192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
camlok
 
  -2  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 01:17 pm
@layman,
Quote:
Well, maybe you didn't see the right reports, then, eh, Jack?


The "right" reports = the alternate facts reports.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -2  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 01:18 pm
@reasoning logic,
Do you swallow ALL of that left-wing propaganda so readily, RL?

0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  -2  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 01:19 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
They are trying to wean themselves off of US war crimes/terrorism, Finn. You guys oughta try it. Be responsible world citizens instead of murdering thieves.
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  -1  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 01:21 pm
@gungasnake,
Quote:
Oralloy is right,


That is a full blown contradiction in terms.
camlok
 
  -2  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 01:25 pm
@revelette1,
Again, with your stunning hypocrisy, rev. No one messes in other countries' elections like the US. Then when the US gets into a country in comes the brutal, vicious right wing dictators and out go elections.

The results - tens of millions slaughtered and rev and her friends are pleased with the outcomes.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  9  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 02:05 pm
This Australian journalist sums up our "president" pretty well. Please check out his observations about the G20 and Cheetolini in general:



camlok
 
  -1  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 02:10 pm
@snood,
Putin thinks that it is nice to have a president in "power" who is actually dumber than Reagan!
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  4  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 02:51 pm
Quote:
Trump’s Son Met With Russian Lawyer After Being Promised Damaging Information on Clinton

President Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign, according to three advisers to the White House briefed on the meeting and two others with knowledge of it.

The meeting was also attended by his campaign chairman at the time, Paul J. Manafort, and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Mr. Manafort and Mr. Kushner only recently disclosed the meeting, though not its content, in confidential government documents described to The New York Times.

The Times reported the existence of the meeting on Saturday. But in subsequent interviews, the advisers and others revealed the motivation behind it.

The meeting — at Trump Tower on June 9, 2016, two weeks after Donald J. Trump clinched the Republican nomination — points to the central question in federal investigations of the Kremlin’s meddling in the presidential election: whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. The accounts of the meeting represent the first public indication that at least some in the campaign were willing to accept Russian help.



More at
NYT
camlok
 
  -1  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 02:57 pm
@revelette1,
Now why would anyone NOT want to discover damaging information/illegalities/murders/... about anyone?

There is nothing wrong with that at all!

Considerations as to how it is used certainly come into play.

Don't like to see your ox gored, eh, rev? Fair enough, but what deep evil you folks are willing to see hidden doesn't say much about you all as humans.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 03:18 pm
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:
The accounts of the meeting represent the first public indication that at least some in the campaign were willing to accept Russian help.


Heh, Russian "help," eh? Their story says this:

The New York Times wrote:
It is unclear whether the Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, actually produced the promised compromising information about Mrs. Clinton.

In a statement on Sunday, Donald Trump Jr. said he had met with the Russian lawyer at the request of an acquaintance. “After pleasantries were exchanged,” he said, “the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Ms. Clinton. Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”

He said she then turned the conversation to adoption of Russian children and the Magnitsky Act, an American law that blacklists suspected Russian human rights abusers. The law so enraged President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia that he retaliated by halting American adoptions of Russian children.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/09/us/politics/trump-russia-kushner-manafort.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

"The woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Ms. Clinton."

Funny that's exactly the kind of information you cheese-eaters are spending vast amounts of time and money trying to discover, eh? I'm sure you're all screaming to have Mueller find this woman and interview her to discover what she knows about "russians meddling in our elections," eh?
oralloy
 
  -1  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 03:46 pm
@camlok,
camlok wrote:
Quote:
Oralloy is right,

That is a full blown contradiction in terms.

No contradiction. You cannot point out a single fact that I've ever been wrong about.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  3  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 03:46 pm
@layman,
Trump Jr was willing to deal with Russians to get his father elected president. Trump Jr was heavily involved with his father's campaign in an advisory role. From the account in the times, it appears it was some sort of trick of the Russian lawyer to get Trump Jr to discuss the Magnitsky Act as she apparently offered no evidence towards the Clinton's whatsoever.
layman
 
  0  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 03:51 pm
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:

Trump Jr was willing to deal with Russians to get his father elected president. Trump Jr was heavily involved with his father's campaign in an advisory role. From the account in the times, it appears it was some sort of trick of the Russian lawyer to get Trump Jr to discuss the Magnitsky Act as she apparently offered no evidence towards the Clinton's whatsoever.


Ya don't say, eh? Clinton was paying $50,000/month to some guy to seek out russian agents to fabricate false information about Trump which they tried to get published. You ever complain about that, Rev?

I didn't think so.
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  2  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 04:08 pm
Sorry for derailing does anyone know about Cicerone? I haven't see him for a while on the forum. Is he ok?
snood
 
  5  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 04:33 pm
This is what the crazy, stupid "president" is basically saying to us:

Obama should have done something about the Russian interference that he takes Putin at his word for that he didn't do .

Also, he's going to start a cyber security force along with Putin so together they can prevent the hacking that Putin did, and will do.

I just can't...
revelette1
 
  2  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 05:06 pm
@snood,
Razz

Well put.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 05:13 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

This is what the crazy, stupid "president" is basically saying to us:

Obama should have done something about the Russian interference that he takes Putin at his word for that he didn't do .

Also, he's going to start a cyber security force along with Putin so together they can prevent the hacking that Putin did, and will do.

I just can't...


Try harder. Despite months of digging by government agencies and partisan supporters of Democrats who still can't deal with their defesat, here has been no material evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign to interfere with the election. However there is substantial evidence of Russian (either lone wolf or KGB) efforts to interfere with the election in actions taken while Obama was president. Our intelligence services knew about it but they and Obama did and said nothing about it. Only they know their motives for this odd inaction (particularly given their shrill demands for investigations now) , but their critics say they expected a Hillary win and didn't want to tarnish the result.


That shouldn't have been too hard.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 06:42 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

Obama should have done something about the Russian interference that he takes Putin at his word for that he didn't do .


Oh, is that what it's about. And there I was, thinking Trump was taking Putin's word that he hadn't been helping Trump's campaign. Well, I guess I'm glad they were able to put it all behind them, anyway.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -1  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 07:19 pm
If anyone remembers, the FBI/Homeland Security crew put together a public report on their "findings' about russian hacking and the slight evidence they gave in support of it.

This report was highly criticized by experts, such as the creator of Mcafe fee anti-virus software. He didn't just say the evidence was "inconclusive," either.

He literally scoffed at the premises underlying their conclusion as being "preposterous" to anyone with even an rudiementary understanding of the situation.

0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Sun 9 Jul, 2017 07:33 pm
Trump Jnrs meeting with the Russians gets even murkier.

Quote:
US President Donald Trump's son agreed to meet a Kremlin-linked Russian lawyer last year after being promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton, the New York Times reports.
The New York Times first reported the meeting on Saturday. At the time, both Mr Trump Jr and Ms Veselnitskaya confirmed the meeting but said the US presidential campaign was not discussed.
On Sunday, the New York Times said that Mr Trump Jr had agreed to the meeting after being offered information that would potentially prove detrimental to Mrs Clinton, who was Democratic presidential candidate at the time.
The New York Times cited three White House advisers briefed on the meeting, and two others with knowledge for it, as its sources.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40552130
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.42 seconds on 05/17/2024 at 02:22:22