Communicating with Russians

Page 8 of 15 [ 227 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 15 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

13 Jul 2017, 5:07 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

But the investigation isn't done yet. There very well may be something to go overboard about.

But they've been going overboard on a continual basis since Nov 9th. And I don't see any merit in going overboard period. People went overboard over Comey testifying; this is it, this is huge, this is what will finally destroy Trump, it's impeachment time on and on. And that's just one of many examples where they went overboard with all the hyperbole.

If people were going overboard because of this, it's only because Russian involvement with Trump was never a well kept secret.

Whatever the trigger, people acting bananas is still people acting bananas.

But acting bananas is hardly just a liberal thing. There are plenty of conservatives who are fanatic about Obama being born in Kenya. He wasn't - Trump eventually even said Obama was born in America, but only after misleading millions of gullible, and just plain stupid people into believing that about Obama. Then again, the real reason of what got all those conservatives fired up is that Obama is a black man, and were ready to see him disqualified as President for any reason.

The totality of what's transpired since nov 9th has been the bitrher lunacy times a thousand.

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

13 Jul 2017, 5:31 am

Well here's the deal. I've heard one legal expert after the other and they're all unanimous that nothing illegal took place. Personally I thought junior was in some deep s**t, but apparently not.

Along with that is the counter claim that during the campaign Clinton accepted information against Trump directly from Ukraine.

So, so much for the getting campaign help from a foreign government being a crime much less treason claim. Because nobody's charging Hillary with either.

This is another in a long series of bombshells that's turned out to be a dud.

Side thought: weren't a bunch of legal experts having to say no crime was committed over something else a couple of months ago?

Edit: oh yeah, that was over whatever Trump said to Comey. He was supposed to get impeached and put in jail over that too right?

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

13 Jul 2017, 11:41 am

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

But the investigation isn't done yet. There very well may be something to go overboard about.

If people were going overboard because of this, it's only because Russian involvement with Trump was never a well kept secret.

Whatever the trigger, people acting bananas is still people acting bananas.

The totality of what's transpired since nov 9th has been the bitrher lunacy times a thousand.

Birtherism went on for over eight years, without a single shred of evidence to support it. With the Russian connection, we know Trumpites had actual meetings with them, then tried to hide that fact.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

13 Jul 2017, 11:53 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

Birtherism went on for over eight years, without a single shred of evidence to support it. With the Russian connection, we know Trumpites had actual meetings with them, then tried to hide that fact.

What I'm still talking about is all the mass hysteria and hyperbole that's been going on since nov 9th. You know the scope of all of it in all its multiple facets is on a massively larger scale.

jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

13 Jul 2017, 11:59 am

People close to the President actively seeking aid from foreign governments to obtain politically damaging information about another candidate doesn't merit discussion in this thread as a problematic communication with Russians?

_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

13 Jul 2017, 12:22 pm

jrjones9933 wrote:

People close to the President actively seeking aid from foreign governments to obtain politically damaging information about another candidate

I wonder why people aren't up in arms about Hillary Clinton actively seeking aid from foreign governments like Ukraine to obtain politically damaging information about another candidate.

jrjones9933 wrote:

doesn't merit discussion in this thread as a problematic communication with Russians?

Huh?

jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

13 Jul 2017, 12:41 pm

EzraS wrote:

jrjones9933 wrote:

People close to the President actively seeking aid from foreign governments to obtain politically damaging information about another candidate

I wonder why people aren't up in arms about Hillary Clinton actively seeking aid from foreign governments like Ukraine to obtain politically damaging information about another candidate.

Tu quoque

There has been some discussion of that. It seems like the Ukrainians have some evidence that Manafort did work inside the Ukraine on behalf of Russia-aligned or Russian interests, discovered in the course of an official corruption investigation into the previous administration. The DNC (not the Clinton campaign) tried to get information about that investigation, and Ukraine was willing to provide some of the evidence they had found. The DNC tried to get information about criminal activity in Ukraine by Manafort from the government of Ukraine.

Trump publicly called for the Russians to release stolen emails, and it appears that many people in the campaign knew about their espionage and election interference on their behalf.

I see a big difference between asking an allied government about the crimes they are investigating in their own country, and asking an adversarial government about their espionage activities in the US, even though both campaigns obviously wanted to discredit the other side.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... elped-tru/

Quote:

At the end of the day, information emerged from Ukraine that disrupted the Trump campaign. Taking the Politico report at face value, at least some Ukrainian officials helped in that process.

By contrast, private emails acquired by the Russians and distributed through Wikileaks and DCleaks, in conjunction with a false news disinformation campaign, disrupted the Clinton campaign.

On the one hand, you have a Ukrainian consultant to the DNC working independently, and on the other hand you have the candidates son, son-in-law, and campaign chairman. There's no equivalence in the personal connections to the candidate, either.

_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

13 Jul 2017, 7:25 pm

Yeah I already saw the politico article. One of those "what really happened is [insert convoluted obfuscation]"

In other words a foreign government interfered in the campaign to help Clinton and harm Trump, which the dnc went along with with Hillary's knowledge.

By the way, tu quoque doesn't apply. It's an ad hominem fallacy where one points out the hypocrisy of the person maintaining a position. What you're looking for is the two wrongs make a right fallacy.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

13 Jul 2017, 7:54 pm

jrjones9933 wrote:

EzraS wrote:

jrjones9933 wrote:

People close to the President actively seeking aid from foreign governments to obtain politically damaging information about another candidate

I wonder why people aren't up in arms about Hillary Clinton actively seeking aid from foreign governments like Ukraine to obtain politically damaging information about another candidate.

Quote:

Manifort was in fact Putin's fixer in Ukraine.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

13 Jul 2017, 7:56 pm

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Birtherism went on for over eight years, without a single shred of evidence to support it. With the Russian connection, we know Trumpites had actual meetings with them, then tried to hide that fact.

What I'm still talking about is all the mass hysteria and hyperbole that's been going on since nov 9th. You know the scope of all of it in all its multiple facets is on a massively larger scale.

If a candidate won due to committing treason, then there's more than enough reason for hysterics.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

13 Jul 2017, 9:07 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Birtherism went on for over eight years, without a single shred of evidence to support it. With the Russian connection, we know Trumpites had actual meetings with them, then tried to hide that fact.

What I'm still talking about is all the mass hysteria and hyperbole that's been going on since nov 9th. You know the scope of all of it in all its multiple facets is on a massively larger scale.

If a candidate won due to committing treason, then there's more than enough reason for hysterics.

I don't think hysterics is a good thing in any situation. When a plane is going down, they tell people to remain calm, not get hysterical. Hysteria isn't something that can be condoned, no matter how much of a die hard apologist one is. The motto is Keep Calm, not Go Berserk.

Saying Trump won due to committing treason is hysterical sounding hyperbole.

Trump won because the majority of 538 electors voted for him. Trump got 306 electoral votes and Clinton got 232 electoral votes. That's it. That's why Trump won.

Is there any evidence that those 306 electors who voted for Trump were influenced in any way by anything the Russians did?

Because that's what it boils down to, those 306 people.

So where is the evidence those 306 were influenced by Vladimir Putin? Have they been questioned or investigated regarding being influenced by Russia? If not why not?

I think the reason is, that if the focus was put on those 306 and they all testified they were not influenced by Russia and no evidence could be found they were influenced by Russia, the whole investigation circus would come to a screeching halt.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

13 Jul 2017, 10:35 pm

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Birtherism went on for over eight years, without a single shred of evidence to support it. With the Russian connection, we know Trumpites had actual meetings with them, then tried to hide that fact.

What I'm still talking about is all the mass hysteria and hyperbole that's been going on since nov 9th. You know the scope of all of it in all its multiple facets is on a massively larger scale.

If a candidate won due to committing treason, then there's more than enough reason for hysterics.

Clinton in fact won the popular vote - which is how the chief executive is elected every where else. Putin was able to cast doubt against Clinton with fake news and cyber warfare, that, cumulatively, enough inconsequential fly over states were able to put Trump over the top with the electoral votes. States like California, or New York, that deserve even more electors than they should have, considering their population size, weren't able to make Clinton President, which they should have been.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

14 Jul 2017, 12:24 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

Putin was able to cast doubt against Clinton with fake news and cyber warfare, that, cumulatively, enough inconsequential fly over states were able to put Trump over the top with the electoral votes.

Citation please. Evidence please. Which ones of the 306 electors who voted for Trump where influenced by Putin?

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Jul 2017, 12:47 am

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Putin was able to cast doubt against Clinton with fake news and cyber warfare, that, cumulatively, enough inconsequential fly over states were able to put Trump over the top with the electoral votes.

Citation please. Evidence please. Which ones of the 306 electors who voted for Trump where influenced by Putin?

Those electors followed the vote of their states, and went for Trump. It was those red state voters who believed the fake news about pizza/pedophile cults and Benghazi crap. Were it up to the popular vote, or even if the electoral college actually assigned proper numbers due to population size per state, Clinton would be in the White House today.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

14 Jul 2017, 2:26 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Putin was able to cast doubt against Clinton with fake news and cyber warfare, that, cumulatively, enough inconsequential fly over states were able to put Trump over the top with the electoral votes.

Citation please. Evidence please. Which ones of the 306 electors who voted for Trump where influenced by Putin?

If this, if that, if only. But none of that is reality. What evidence is there that Putin got any of those electors to vote for Trump? The thousands of democrats who sent them thousands of death threats certainly tried to influence their vote, that's a known fact. But is there any evidence that Putin swayed them in any way?

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Jul 2017, 3:17 am

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Putin was able to cast doubt against Clinton with fake news and cyber warfare, that, cumulatively, enough inconsequential fly over states were able to put Trump over the top with the electoral votes.

Citation please. Evidence please. Which ones of the 306 electors who voted for Trump where influenced by Putin?

Again, those electors voted the way their states went. It was the citizens of those states who were unduly influenced by Putin. And even if Trump would have won without Putin's help, the fact of the mounting evidence shows how he and his people were working hand-in-glove with the Russians, which is treasonous.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Page 8 of 15 [ 227 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 15 Next

Jump to:

Communicating with Russians Post Reply New Topic

Communicating with Russians