***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[dwalk31]

This article was written hours ago. You Trump fans are so predictable

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...verybody-does-it-defense-of-collusion/533325/

cliffs from the article you posted: There is not enough information to state that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to interfere with the American election

 

[jimmypiff]

I don't recall saying that countries interfering in elections is ok.

​I don't recall saying that you did?

I'm just trying to clear up your understandings/misunderstandings

 

[boris]

 
​Oh you're sure? lol whew, I was starting to get worried

Comrade Trump is best at deal.

 

[Betonblck]

So if China and the DNC work together in 2020, I guess Republicans would be cool with it

And China hacks emails, breaks into RNC offices and steals computers, it's all ok because all the Democrats did was go to a meeting.

 

[dwalk31]

So if China and the DNC work together in 2020, I guess Republicans would be cool with it

I imagine people will scream Chinese collusion until someone is locked up. That seems to be working very well right now. If it aint broke?

 

[jimmypiff]

 
Comrade Trump is best at deal.

​not according to the many people that sued him for shady "deal"

...I mean, not even American banks will mess with him. His credit score is in the negatives. lol

 

[Belgium]

cliffs from the article you posted: There is not enough information to state that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to interfere with the American election

Which is why an investigation is going on, multiple investigations actually, to look into this whole Russian meddling and whether or not there was any form of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. And if there was, who was involved. Investigations take time. I suggest you look into the history of the Watergate scandal and how long it took amongst other things.

There's the House Intel committee, the Senate Intel committee, the FBI and the special counsel Mueller's investigation.

 

[blackdynamite]

If they aren't bad, can you intelligently explain why Russia is good?

Bad in what sense? America has interfered in elections all over the world, and has even militarily overthrown elected officials all over the world, like Iran in 1953. All I'm saying is that America is being a hypocrite if it thinks that Russia hacked the elections. For one, there is no proof of meddling, and is'nt it pretty obvious that Seth Rich was the DNC leaker? I mean, do Americans think that Russia hacked the machines and changed the votes in the computer....?

 

[deleted]

Look how they squirm when a major story breaks

 

[dwalk31]

Which is why an investigation is going on, multiple investigations actually, to look into this whole Russian meddling and whether or not there was any form of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Investigations take time. I suggest you look into the history of the Watergate scandal and how long it took amongst other things.
There's the House Intel committee, the Senate Intel committee, the FBI and the special counsel Mueller's investigation.

Well yes, that's true. As it stands, tho, nothing has turned up in months

 

[EddieDoyers]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ifi_push_breaking-news&utm_term=.c85e1c441abb

‘Category 5 hurricane’: White House under siege by Trump Jr.’s Russia revelations

The White House has been thrust into chaos after days of ever-worsening revelations about a meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a lawyer characterized as representing the Russian government, as the president fumes against his enemies and senior aides circle each other with suspicion, according to top White House officials and outside advisers.

President Trump — who has been hidden from public view since returning last weekend from a divisive international summit — is enraged that the Russia cloud still hangs over his presidency and is exasperated that his eldest son and namesake has become engulfed by it, said people who have spoken with him this week.

The disclosure that Trump Jr. met with a Russian attorney, believing he would receive incriminating information about Hillary Clinton as part of the Kremlin’s effort to boost his father’s candidacy, has set back the administration’s faltering agenda and rattled the senior leadership team.

Even supporters of Trump Jr. who believe he faces no legal repercussions privately acknowledged Tuesday that the story is a public relations disaster — for him as well as for the White House. One outside ally called it a “Category 5 hurricane,” while an outside adviser said a CNN graphic charting connections between the Trump team and Russians resembled the plot of the fictional Netflix series “House of Cards.”

Even Vice President Pence sought to distance himself from the controversy, with his spokesman noting that Trump Jr.’s meeting occurred before Pence joined the ticket.

Inside a White House in which infighting often seems like a core cultural value, three straight days of revelations in the New York Times about Trump Jr. have inspired a new round of accusations and recriminations, with advisers privately speculating about who inside the Trump orbit may be leaking damaging information about the president’s son.

This portrait of the Trump White House under siege is based on interviews Tuesday with more than a dozen West Wing officials, outside advisers, and friends and associates of the president and his family, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid.

The makeup of Trump’s inner circle is the subject of internal debate, as ever. Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter and senior adviser; Jared Kushner, her husband and another senior adviser; and first lady Melania Trump have been privately pressing the president to shake up his team — most specifically by replacing Reince Priebus as the White House chief of staff, according to two senior White House officials and one ally close to the White House.

The three family members are especially concerned about the steady stream of unauthorized leaks to journalists that have plagued the administration over the nearly six months that President Trump has been in office, from sensitive national security information to embarrassing details about the inner workings of the White House, the officials said.

Stephanie Grisham, the first lady’s communications director, said: “Of course, the first lady is concerned about leaks from her husband’s administration, as all Americans should be. And while she does offer advice and perspectives on many things, Mrs. Trump does not weigh in on West Wing staff.”

Lindsay Walters, a deputy White House press secretary, disputed reports about Priebus’s standing. “These sources have been consistently wrong about Reince, and they’re still wrong today,” she said.

Trump recently publicly praised Priebus’s work ethic, and the chief of staff’s allies note that Priebus has done as good a job as can be expected under the unique circumstances of this administration. Defenders of Priebus have long said they expect him to make it to a year in the position, and Trump is said to be hesitant to fire him or any other senior staffer amid the escalating Russia investigation led by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III.

The mind-set of Trump Jr. over the past few days has evolved from distress to anger to defiance, according to people close to him. He hired a criminal defense attorney, but maintains that he is innocent of any wrongdoing. After his tweets commenting on the matter drew scrutiny, he agreed to his first media interview — with his friend Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity on his show Tuesday night.

One friend of Trump Jr.’s said the presidential son saw the Hannity appearance as an opportunity to give his version of Richard Nixon’s “Checkers” speech, a 1952 address in which the then-vice-presidential candidate defended himself against accusations of financial improprieties.

Trump has had no public events since returning Saturday night from Germany but has been closely monitoring developments with his eldest son in the news.

Trump continues to view the Russia controversy as an excuse used by Democrats for losing an election they thought they would win — and an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of his victory, aides said. They said that the president’s frustration is based on the media coverage of his son’s actions, as opposed to the actions themselves.

“He just looks at this as the continuum of taking a group of unrelated facts and putting them together in concentric circles and saying, ‘Aha — look what happened!’ ” said Thomas J. Barrack Jr., a longtime friend of the president who was chairman of the Presidential Inaugural Committee. “With Don Jr., whatever set of facts there are may not lead to the conclusion that the establishment media is making.”

Trump and his advisers are deeply frustrated that the disclosure by Trump Jr. has overshadowed the positive coverage they expected to receive from the president’s trip abroad, as well as other issues they hoped to spotlight this week, such as the Senate health-care bill and trade.

A handful of Republican operatives close to the White House are scrambling to Trump Jr.’s defense and have begun what could be an extensive campaign to try to discredit some of the journalists who have been reporting on the matter.

Their plan, as one member of the team described it, is to research the reporters’ previous work, in some cases going back years, and to exploit any mistakes or perceived biases. They intend to demand corrections, trumpet errors on social media and feed them to conservative outlets, such as Fox News.

But one outside adviser said a campaign against the press when it comes to Trump Jr.’s meeting could be futile: “The meeting happened. It’s tough to go to war with the facts.”

In the West Wing, meanwhile, fear of the Mueller probe effectively paralyzed senior staffers as they struggled to respond.

No official has yet delivered a robust defense of Trump Jr., although Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the principal deputy press secretary, told reporters Monday, “I would certainly say Don Jr. did not collude with anybody to influence the election.”

At Tuesday’s press briefing, Sanders read a brief statement from the president — “My son is a high-quality person and I applaud his transparency” — but declined to speak further on the issue, referring all questions to Trump Jr.’s attorney.

Other senior White House officials were hesitant to talk about Trump Jr. — even on the condition of anonymity — for fear of exposing themselves legally.

Some top officials, as well as outside advisers, had earlier suggested that the White House conduct its own internal review to identify any potential problem areas related to Russia so that it can release the information on its own rather than be caught unaware by news reports. But that notion went nowhere, in part because officials were afraid to discuss any potential Russia interactions that could make them targets of Mueller’s probe.

One White House official went so far as to stop communicating with the president’s embattled son, although this official spoke sympathetically about his plight, casting Trump Jr. as someone who just wants to hunt, fish and run his family’s real estate business.

“The kid is an honest kid,” said one friend of Trump Jr. “The White House should’ve never let that story go out on the president’s son. . . . What he’s upset about was that it was a minor meeting and the media glare — anything that’s Russia-related, gets picked up the way roaches get caught in a roach motel.”

Eric Trump, another son of the president, defended his older brother Tuesday night by retweeting a message from British politician Nigel Farage, who said Trump Jr. was under attack because he is “the best public supporter” of the president. Eric Trump tweeted: “This is the EXACT reason they viciously attack our family! They can’t stand that we are extremely close and will ALWAYS support each other.”

Critics of Trump Jr. counter that he should have known better than to accept a meeting with someone who was explicitly described in an email as a “Russian government attorney.”

 

[sfc415]

blackdynamite I agree (somewhat). While it's definitely disappointing, and something should be done to prevent it from happening again, it's hard for me to get mad when the US has been interfering with global elections for almost a century. I have older relatives in countries that went through hell because of the US installing puppet governments either in their homeland or countries in their region. However, if this helps get rid of Trump, I'm all for it

 

[RustyShackleford]

If they aren't bad, can you intelligently explain why Russia is good?

Bad in what sense? America has interfered in elections all over the world, and has even militarily overthrown elected officials all over the world, like Iran in 1953. All I'm saying is that America is being a hypocrite if it thinks that Russia hacked the elections. For one, there is no proof of meddling, and is'nt it pretty obvious that Seth Rich was the DNC leaker?

How about the people that condemn America's meddling overseas and condemn Russia

Is the FBI investigation concluded for you to know there is no collusion?

Our intelligence agencies already confirmed meddling

And you claim there is no evidence of collusion but is is obvious Seth Rich was the leaker l, Famb nice mental gymnastics

Claim one thing is conjecture then presents conjecture

 

[jimmypiff]

 
Bad in what sense? America has interfered in elections all over the world, and has even militarily overthrown elected officials all over the world, like Iran in 1953. All I'm saying is that America is being a hypocrite if it thinks that Russia hacked the elections. For one, there is no proof of meddling, and is'nt it pretty obvious that Seth Rich was the DNC leaker? I mean, do Americans think that Russia hacked the machines and changed the votes in the computer....?

​bad in what sense? Are you serious????? the cold war just ended in 1991!!!

 

[Belgium]

 
Bad in what sense? America has interfered in elections all over the world, and has even militarily overthrown elected officials all over the world, like Iran in 1953. All I'm saying is that America is being a hypocrite if it thinks that Russia hacked the elections. For one, there is no proof of meddling, and is'nt it pretty obvious that Seth Rich was the DNC leaker? I mean, do Americans think that Russia hacked the machines and changed the votes in the computer....?

So because America has done some very bad things as well, that makes all such behavior good? I think we all disapprove of the Drone strike program here. But other countries do them too so I suppose that makes drone strikes a good thing now?

Russia's attack on the US democracy is of a whole new level than the usual cyber engagements between countries. Russia has meddled in the Baltic states in particular for a very long time but nothing of such a grand scale has ever been done against the US.

 

[jimmypiff]

you can't compare America 2017 to Iran 1953...lets be civil here

 

[Betonblck]

If they aren't bad, can you intelligently explain why Russia is good?

Bad in what sense? America has interfered in elections all over the world, and has even militarily overthrown elected officials all over the world, like Iran in 1953. All I'm saying is that America is being a hypocrite if it thinks that Russia hacked the elections. For one, there is no proof of meddling, and is'nt it pretty obvious that Seth Rich was the DNC leaker? I mean, do Americans think that Russia hacked the machines and changed the votes in the computer....?

I said intelligently? You responded with "But America..."

 

[Armada]

 

If they aren't bad, can you intelligently explain why Russia is good?

Bad in what sense? America has interfered in elections all over the world, and has even militarily overthrown elected officials all over the world, like Iran in 1953. All I'm saying is that America is being a hypocrite if it thinks that Russia hacked the elections. For one, there is no proof of meddling, and is'nt it pretty obvious that Seth Rich was the DNC leaker? I mean, do Americans think that Russia hacked the machines and changed the votes in the computer....?

Originally Posted by An Armada  

That doesn't make it right. Its wrong when America does it to other countries and its wrong when it happens to us.

And for the part bolded in red your answer below. Also their is still an investigation still ongoing to see how far things went.

 https://www.vox.com/world/2017/6/21...cking-influence-senate-intelligence-committee

Watch the first video in that link

Also this

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...elligence-organizations-or-four-either-way-r/

Trump asked if the federal government really does have 17 intelligence organizations. Yes, it does.

They are as follows: Air Force Intelligence, Army Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, Coast Guard Intelligence, Defense Intelligence Agency, Energy Department, Homeland Security Department, State Department, Treasury Department, Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Marine Corps Intelligence, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, National Security Agency, Navy Intelligence and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Some of these are large, independent agencies, like the FBI, CIA and NSA. Others are smaller offices within agencies whose main focus is not intelligence, like the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research  or the Treasury’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis.

Four out of the 17 were involved in the January assessment about Russia: CIA, FBI, NSA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which is an umbrella agency that oversees all 17 organizations.  

This doesn’t mean the remaining 13 intelligence organizations disagree with the January assessment, nor does it mean the report was insufficient, according to multiple national security experts.

The 17 organizations differ on their missions and scope, so they wouldn’t all be expected to contribute to every intelligence assessment, including one of this import.

"What matters is the agencies that (were involved) and whether, based on their mandate and collection responsibilities, those are the agencies best positioned to make the assessment," said Carrie Cordero, counsel at law firm ZwillGen and former counsel for various federal agencies focusing on national security.

For example, the intelligence arms of the Drug Enforcement Agency or the Coast Guard would not be expected to collect intelligence related to Russian interference in an election, said Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists.

"So their endorsement or non-endorsement basically means nothing in this case," Aftergood said, adding, "In this context, the assessments that count the most are those of CIA, NSA, FBI and ODNI."

 

[boris]

Well yes, that's true. As it stands, tho, nothing has turned up in months

No one told me we have our very own FBI insider with all the latest information.

 

[deleted]

I said intelligently? You responded with "But America..."

Tu quoque

 

[blackdynamite]

 
​bad in what sense? Are you serious????? the cold war just ended in 1991!!!

I don't see your point. 

@BlackDynamite I agree (somewhat). While it's definitely disappointing, and something should be done to prevent it from happening again, it's hard for me to get mad when the US has been interfering with global elections for almost a century. I have older relatives in countries that went through hell because of the US installing puppet governments either in their homeland or countries in their region. However, if this helps get rid of Trump, I'm all for it

I'm saying.

USA: Let me bring war to your country because we suspect that your're getting influenced by communism

South America: But wait bro, This is my country, why do you care?

USA: We don't, we just want your resources so we're using communism as a front

South America: Naw bro we good

USA: Naw fam we coming anyway

 

[gry60]

lmfaoo

I've been done with trying to reason with these buffoons

I don't know which of the 2 is worse, acting like he believes what he's saying to disingenuously spin, or actually believing the ******** he's typing

This must be him:

Son is arguing about Bill Clinton in 2017. Like they ran out of Obama deflections

Bruh this is like on day 1 of the Iraq invasion talking about something like, idk, the Bill Clinton nonsense.

Goddam ninja been gone for so long that I forgot how to deal with buffoonery

Brah...

I'm listening to a radio show yesterday where the host is talking to a guy involved in Trump's electoral fraud commission. When asked about whether there is a specific case that justified the existence of the commission (that Trump created to soothe his own ego for having lost the popular vote), the dude cites a case...





...from 35 years ago.

 

[dwalk31]

No one told me we have our very own FBI insider with all the latest information.

I'm speaking to public information. Unless you are aware of something I am not

 

[Belgium]

If I go rob a bank and shoot up some innocent folks, does that make it good because so many others have done it and done much worse than killing some folks in a bank?

I take it you also don't see why people think North Korea is bad either then right?

 

[dwalk31]

If I go rob a bank and shoot up some innocent folks, does that make it good because so many others have done it and done much worse than killing some folks in a bank?

If you do it with an AUSA, then you colluded with the American government, apparently