, Russia is turning homosexuality into a crime, and has recently made domestic abuse LESS of a crime, prompting a huge upswing in spousal beatings. And that's really just the start, he is NOT a nice man.

So now Flynn has quit--probably to forestall charges related to espionage or national security violations--but Trump continues to flout even the most basic national security protocols. Trump dumped the White House chief information security officer earlier this month, the guy responsible for making sure presidential communications are secure, and has not replaced him. Although he has been issued the special encrypted presidential smartphone, he continues to use his old, unsecured Android phone. There are people in the Pentagon now who have already said that the White House situation room is no longer a secured space, and Russia or other governments might be listening in.

It's not that it's bad to have ties with another country. It's the rumors that Trump in particular may have received large financial compensation for favors to be-rendered in the future.

For example, 19.5% of Rosnef stock was transfered to an unknown party recently. This is worth a very large sum of money. The Russians however need Exxon expertise to exploit certain oil deposits. We have placed sanctions against Russia preventing this.

The point is a President is not supposed to view the position as a way to personally enrich himself, but to serve the greater interests of the nation as a whole.

As for other reasons some people may be concerned with Russia - Trump has called NATO useless. NATO basically exists to contain Russian expansion. Various European countries are nervous (Poland and smaller Baltic States for example). Russia claims to be helping 'oppressed Russian minority', goes in with troops. See Georgia and Ukraine recently.

The leader of a country (and its government's advisers) must have one loyalty and that is to their country.

Anything that puts that into doubt is of deep concern for the citizens of that country.

Big swing there buddy!

 

[suncowiam]

A theory.....
For Democrats, the Russians are a useful boogeyman.
If they can be both demonized & connected to Trump, then it's worth increasing the risk of violent conflict.
Politics is often not about what's best for the country, but rather what's best for the party.

So they're currently saying that something nefarious is there, because something nefarious might be there.
But have they thought this thru?
Let's say their dream comes true, ie, Trump is impeached, convicted, & driven from office.
Pence would become Prez.
Would he be weakened by such events?
No....his more conventional Republican status could mean even greater cooperation with his party's control of Congress.
Is that better for progressives & everyone else than Trump?

More people should play go.
One learns that an attack requires great care & planning, lest a battle won cause an overall loss.

Russians hacked the DNC, so they're only considered a Boogieman. I guess it will take the Russians to hack the Republicans for them to be considered anything more.

How about we also consider facts and not just goals? Yes, yes, the DNC has some goals that are very anti-Trump. But if Trump ever acted illegally, I don't care whose goals they align to, this should be known regardless of what potential fall out occurs.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

That wasn't my point. He implied that he could do no wrong in the eyes of his followers, and he seems to have been right for the most part.

Foreign power interferes with computer hacking and spreads it around: no problem, it's only sore losers who complain about that.

President may have ties and direct business dealings and could create foreign policy to benefit himself: no problem, we should have closer ties and Trumps "enemies" only want to scare us about Russia, because politics.

Some may President's administration may be compromised by blackmail by Russian intelligence: no problem, it's a partisan witch hunt. . . let's drop it without an investigation.

Regularly insults foreign leaders and seems to have no idea what our actual current deals are: no problem, he just a tough guy. . . Have you see how hard his handshake is?

The chairman of the foreign armed services committee John McCain (R), along with Linsey Graham (R), John Cornyn (R), Roy Blunt (R), and others. . . all Senate Republicans, want an immediate full investigation. They also seem to think this Russia alliance is a bad idea. And that's just the Senate, the House is also full of voices demanding such action: no problem, the real issue here is that there were leaks or something.

I think we need a new name for it.

Trump + Apologetics = Trumpolegetics.

And this:

Escalation of commitment - Wikipedia

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Trump wasn't kidding when he said that he could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and not lose any supporters.

Heck, I'm pretty sure he was bragging.

 

[Stevicus]

Russia, in itself, is responsible for a great deal of instability in the Balkans. Can't claim they are the key to stability while they cause the opposite.

The Balkans themselves are responsible for the instability in their own region. Can't blame the Russians for that.

 

[fantome profane]

Heck, I'm pretty sure he was bragging.

Q. How can you tell if Trump is bragging?

A. His mouth is mouthing.

 

[YmirGF]

Heck, I'm pretty sure he was bragging.

Also, prolly felt smug that he could likely buy off any witnesses...

 

[tytlyf]

More russian 'coincidences.' Doesn't help that Trump is lying about it. No surprise the Trump voters are defending him til death. They don't care.

Very dangerous times, but I knew this before the election.

 

[idav]

Oh, but it is the point (as I see it).
Many are making much of the Russian connections because they hope for ammunition to use against
Trump. (This is what happened during the election, with the unevidenced claims of mere likelihood that
Russians helped him.) The hope for something illegal isn't really about wanting to enforce the law.
(We saw that with Hillary's server issue.) The law is about politics more than justice.

This isn't about ammunition against trump or republicans. That's like trump saying that all the fake news is hillarys fault. Can we just judge him by the horrible job he is doing without bringing in partisanship. I really could care less if trump gets impeached, he got elected now he has the world to answer to.

 

[Revoltingest]

Russians hacked the DNC....

This isn't a fact.
Even the agencies which say it's likely won't produce any evidence.
And as we saw & still see, the intelligence community is willing to
take sides for or against a pol.

........so they're only considered a Boogieman. I guess it will take the Russians to hack the Republicans for them to be considered anything more.

This is just partisan speculation from a pretty shaky premise.

How about we also consider facts and not just goals? Yes, yes, the DNC has some goals that are very anti-Trump. But if Trump ever acted illegally, I don't care whose goals they align to, this should be known regardless of what potential fall out occurs.

Illegal acts should see the light of day.
Present what you find.

 

[Revoltingest]

This isn't about ammunition against trump or republicans. That's like trump saying that all the fake news is hillarys fault. Can we just judge him by the horrible job he is doing without bringing in partisanship. I really could care less if trump gets impeached, he got elected now he has the world to answer to.

It's too early to say he's doing either a good or bad job.
He certainly has some teething problems, but there are some positives.
What matters is results, & we don't have any yet.
Tis hard to predict what will emerge from the chaos.

 

[idav]

It's too early to say he's doing either a good or bad job.
He certainly has some teething problems, but there are some positives.
What matters is results, & we don't have any yet.
Tis hard to predict what will emerge from the chaos.

He gives plenty to debate about, doesn't mind controversy that's for sure.

 

[suncowiam]

This isn't a fact.
Even the agencies which say it's likely won't produce any evidence.
And as we saw & still see, the intelligence community is willing to
take sides for or against a pol.

This is just partisan speculation from a pretty shaky premise.

Illegal acts should see the light of day.
Present what you find.

What is a fact is that a majority of US intelligence agencies and even the president believes Russians hacked. But you're right, I don't have evidence so I am presuming my position based on authority. I do believe my authorities do qualify for such a position that even necessitated the recent US regime to sanction Russia and also then reaffirmed by Trump.

Our conversation was based around your hypothetical situation of Trump being impeached and the fallout of Pence becoming president. Obviously, I do not have evidence concerning your hypothetical but just stating that we should focus on facts and not some fallout of Pence becoming president.

 

[Revoltingest]

What is a fact is that a majority of US intelligence agencies and even the president believes Russians hacked. But you're right, I don't have evidence so I am presuming my position based on authority. I do believe my authorities do qualify for such a position that even necessitated the recent US regime to sanction Russia and also then reaffirmed by Trump.

Our conversation was based around your hypothetical situation of Trump being impeached and the fallout of Pence becoming president. Obviously, I do not have evidence concerning your hypothetical but just stating that we should focus on facts and not some fallout of Pence becoming president.

There are facts about Pence's values & political views.
If we assume Trump is deposed, then we may assess the risks of a Pence presidency.

 

[suncowiam]

There are facts about Pence's values & political views.
If we assume Trump is deposed, then we may assess the risks of a Pence presidency.

Pence can wait his turn to be impeached.

I'm joking!

 

[Quetzal]

The Balkans themselves are responsible for the instability in their own region. Can't blame the Russians for that.

Yeah, Russia invading Georgia and Ukraine. Totally their fault.

 

[metis]

What is a fact is that a majority of US intelligence agencies and even the president believes Russians hacked. But you're right, I don't have evidence so I am presuming my position based on authority.

I know you know this fact but there are some that don't, or they just deny it, and that is that the intelligence community is highly restricted in what they can disclose publicly for security reasons. But when we see members of the Republican Party who have said there's something there, then I would suggest that those who suggest otherwise are just burrowing their head in the sand because they just don't want to know anything that might suggest they were duped. And it's common knowledge, based on numerous reports and witnesses to the evidence, that the DNC was hacked into to look at its e-mails.

 

[Stevicus]

Yeah, Russia invading Georgia and Ukraine. Totally their fault.

Georgia and Ukraine are not in the Balkans. You mentioned the Balkans, and now you're bringing up something different. Stop moving the goalposts, and perhaps we can have a reasonable discussion on this matter. Or maybe not.

 

[Quetzal]

Georgia and Ukraine are not in the Balkans. You mentioned the Balkans, and now you're bringing up something different. Stop moving the goalposts, and perhaps we can have a reasonable discussion on this matter. Or maybe not.

You're right but my point still stands. Russia is creating instability in the regions of influence. You can't argue against that. Sorry.

 

[Underhill]

This isn't a fact.

Sure, in the same way evolution isn't fact. Just all the evidence points to it, and most experts agree.. but we could be wrong.

Even the agencies which say it's likely won't produce any evidence.
And as we saw & still see, the intelligence community is willing to
take sides for or against a pol.

Against a pol, or against an ignorant leader who talks trash about agencies he knows nothing about?