Trump and Russiagate - Page 144 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14934583
jimjam wrote:Or ….. it's illegal unless Donald does it :lol: .

While the president suggested on Saturday that Mr. Cohen’s recording may have been illegal, New York law allows one party to a conversation to tape it without the other knowing. Over the years, Mr. Cohen, in his dealings on Mr. Trump’s behalf with journalists, opposing lawyers and business adversaries, frequently taped his conversations, unbeknown to the people with whom he was speaking. Mr. Trump himself also has a history of recording phone calls and conversations.


Yes, state laws are in conflict with federal laws on this. My father lost his private investigators license and therefore livelihood on a very similar case. He taped the phone calls of his security guards to make sure they were not tying up the security phones with private calls. Totally legal in Illinois, but they charged him in federal court where it is illegal unbeknownst to him. An example of how reading state laws can mislead you.
User avatar
By Albert
#14934653
Image Beaten 2016 candidate tells OzyFest in New York sources have told her Moscow may target servers and voting machines next

Clinton: Trump-Putin a 'mystery', Russia may attack election infrastructure

Hillary Clinton has criticized Donald Trump’s performance at the Helsinki summit earlier this week, calling his failure to tackle Vladimir Putin over Russian interference in the 2016 US election “deeply disturbing” and a “mystery”.

Speaking at OzyFest – a festival of talks and music – in Central Park, New York on Saturday, Clinton also said Russian agents were targeting the November midterm elections in a renewed attempt to disrupt US democracy, and could this time attack election infrastructure such as “the servers you send results to” and “the operations of voting machines”.

Clinton beat Trump by nearly 3m ballots in the popular vote in 2016, but lost in the electoral college. She was secretary of state in the Obama administration.

In Central Park, she outlined the extent of Russian interference as depicted in the recent indictments of 12 Russian intelligence officers by special counsel Robert Mueller.

“It was a very broad and a very successful cyber attack on our electoral system,” she said. “The attack goes to the heart of our democracy. The great mystery is why the president has not spoken up for our country.”

Calling the attacks “really distressing and alarming”, she said: “It should concern every single American.”


Clinton also called for clarity on what was said in the two-hour, one-on-one meeting between Trump and Putin that preceded their joint press conference in Helsinki.

“We don’t know what was said in the room between them,” she said. “Putin is telling the world what was said but we hear crickets from the White House. Make no mistake this is a direct attack on our democracy. The idea that we are not sure where our own president stands is deeply disturbing.”

Clinton questioned why Trump did not confront Putin over Russia’s election interference.

“Vladimir Putin has a very clear strategy,” she said. “He is quite adept at reading people … at manipulating people. Hardly anyone who believes in freedom gets on with him. [Trump] wants to be friends with him for reasons we’re still trying to find out about.”

Clinton also said sources in the tech industry told her Russian agents were targeting this year’s midterms. US intelligence agencies have said the Trump administration is not doing enough to counter such efforts.

“They are still looking for ways to steal information about voter registration, for example,” Clinton said. “There are some tech experts in Silicon Valley whom I have met who say that maybe what they will do this time is really disrupt the actual election. Shut down the servers you send results to, interfere with the operations of voting machines, because too many of them are linked to the internet.

“We are still very vulnerable. And we don’t have leadership from the administration.”

Clinton claimed Putin “wants to break up Nato, the European Union. He wants to undo the architecture of the post-world war two world. He thrives on divisiveness. His attacks on the electoral system were designed to help Trump.”
User avatar
By Hong Wu
#14934664
Carter Page FISA warrant docs are out. It appears that the FBI did pay for the golden showers dossier and use it to get the FISA warrant. So evidence of the "circular intelligence" process may be rock solid at this point and with Lisa Page's alleged cooperation we might be sticking a fork into Russiagate after two years!

But it will survive in the minds of some leftists for all time as a real life Manchurian candidate story: reprogrammed by the Soviet Union in '87, activated by the Russian Federation in '16, as part of Vlad the Impaler's aeons-long plan to destroy the freedom to censor, bringing forth an age of hate facts.
By Sivad
#14934680
skinster wrote:Except a Citigroup executive picked Obama's cabinet in 2008, as was revealed by Wikileaks via the Podesta emails.
#NotAStooge

:lol:


Liberal denierism is :knife: .




Chomsky predicted back in '09 how Obama's duplicitous corporate whoring would give rise to Trumpism
#14934687
Trump is just a master negotiatior who sees the value in forming a strong bond with Russia, a country that has less than 1/19th of the GDP of the EU. He is a businessman who knows deals. Which is why he has dealt so successfully with other countries in the past where he has gotten us *checks notes*

Nothing. But trust me, he has a plan. And he wants to have very strong relations with Russia that have absolutely nothing to do with the existence of the piss tape.

Now lets all pretend the Pro-Trump people are arguing in good faith.
User avatar
By jimjam
#14934727
Hong Wu wrote:Carter Page FISA warrant docs are out.


Don's handlers have been having some difficulty coming up with a diversionary story to shift the media light from his Putin love fest/screw up. Looks like it's back to the FBI as America's Enemy #1 theme.
User avatar
By Beren
#14934733
jimjam wrote:Looks like it's back to the FBI as America's Enemy #1 theme.

It's either the FBI or the Fake News Media, Democrats can be #3 only it seems. :lol:

I wonder whether the American Fake News Media reported on this one:



At 1:00 he starts saying that "that was the one state [Wisconsin] that Ronald Reagan didn't win when he ran the board his second time." Was that intentional or is he so ignorant indeed? Maybe the media didn't care because he tells sweet little lies like that so frequently. It shouldn't be so hard to memorise that Reagan won all states except for Mondale's home state of Minnesota and D.C. in 1984, and he won Wisconsin in 1980 as well.

Image

Does Trump still have the ability to tell the truth? Or is the truth just never good enough for him?
#14934813
The best part about the Brexit thing during the election was that Trump didn't have an opinion on it but wanted credit for predicting the vote correctly. Then he said he was so good at predicting that he should be a TV news person. Because that's what they do, they predict future events.
User avatar
By Hong Wu
#14934814
The FISA warrant isn't a distraction from how Trump's approval rating went up after his summit with Putin, it's something people have been arguing about for years. Now that it's out, it confirms the Trump camp's claim that the FBI did use the golden showers dossier to surveil Trump's campaign and that they did withhold from the court that it was an opposition research piece. The only misdirection here is this weak attempt to bring up some Trump comments on Brexit, where they're like "lol this is Trump being right on something". That is their joke because he was right on this.
User avatar
By Beren
#14934815
SpecialOlympian wrote:The best part about the Brexit thing during the election was that Trump didn't have an opinion on it but wanted credit for predicting the vote correctly. Then he said he was so good at predicting that he should be a TV news person. Because that's what they do, they predict future events.

The Guardian wrote:Theresa May has revealed that Donald Trump advised her to “sue the European Union” rather than negotiate with the 27-country bloc, in a private conversation that the US president referred to during his visit to the UK on Friday.

The prime minister was asked on the BBC’s The Andrew Marr Show what the “brutal” Brexit negotiating advice was that Trump had talked about in their joint press conference outside the prime minister’s Chequers country retreat.

Revealing it for the first time, May said: “He told me I should sue the EU.” After being prompted by a surprised Marr, May repeated: “Sue the EU, not go into negotiations with them, sue them.”

The prime minister smiled, and indicated she had disregarded the advice, saying “actually we’re going into negotiations with them”, in remarks that will be interpreted as a put-down of the president. Trump leaves the UK this afternoon to fly to Helsinki to meet the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.

On Friday, Trump had said he gave May “a suggestion, I wouldn’t say advice” about how to handle the Brexit talks, without revealing what it was. “I think she found it maybe too brutal, and that’s OK. I gave her a suggestion, not advice. I could fully understand why she thought it was a little bit tough.”

I wonder whether Trump considered that "suggestion" deeply or it just popped out of his mind suddenly.
#14934833
Considering that he's been involved in like 1,200 lawsuits or something ridiculous I assume it's the same advice he gives to everyone for everything. The president is retarded don't over think it. His own ghost writer for Art of the Deal had to shadow him for half a year because Trump couldn't focus long enough to hold an interview lmao
By skinster
#14934908
The Eulogy Of An Immortal Russiagate Scandal
From the latest joke-indictment by Robert Mueller to the hysterical press-coverage of the Trump-Putin summit, the way establishment media has been acting over the past week has been apoplectic. One might imagine, given their response, that the end was nigh and Putin personally commandeered the four horsemen of the apocalypse or something equally Biblical.

However, the certifiable insanity characterizing the media’s reaction to these events is not the focus of this article. Instead, we ask, how is it that the Russiagate issue is still being discussed in the first place? How did we get here, to the verge of a neo-McCarthyist second-coming, despite all aspects of this issue being repeatedly dismissed in the light of evidence?

When we part the curtain of staged madness, designed to provoke fear in the gullible and outrage in the skeptical, what do we actually glimpse?

The reality is that Russiagate, the neoliberal war-cry, is only spurred on by a constant shift in narrative focus. Yesterday we saw farcical indictments; today we are consumed by a summit. If the pattern holds, then tomorrow we will be delivered a new take on Mifsud, tailored to deceive and mislead once again.

In a recent Memorandum to the President penned by Bill Binney and Ray McGovern, they noted: “We now have forensic evidence that shows the data provided by Guccifer 2.0 had been manipulated and is a fabrication.”

The memo, published with Consortium News, continued: “If you are wondering why so little is heard these days of accusations that Russia hacked into the U.S. election in 2016, it could be because those charges could not withstand close scrutiny. It could also be because special counsel Robert Mueller appears to have never bothered to investigate what was once the central alleged crime in Russia-gate as no one associated with WikiLeaks has ever been questioned by his team.”

First, as mentioned by McGovern and Binney, we have the thoroughly debunked Guccifer 2.0 hacking narrative. But wait, we also have the collusion narrative spawned by the dossier produced by Christopher Steele, likewise discredited. Time to focus on a mutated and contradictory version of the Guccifer 2.0 narrative! Before anyone can notice the holes, we are spun back to a new incarnation of the Trump-Russian collusion scandal, Mifsud the most mysterious and magical scholar of them all! Do we sound like a street hawker yet?

In Mifsud, we saw a narrative built to replace the collusion allegations first based on the debunked, laughable Steele dossier. The corruption involved in framing Mifsud as a Russian intelligence asset also became painfully evident, in light of his close ties with UK and Western intelligence figures, and his long-standing history at campuses where these same intelligence agencies – including the CIA and FBI, conducted training programs.

This statement brings us to the crux of this piece: what do the unfolding chapters of the Russiagate fairytale have in common?

Each of them has a critical lack of evidence supporting their thesis and has been countered by credible evidence that would require a book to recount in full. Each of these branches has been shoved into the fore of press attention when convenient, for a brief moment becoming the singular focus of the establishment media’s echo-chamber. When their credibility quickly fails in the light of credible countering evidence, they are whipped from view, to be replaced by a freshly fabricated aspect of a different arm of the scandal. Focus shifts like eyes at a tennis match, between the Russian hacking narrative and the Trump-Russia collusion fantasy.

The following discussion is not intended to dismiss the incredible value and significance of work done by analysts including the Forensicator, Adam Carter, Chris Blackburn, VIPS members including former NSA Technical Director Bill Binney and CIA Veteran analyst Ray McGovern, or thinkers as diverse as Julian Assange and Richard Levine. None of these individuals were funded by or associated with Russia, and all of them have focused on factual evidence instead of ideology.

Standing on the shoulders of this methodical evidence, it seems at this point that no amount of contrary evidence, exposure or implosion will ultimately kill the undead Russiagate monster. If that were possible, the Thing would have been put irrevocably into the ground over a year ago. Or six months ago. Or a few weeks ago.

Despite all of these facets of the Russiagate saga having been concretely refuted, the state-sanctioned legacy press continues to chant in unison in the wake of Mueller’s latest toothless indictments. Again, the significance isn’t in the extremity of the media hysteria, but in the fact that it continues despite evidence that should have ended “Russiagate” many times over.

It is unkillable, immune to factual refutation. No logical response will halt its diabolical momentum, based on deception and fear. The question is no longer whether Guccifer 2.0 hacked the DNC for the Kremlin, or did Mifsud work for Putin, but was the Steele dossier legitimate? Did Trump collude with Russia? These questions have long been answered, and yet the Thing lumbers on.

We must now recognize the underlying, silent reality of this charade. It is not intended to be answered, and it is brought before us with the knowledge that it does not stand on fact. From top to bottom, beginning to end, this entire scandal has been an intentional fabrication – one that is not based on a shred of truth and therefore is not intended to be believed any more than a street magician’s trick. This is what allows it to continue no matter how many facts one throws at it. Evidential refutation bounces endlessly off the facade of the Russiagate figment.

Why is this? How is it that facts don’t stop the progression of this catastrophic hurricane of lies? The immortality of Russiagate is thanks to the fact that it was never intended to be perceived as truthful in the first place – it was intended to distract, not to convince. To focus attention: it is the visible hand that deflects attention in the most basic sleight of hand magic trick.

In other words, the pundits whose eyes roll back in horror at the sight of a two-hour summit between Putin and Trump are not in actuality afraid of Putin – we only need recall Uranium One to know that the neoliberal establishment does not fear Putin. Media hysteria pushing us towards a nuclear holocaust is meant to do two things: provoke fear and sell outrage. Raise CIA paychecks, inflame viewership among believers and skeptics alike. Involve you in the charade. Make you believe it is real. Create an enemy, whether Putin or Mueller is your Satan of choice.

It doesn’t matter, as long as your eyes are on the Russiagate scandal. They are, thus, controlling the public narrative. That is the goal. Not proving that Russia interfered with the election, but making sure that the masses discuss nothing else. Not nuclear winter, but the threat of nuclear annihilation, because the first Cold War was good for business.

It doesn’t matter how many times you say: but here’s how it’s done, because the Thing works through distraction. It works by placing attention in the desired place in order to hide what is done in the dark. I have been guilty myself, of falling for the trick – not by believing in the veracity of the saga’s claims – but by following them in order to criticize them factually. I have been, like so many of us, the cat chasing the establishment’s laser pointer across a wall, trailing behind them to point out again and again that they have lied. But it has been chasing their figment nonetheless – attempting to catch that immaterial dot.

Through the observation that this soap opera was never intended to be perceived as truth but to hold attention, one finally undermines the reason for, and the reality of, its existence, in a way that factually based debunking never could.

We must now conclude that the entire fabrication of this epic was not intended to convince the public based on evidence, but was instead intended to deflect attention from the reality of the 2016 rigging of the Democratic Primary on the part of the DNC. To deflect from the US war machine in Yemen and Syria and around the world. To justify the silencing of journalists and political prisoners like Julian Assange. To ensure that the multitude of wrongs, crimes, and infinitude of acts committed in darkness never come to light.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07- ... te-scandal
User avatar
By jimjam
#14935400
Arnold Schwarzenegger said to Trump after Helsinki: “You’re the president of the United States. You shouldn’t do that. What’s the matter with you?” :lol:
User avatar
By Beren
#14935443
Conan for president! (If you want a barbarian anyway.) :lol:

FiveThirtyEight wrote:This brings the total number of the people charged in connection with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election to 32.

Image
It’s a large number considering that the investigation has been active for only 14 months. So far, Mueller has filed charges against five American, one Dutch and 26 Russian nationals, along with three Russian businesses. Of all those indicted, five people have pleaded guilty — including one who has already served prison time — and Paul Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, is awaiting trial. (The charges against him are related to his lobbying work, not election interference.) Our analysis of special counsel investigations going back to Watergate shows that a majority ended without charges being filed against anyone, while others took years to produce indictments. Mueller is still working quickly compared with past investigations.

Besides what is quoted the least we can say is that special investigations rarely last for less than two years and they last for about five years on average.
User avatar
By Beren
#14935527
RT wrote:"The president believes that the next bilateral meeting with President Putin should take place after the Russia witch hunt is over, so we’ve agreed that it will be after the first of the year," Bolton said in a statement.

Maybe it wouldn't help Republicans with midterm elections? :D
User avatar
By Beren
#14935771
It wasn't even Trump and co. that called off the visit it seems.

Reuters wrote:Kremlin, coy on new summit idea, says Putin and Trump can meet at G20

Denis Pinchuk, Andrew Osborn

MOSCOW (Reuters) - The Kremlin was reticent on Tuesday about whether it would accept an invitation from U.S. President Donald Trump to hold a summit with Vladimir Putin in Washington later this year, saying only that the two men had other chances to meet as well.

The Kremlin’s failure to swiftly accept Trump’s invitation for a Washington summit has been noticeable. Though Moscow saw the Helsinki summit n the two leaders held last week as a success, the fiercely negative reaction by some U.S. politicians to Trump’s performance has taken some in Russia aback.

Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said that though Washington and Moscow agreed there was a need for another Putin-Trump meeting, Russia had not yet begun any practical preparations for a new meeting.

“There are other options (to meet) which our leaders can look at,” Ushakov told reporters, citing a meeting of G20 leaders in Argentina which starts at the end of November.

“Maybe there will be other international events which Trump and Putin will take part in.”

‘LET THE DUST SETTLE’

Ushakov did not explain why Moscow had not yet accepted Trump’s invitation. But when he was asked for details about how Trump had behaved at the Helsinki summit, he declined, citing a desire not to inflame what he described as an already overheated U.S. political situation.

“After the (Helsinki) summit you know what kind of atmosphere there is around its outcome,” Ushakov told reporters. “I think it would be wise to let the dust settle and then we can discuss all these questions in a business-like way. But not now.”

Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, was also cautious on Friday about the prospects of a new summit, saying only that Moscow was ready to discuss the proposal.

Before the Helsinki summit, Russian state TV expressed unease about the idea of Putin and Trump meeting in Washington, recalling how the U.S. leader had humiliated other foreign leaders, such as French President Emmanuel Macron, on home soil, something he would find harder to do on neutral ground.

For Putin, the fact that the Helsinki summit happened at all was a geopolitical victory, which Moscow interpreted as U.S. recognition of Russia’s status as a great power and an overdue U.S. realization that its interests must be taken into account.

But its hopes of a gradual thaw in troubled U.S.-Russia relations now hang in the balance after Trump faced a squall of criticism at home over his failure to publicly confront Putin over Moscow’s meddling in the 2016 election, something Russia denies.

Trump’s unexpectedly rapid invitation to Putin to come to Washington for another summit — only three days after Helsinki — has only deepened criticism of Trump’s handling of Russia, overshadowing the so-far meager results of the Helsinki summit.

Additional reporting by Tom Balmforth, editing by Larry King
#14935814
The Elite Fixation With Russiagate
Does a broader public share this sense of crisis?

No single act of Donald Trump’s presidency has engendered more criticism than his performance at the Helsinki summit with Vladimir Putin. For declining to endorse US intelligence claims that the Kremlin meddled in our election and faulting both countries for the poor state of US-Russia relations, Trump was roundly accused of “shameful,” “disgraceful,” and “treasonous” behavior that has sparked a full-blown “national security crisis.”

But does the American public at large share the prevailing elite assessment? Save for a White House vigil led by two longtime Hillary Clinton staffers and a few scattered rallies—and in stark contrast to mass protests over Trump’s misogyny, Muslim ban, and zero-tolerance immigration policy—Americans have not poured into the streets to confront the “crisis.” A poll by The Hill and the HarrisX polling company found 54 percent support for Trump’s now-scuttled plan for a follow-up summit with Putin at the White House. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that Trump’s post-Helsinki approval rating slightly increased to 45 percent. While the uptick does not necessarily signal an embrace of Trump’s behavior, it is not difficult to see why his numbers did not plummet. In a recent Gallup poll on problems facing the country, the “Situation with Russia” was such a marginal concern that it did not even register. While an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll found that 64 percent believe Trump has not been tough enough on Russia, it also saw a near-even split on whether Putin is a foe or an ally, and 59 percent support for better relations.

The gap between elite and public priorities highlights an endemic problem that long predates Trump. Since his election, however, the elite fixation on alleged Russian meddling and the president’s suspected collusion has exacerbated that divide.

From the outset, Russiagate proponents have exhibited a blind faith in the unverified claims of US government officials and other sources, most of them unnamed. The reaction to special counsel Robert Mueller’s recent indictment of 12 Russian military-intelligence officers for hacking of Democratic party servers and voter databases is no exception. Mueller’s indictment is certainly detailed. Most significantly, it marks the first time anyone has been charged for offenses related to Russiagate’s underlying crime. But while it is a major step forward in the investigation, we have yet to see the basis for the allegations that Mueller has lodged. As with any criminal case, from a petty offense to a cybercrime charge against a foreign government, a verdict cannot be formed in the absence of this evidence.

The record of US intelligence, replete with lies and errors, underscores the need for caution. Mueller was a player in one of this century’s most disastrous follies when, in congressional testimony, he endorsed claims about Iraqi WMDs and warned that Saddam Hussein “may supply” chemical and biological material to “terrorists.” That does not mean Mueller perjured himself back then, or that he is concocting a false case now. It just means that government officials can make mistakes based on faulty information.

Suppose, however, that all of the claims about Russian meddling turn out to be true. Hacking e-mails and voter databases is certainly a crime, and seeking to influence another country’s election can never be justified. But the procession of elite voices falling over themselves to declare that stealing e-mails and running juvenile social-media ads amount to an “attack,” even an “act of war,” are escalating a panic when a sober assessment is what is most needed.

Pundits and politicians have even compared Russiagate to Pearl Harbor, 9/11, and Kristallnacht, accompanied by bellicose calls for revenge. According to Democratic Representative Steve Cohen of Tennessee, a sufficient response would be “a cyber attack that made Russian society valueless.… If they all fell underneath the Kremlin and buried together, it’d be too soon” [sic].

Perhaps just as troubling is the degree of imperial myopia that Russiagate’s complainants unwittingly lay bare. Richard Haass, the head of the Council on Foreign Relations, solemnly intoned that Russia, through its annexation of Crimea and meddling in the 2016 election, has broken the “international order for 4 centuries” that had been “based on non-interference in the internal affairs of others and respect for sovereignty” and thus should be dealt with “as the rogue state it is.” It takes more than mere historical amnesia to make such pronouncements in the face of the United States’ leading role throughout the preceding centuries in meddling in and attacking foreign countries—as did the George W. Bush administration that Haass served in. It also requires the entitlement and hypocrisy of a US exceptionalism that insists on holding others to standards that we strenuously reject for ourselves.

Fixation on the alleged Russian threat does not just obscure our own past. With the attendant suspicion of Trump’s potential subordination to Putin, it is obscuring the reality in front of us. Anyone paying attention to Trump’s actual policies cannot escape the conclusion that his administration “has been much tougher on Russia than any in the post-Cold War era” (Daniel Vajdich of the NATO-funded Atlantic Council), wherein “U.S. policy toward Russia has, if anything, hardened under [Trump’s] watch” (Brookings fellow and former State Department official Jeremy Shapiro). The new Pentagon budget earmarks $6.5 billion for the European Deterrence Initiative—a military program aimed at confronting Russia in Eastern Europe—a 91 percent increase over President Obama’s last year in office. Following Trump’s decision to sell anti-tank missiles to Ukraine—a move Obama resisted—the Pentagon has just announced $200 million in new military assistance. The NATO summit right before Helsinki prompted widespread suspicions that Trump was undermining the transatlantic alliance, possibly at Putin’s behest. All seemed to overlook what Trump actually did: openly criticize Russia’s prized Nord Stream 2 gas project with Germany and badger NATO members to increase military spending. At a post-Helsinki Senate hearing, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo touted Trump’s “massive defense buildup that threatens Vladimir Putin’s regime” and reaffirmed that the United States will never recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea.

This consistent record of Trump directly contradicting Putin’s agenda is inconvenient to a collusion-and-kompromat hypothesis, so it is little wonder that it is overlooked. Instead of focusing on policy, the press has engaged in commentary more appropriate for an ice-skating performance. Blake Hounshell of Politico questions why Trump is “oddly submissive” with “the diminutive Putin,” with the American president “slumping in his chair” next to the Russian leader. “The way Trump behaves around Putin—quietly bowing and scraping, taking his word over America’s own chief of intelligence,” writes The Week’s Ryan Cooper, “is simply wildly out of character.” Except that it’s not. Trump has been deferential to many authoritarian leaders—hardly out of character, by the way, for any American president. And if Benjamin Netanyahu is to be believed, Trump even let the Israeli prime minister convince him to nix the Iran nuclear deal.

Amid fervent speculation that Trump may be a Kremlin asset, Israel’s brazen (and actually documented) foreign meddling barely registers, joining an innumerable number of critical issues that the Russiagate frenzy has sidelined. It has gotten so extreme that even Trump’s new threats of war on Iran, coupled with an escalating administration campaign to destabilize its government, has been ignored or even downplayed as an effort to distract us from his Russia woes. But in the absence of publicly available evidence, and an outburst of both panic and chauvinist warmongering, it is arguably we who are distracting ourselves. Under one of the most dangerous administrations in US history, that willful and heedless diversion may be the far most serious national-security crisis we face.
https://www.thenation.com/article/elite ... ussiagate/
#14935823
skinster's link wrote:No single act of Donald Trump’s presidency has engendered more criticism than his performance at the Helsinki summit with Vladimir Putin. For declining to endorse US intelligence claims that the Kremlin meddled in our election and faulting both countries for the poor state of US-Russia relations, Trump was roundly accused of “shameful,” “disgraceful,” and “treasonous” behavior that has sparked a full-blown “national security crisis.”

I don't know. They pretty much melted down when the deep state's Antifa counter-protest in Charlottesville blew up in their faces, and Trump said there were bad actors on both sides (there were). They've thrown a ton of Federal charges against James Fields, but seem to keep a very low media profile on the case while pecking for a federal death penalty. They've ensnared William Evans (sonofnewo) from any more public commentary as well, or so it seems. I guess they're still pretty sore about getting Heather Heyer killed and everyone figuring out that the deep state set the whole situation up.

Yet, they've (the media) gone on now with the Michael Cohen tapes, because nobody cares about the deep state freaking out over Russia. Of course, nobody cares about the Michael Cohen tapes either, except that Cohen has probably ended his career as both an attorney and fix-it guy. What an idiot.
User avatar
By maz
#14935891
blackjack21 wrote:
Yet, they've (the media) gone on now with the Michael Cohen tapes, because nobody cares about the deep state freaking out over Russia. Of course, nobody cares about the Michael Cohen tapes either, except that Cohen has probably ended his career as both an attorney and fix-it guy. What an idiot.


One of my favorite things to do is to read the Huffington Post's Russia coverage while having my morning coffee. It's like reading a good comic book or something.
#14935894
Impossible @maz! Nothing is funnier than the state-run propaganda channel of Fox News!
  • 1
  • 142
  • 143
  • 144
  • 145
  • 146
  • 266

EU is not prepared on nuclear war, but Russia,[…]

It is implausible that the IDF could not or would[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]