This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

The Russians don't like Trump, they used him to help divide us!

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Recent disclosures by Russian journalists and hackers claim that Russia's primary goal in using American social media to sway the last presidential election in 2016, was to sew dissension, chaos, and racial and social conflict in the United States. The old saying is true: "A country divided is weak."

Our media has been wrongly pushing the idea that Putin likes Trump and respects him as a leader. What Putin and his computer propaganda crews want is an America so divided and conflictive its power image will diminish internationally. Getting Trump elected served this purpose wonderfully.

Reality.

View user profile
President Trump is the world's joke. People laugh at him, but then the horror of the man is no joke. It must be killing him. He is watching people laugh at him across the board, and it must be killing him.

View user profile
Wordslinger wrote:Recent disclosures by Russian journalists and hackers claim that Russia's primary goal in using American social media to sway the last presidential election in 2016, was to sew dissension, chaos, and racial and social conflict in the United States.  The old saying is true:  "A country divided is weak."

Our media has been wrongly pushing the idea that Putin likes Trump and respects him as a leader.  What Putin and his computer propaganda crews want is an America so divided and conflictive its power image will diminish internationally.  Getting Trump elected served this purpose wonderfully.

Reality.  

You mean Putin was lying when he said Americans should respect Trump more? I'm shocked, SHOCKED!

Seriously though, Russia, AKA Putin, has been doing this stuff all over Europe. He targets successful, functioning democracies, especially NATO countries.

Russian hacking efforts leading up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election were part of a broader influence campaign aimed at countries across Europe and the Balkans, meant to disrupt pro-North Atlantic Treaty Organization candidates and parties, according to testimony during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Wednesday.

Russian hackers and operatives have attempted to influence recent elections in Montenegro, the Netherlands and France, and have also conducted cyberattacks in Germany — including against the country’s parliament — ahead of the German federal elections later this year, officials said.

https://morningconsult.com/2017/06/28/russian-election-meddling-europe-growing-brazen-officials-say/

View user profile
I don't think his psyche is allowing him to realize what a laughingstock he is. If it did, I honestly think he might be nearly suicidal. Anybody who knew that the world felt about them as the world does about Trump would, at the very least, never show their face in public again.
He's a sick man and the Russians knew it. But they also knew he was an unbridled racist, and that racism is the easiest issue to divide a country with so much diversity. Raising the race issue in most countries doesn't do a lot of good because most of them are fairly homogenous, but America is the perfect target. It's also that acceptance that we take so much pride in, so when we doubt that we are a welcoming nation it screws with our self-esteem. The Russians are good psychologists and they know exactly how to play Trump.

View user profile
http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/356630-fbi-watched-then-acted-as-russian-spy-moved-closer-to-hillary

As Hillary Clinton was beginning her job as President Obama’s chief diplomat, federal agents observed as multiple arms of Vladimir Putin’s machine unleashed an influence campaign designed to win access to the new secretary of State, her husband Bill Clinton and members of their inner circle, according to interviews and once-sealed FBI records.

Some of the activities FBI agents gathered evidence about in 2009 and 2010 were covert and illegal.

A female Russian spy posing as an American accountant, for instance, used a false identity to burrow her way into the employ of a major Democratic donor in hopes of gaining intelligence on Hillary Clinton’s department, records show. The spy was arrested and deported as she moved closer to getting inside the secretary’s department, agents said.


Other activities were perfectly legal and sitting in plain view, such as when a subsidiary of Russia’s state-controlled nuclear energy company hired a Washington firm to lobby the Obama administration. At the time it was hired, the firm was providing hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in pro bono support to Bill Clinton’s global charitable initiative, and it legally helped the Russian company secure federal decisions that led to billions in new U.S. commercial nuclear business, records show.

Agents were surprised by the timing and size of a $500,000 check that a Kremlin-linked bank provided Bill Clinton with for a single speech in the summer of 2010. The payday came just weeks after Hillary Clinton helped arrange for American executives to travel to Moscow to support Putin’s efforts to build his own country’s version of Silicon Valley, agents said.

There is no evidence in any of the public records that the FBI believed that the Clintons or anyone close to them did anything illegal. But there’s definitive evidence the Russians were seeking their influence with a specific eye on the State Department.


“There is not one shred of doubt from the evidence that we had that the Russians had set their sights on Hillary Clinton’s circle, because she was the quarterback of the Obama-Russian reset strategy and the assumed successor to Obama as president,” said a source familiar with the FBI’s evidence at the time, speaking only on condition of anonymity, because he was not authorized to speak to the news media.

That source pointed to an October 2009 communication intercepted by the FBI in which Russian handlers instructed two of their spies specifically to gather nonpublic information on the State Department.

“Send more info on current international affairs vital for R., highlight US approach,” part of the message to the spies read, using the country’s first initial to refer to Russia. “… Try to single out tidbits unknown publicly but revealed in private by sources closer to State department, government, major think tanks.”

The Clintons, by that time, had set up several new vehicles that included a multimillion dollar speech-making business, the family foundation and a global charitable initiative, all which proved attractive to the Russians as Hillary Clinton took over State.

“In the end, some of this just comes down to what it always does in Washington: donations, lobbying, contracts and influence — even for Russia,” said Frank Figliuzzi, the former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence.

The sleeper ring

Figliuzzi supervised the post-arrest declassification and release of records from a 10-year operation that unmasked a major Russian spy ring in 2010. It was one of the most important U.S. counterintelligence victories against Russia in history, and famous for nabbing the glamorous spy-turned-model Anna Chapman.

While Chapman dominated the headlines surrounding that spy ring, another Russian woman posing as a mundane New Jersey accountant named Cynthia Murphy was closing in on accessing Secretary Clinton’s department, according to records and interviews.

For most of the 10 years, the ring of Russian spies that included Chapman and Murray acted as sleepers, spending a “great deal of time collecting information and passing it on” to their handlers inside Russia’s SVR spy agency, FBI records state.

Murphy, living with her husband and kids in the New Jersey suburbs of New York City, reported a major breakthrough in February 2009 in an electronic message sent to her handlers: she had scored access to a major Democrat, FBI records state.

“Murphy had several work-related personal meetings with [a prominent New York-based financier, name omitted] and was assigned his account,” one FBI record from the case read. “The message accurately described the financier as ‘prominent in politics,’ ‘an active fund-raiser’ for [a major political party, name omitted] and a ‘personal friend’ of [a current Cabinet official, name redacted].”

Multiple current and former officials confirmed to The Hill that the Cabinet officer was Hillary Clinton, the fundraiser was New York financier Alan Patricof and the political party was the Democratic National Committee. None of the Americans were ever suspected of illegalities, but the episode made clear the Russian spies were stepping up their operations against the new administration after years of working in a “sleeper” capacity, officials said.

Patricof did not return a call to his office Friday seeking comment. But in 2010 he told The Washington Post after the spy case broke he believed he had been a victim of the spy ring, saying Murphy had worked for him but that he only talked accounting and not government or politics with her.

“It’s just staggering,” he told the Post about the idea of being targeted by Russia. “It’s off the charts.”

Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill declined Saturday to say if the secretary was ever alerted or briefed to the Russian spy effort, instead suggesting that any focus on the spy case was a partisan effort to distract from the controversy around Moscow and President Trump.

“Nothing has changed since the last time this was addressed, including the right’s transparent attempts to distract from their own Russia problems, which are real and a grave threat to our national security,” he wrote in an email to The Hill.

Back in 2010, when the spy story broke, Hillary Clinton’s office issued a statement that there was “no reason to think the Secretary was a target of this spy ring.”

Court documents and agents who worked the case suggest otherwise, saying the Russians were specifically targeting her department and any intelligence they could get on the new administration’s emerging foreign policy.

Trying to get inside State

The FBI documents show exactly what Murphy’s Russian handlers wanted her to get from a Clinton-tied donor she had befriended. “Maybe he can provide Murphy with remarks re US foreign policy, roumors (sic) about White House internal kitchen, invite her to major venues,” one FBI document quoted the Russians as saying.

By 2010, the Russian SVR urged Murphy to consider taking a job with a lobbying firm because “this position would expose her to prospective contacts and potential sources in U.S. government,” the FBI affidavit read.

Figliuzzi said it was the FBI's belief that Murphy wasn’t going to risk taking a job inside the State Department, where the vetting process might unmask her true identity. So she aimed for a private sector job where “she could get next to people who had the jobs who could get the information she wanted from State,” he said.

The retired FBI executive said that by early summer 2010, agents feared Chapman might flee the country and Murphy was getting too close to posing a security concern to Hillary Clinton. As a result, they arrested the entire ring of 10 spies, and quickly expelled them.

“In regards to the woman known as Cynthia Murphy, she was getting close to Alan, and the lobbying job. And we thought this was too close to Hillary Clinton. So when you have the totality of the circumstance, and we were confident we had the whole cell identified, we decided it was time to shut down their operations,” Figliuzzi said.

The FBI announced the arrests on June 28, 2010, a day after they were made.

The ring highlights the long-standing efforts Russia has made to gain access to U.S. officials, which sprouted up well before the last election. But the recent events also illustrate how Russia’s efforts have advanced.

Figliuzzi said they show a “logical evolution or morphing of methodology to exploit social media in a way that is far more effective and potentially damaging” than the spy ring rolled up in 2010.

“We watched a sleeper cell of ten people for ten years that didn't come close to the impact of a few thousand ads and posts on FB, Twitter, Google and Instagram,” he said.

Bill Clinton’s big check

A day after the arrests of the sleeper ring, another event captured the FBI’s attention.

Thousands of miles away in Russia, former President Clinton collected a $500,000 check for giving a 90-minute speech to Renaissance Capital, a Kremlin-connected bank, then scored a meeting with Putin himself.

The check caught the attention of FBI agents, especially with Hillary Clinton having recently returned from meetings in Russia, and her department working on a variety of issues where Moscow had an interest, records show.

One issue was American approval of the Russian nuclear company Rosatom’s purchase of a Canadian company called Uranium One, which controlled 20 percent of America’s strategic uranium reserves. State was one of more than a dozen federal agencies that needed to weigh in, and a Clinton deputy was handling the matter.

The second issue was the Russian company TENEX’s desire to score a new raft of commercial nuclear sales to U.S. companies. TENEX for years was selling uranium recycled from old Soviet warheads to the United States. But that deal was coming to an end and now it needed a new U.S. market.

And the third was a promise Secretary Clinton herself made to Russian leaders to round up support in America’s Silicon Valley for then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s dream for a new high-tech hub outside Moscow known as Skolkovo. A team of venture capitalists had been dispatched to Moscow just a few weeks before Bill Clinton landed his payday, records show.

"We have 40,000 Russians living in Silicon Valley in California. We would be thrilled if 40,000 Russians were working in whatever the Russian equivalent of Silicon Valley is, providing global economic competition, taking the internet and technology to the next level,” Hillary Clinton said at the time, according to a State Department transcript. She added that the business executives she dispatched to Putin's homeland had Twittered their way through Russia.

The bank that paid Bill Clinton was promoting the Uranium One deal’s stock. And the former president entertained – though he never followed through with – meeting with two Russian figures who had ties to the nuclear sales and the Silicon Valley deals as well, State Department records show.

Angel Urena, the official spokeswoman for the former president, told The Hill that Bill Clinton never discussed the issues pending before his wife’s department when he was in Russia and that the money he collected for himself and his charitable efforts never influenced his wife’s decision-making.

Another investigation

Away from Bill Clinton’s check and the breaking news of a spy ring, the FBI had another major investigation underway where the Clinton name was surfacing.

Since 2009, the FBI had an undercover informant gathering evidence of a massive bribery and kickback scheme inside the Russian nuclear energy firm TENEX and its American arm TENAM.

Years later, FBI agents would help the Justice Department bring charges against the Russian nuclear industry’s point man in the United States, TENEX director Vadim Mikerin, as well as a Russian financier and an American trucking executive whose company moved Russian uranium around the United States.

But as the informant gathered evidence of the bribery scheme in early 2010, he began to hear a familiar name crop up in conversations. The Russians kept talking about ways they could win access to or favor with the Clintons, and the informant kept reporting it back to his FBI handlers.

The informant has never been publicly identified, but his lawyer told The Hill on Friday he can shed significant light to Congress on what the Russians were doing to try to win favorable treatment from the Obama administration.

“I can confirm that my client while working undercover for the FBI and in the employ of the Russian energy firm TENEX witnessed numerous, detailed conversations in which Russian actors described their efforts to lobby, influence or ingratiate themselves with the Clintons in hopes of winning favorable uranium decisions from the Obama administration,” attorney Victoria Toensing said.

“Unfortunately, he cannot at the present time disclose the specifics of that evidence he reported to the agents in real time because of an NDA he signed with the bureau. But we are working with Congress to find a means in the future for him to transmit the important information he possesses,” she added.

There are some public records that show what TENEX was trying to do inside the United States.

The Russian firm between 2009 and 2011 hired two Washington consulting firms to help it win Obama administration approval for policies and contracts that opened up billions in new nuclear fuel sales for TENEX, foreign agent registration records show. Those firms were never implicated in any wrongdoing in court records, and were just doing contract work to expand the Russian company's commercial nuclear sales inside the United States.

The lobbying work was perfectly legal, focusing on agencies like State, Commerce and Energy that supervised the U.S.-Russia nuclear relationship. But once again, a connection to the Clintons emerged.

One of the firms TENEX hired in 2010 was providing hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in support to the Clinton Global Initiative, starting in 2008.

View user profile
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mueller-now-investigating-democratic-lobbyist-tony-podesta-n812776

WASHINGTON — Tony Podesta and the Podesta Group are now the subjects of a federal investigation being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, three sources with knowledge of the matter told NBC News.

The probe of Podesta and his Democratic-leaning lobbying firm grew out of Mueller's inquiry into the finances of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, according to the sources. As special counsel, Mueller has been tasked with investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

View user profile
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/21/politics/fusion-gps-injunction/index.html

Washington (CNN)Fusion GPS, the intelligence firm behind the controversial Trump dossier, asked a federal court on Friday to stop its bank from turning over financial records subpoenaed by the House intelligence committee.

In its filing, the firm asserted that the subpoena exceeds the committee's legal authority and said the release of the records would reveal the names of its clients and therefore violate its and their First Amendment rights to free speech and free association.

The intelligence committee has subpoenaed the bank information as part of its investigation into Russia's attempts to influence last year's election, including allegations in the dossier of collusion by Donald Trump's presidential campaign.

Trump has repeatedly denied the allegations of collusion with Russia during the campaign.
The intelligence panel said in its court filing related to the firm's request that it sought the banking information as part of its effort "to understand all facets of the 'dossier' written by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, including who paid for it, who received it, what steps were taken to corroborate it and whether the FBI relied on it in its investigation of the allegations of collusion.

"The records sought by the subpoena will allow the Committee to fully understand and perhaps conclusively determine who paid for the 'dossier' and the amount of funds that Fusion GPS paid to Mr. Steele for the performance of his work, as well as determine whether Fusion GPS engaged in other Russia-related work within the scope of the Committee's pending investigation," the committee's response said. "Such information is crucial for the Committee to fully investigate not only the 'dossier' and its relevance to the question of whether there was possible 'collusion' between the Russian Government and the Trump campaign but also other aspects of the Committee's investigation."

Californian Republican Rep. Devin Nunes, who chairs the panel, signed the subpoenas, which included the request for Fusion GPS's financial records from TD Bank and were sent to the firm October 4, according to the court documents.

Fusion GPS asserted in its filing Friday that Nunes did not give the firm required notice that he was subpoenaing the bank for its records.

On Saturday, a judge on the US District Court for the District of Columbia, Tanya Chutkan, extended the bank's deadline to respond to the subpoena for its records until Wednesday. Chutkan also told the intelligence committee to file its response to a request by Fusion GPS for a restraining order from the court by 6 p.m. Monday.

The subpoenas also requested depositions of key members of the private intelligence firm. Two partners at Fusion GPS, Peter Fritsch and Thomas Catán, invoked their Fifth Amendment rights not to answer questions during their closed-door appearance before the committee Wednesday, according to their attorney, Joshua Levy.

After the session, which lasted more than an hour, Levy charged that the committee broke with its past practices by requiring them to physically appear to plead the Fifth.
"No American should have to experience the indignity that occurred today," Levy told reporters. "No American should be required to appear before a congressional committee just to invoke his constitutional privileges. But that is what Chairman (Devin) Nunes required of our clients at Fusion GPS today, in a sharp departure from even the past practice of this committee's investigation, where witnesses under the exact same circumstances were excused from appearing."

Florida Rep. Tom Rooney, a senior Republican on the committee, defended the decision to hold a hearing for the Fusion GPS partners.

"We didn't require them to come in and plead the Fifth. We asked them to come in to answer questions with regard to our investigation, as we have with numerous, numerous witnesses over the last several months," Rooney said after the session concluded.

"The fact that they did plead the Fifth obviously is their right, but I think it is important that we hear from them directly, especially with regard to their extremely lengthy response to our request and in part, partially, because their response was that the investigation and subpoena was illegitimate. I think by the very fact that they were here shows its legitimacy and I think that's important," Rooney added.

Nunes did not attend Wednesday's hearing, Levy said. A spokesperson for Nunes did not respond to requests for comment at the time.

On Saturday, Trump called for his own Justice Department and FBI to release information on who paid for the dossier.



Last edited by PkrBum on 10/23/2017, 6:10 pm; edited 1 time in total

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mueller-now-investigating-democratic-lobbyist-tony-podesta-n812776

WASHINGTON — Tony Podesta and the Podesta Group are now the subjects of a federal investigation being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, three sources with knowledge of the matter told NBC News.

The probe of Podesta and his Democratic-leaning lobbying firm grew out of Mueller's inquiry into the finances of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, according to the sources. As special counsel, Mueller has been tasked with investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

So?

View user profile
The worm has turned. Who do you suppose financed that bogus dossier? Hillary? Russia? Both?

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:The worm has turned. Who do you suppose financed that bogus dossier? Hillary? Russia? Both?

This is Tony, not John. It's part of a comprehensive investigation. The worm has not turned; it's choking to death on your garbage posts.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mueller-now-investigating-democratic-lobbyist-tony-podesta-n812776

WASHINGTON — Tony Podesta and the Podesta Group are now the subjects of a federal investigation being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, three sources with knowledge of the matter told NBC News.

The probe of Podesta and his Democratic-leaning lobbying firm grew out of Mueller's inquiry into the finances of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, according to the sources. As special counsel, Mueller has been tasked with investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

So, I guess we can cross "reading comprehension" off the list of skills Pkrdumb has mastered.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:The worm has turned. Who do you suppose financed that bogus dossier? Hillary? Russia? Both?

The thread we're supposed to be dealing with here purports that Trump was the perfect foil for Putin -- if your purpose is to boost racial and social and religious division in the United States, Trump would be the perfect new President. The best ever.

Considering the massive cut and paste job aimed at punishing Hillary Clinton here by Pkrdumb, it's clear the poor guy can't stand the idea that Putin uses him like a weapon to wound America.  Stop crying little boy.  Your habit of always responding to attacks on Trump by casting aspersions at Obama, or the Clintons is always irrelevant and has become boring to all the rational members of this forum.  The incredible irony of your syndrome, is that while you defend the Pussy Grabber, he's busy pissing on you and all those like you.  Reality!

View user profile
I'd like to play by one set of rules and standards... that's all. Don't confuse that with defending trump.

View user profile
Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:The worm has turned. Who do you suppose financed that bogus dossier? Hillary? Russia? Both?

The thread we're supposed to be dealing with here purports that Trump was the perfect foil for Putin -- if your purpose is to boost racial and social and religious division in the United States, Trump would be the perfect new President.  The best ever.

Considering the massive cut and paste job aimed at punishing Hillary Clinton here by Pkrdumb, it's clear the poor guy can't stand the idea that Putin uses him like a weapon to wound America.  Stop crying little boy.  Your habit of always responding to attacks on Trump by casting aspersions at Obama, or the Clintons is always irrelevant and has become boring to all the rational members of this forum.  The incredible irony of your syndrome, is that while you defend the Pussy Grabber, he's busy pissing on you and all those like you.  Reality!



It's obvious that the pussy grabber in chief isn't the only one that enjoys golden showers, his cockholsters do too. Laughing

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:I'd like to play by one set of rules and standards... that's all. Don't confuse that with defending trump.

Obviously you're incapable of understanding that past alleged wrongs by governmental figures have nothing to do with correcting current dangerous situations. Trying to make us believe that prior failed attempts to mollify N. Korea's leader, somehow justify the provocations Trump issues almost daily to rile his opponent. What any other American politician did in relation to this situation is totally irrelevant. The only issue that counts is whether the current idiot in the White House will succeed in getting us into a disastrous nuclear war that was unnecessary.

View user profile
Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I'd like to play by one set of rules and standards... that's all. Don't confuse that with defending trump.

Obviously you're incapable of understanding that past alleged wrongs by governmental figures have nothing to do with correcting current dangerous situations.  Trying to make us believe that prior failed attempts to mollify N. Korea's leader, somehow justify the provocations Trump issues almost daily to rile his opponent.  What any other American politician did in relation to this situation is totally irrelevant.  The only issue that counts is whether the current idiot in the White House will succeed in getting us into a disastrous nuclear war that was unnecessary.    

Mollify is a good word to express our past efforts to deal with nk. Has it worked?

Why keep doing the same thing with the same failed result? The past is certainly/always relevant.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I'd like to play by one set of rules and standards... that's all. Don't confuse that with defending trump.

Obviously you're incapable of understanding that past alleged wrongs by governmental figures have nothing to do with correcting current dangerous situations.  Trying to make us believe that prior failed attempts to mollify N. Korea's leader, somehow justify the provocations Trump issues almost daily to rile his opponent.  What any other American politician did in relation to this situation is totally irrelevant.  The only issue that counts is whether the current idiot in the White House will succeed in getting us into a disastrous nuclear war that was unnecessary.    

Mollify is a good word to express our past efforts to deal with nk. Has it worked?

Why keep doing the same thing with the same failed result? The past is certainly/always relevant.


Let's hear your advice on how to handle N. Korea. We have but two choices: 1) negotiate a settlement or 2) attack N. Korea, what would you suggest we do?

View user profile
Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I'd like to play by one set of rules and standards... that's all. Don't confuse that with defending trump.

Obviously you're incapable of understanding that past alleged wrongs by governmental figures have nothing to do with correcting current dangerous situations.  Trying to make us believe that prior failed attempts to mollify N. Korea's leader, somehow justify the provocations Trump issues almost daily to rile his opponent.  What any other American politician did in relation to this situation is totally irrelevant.  The only issue that counts is whether the current idiot in the White House will succeed in getting us into a disastrous nuclear war that was unnecessary.    

Mollify is a good word to express our past efforts to deal with nk. Has it worked?

Why keep doing the same thing with the same failed result? The past is certainly/always relevant.


Let's hear your advice on how to handle N. Korea.  We have but two choices: 1) negotiate a settlement or 2) attack N. Korea, what would you suggest we do?

Aggressive rhetoric with the firm threat of his destruction if he attacks anyone is worth a try.

Why are you afraid of bargaining from a position of strength? Bought into the Obama Nobel policy? How'd that work out? What major foreign relation is better? Results matter. Even his Iran and Cuba deals were complete give always... among the many weak positions... he'll be remembered as the weak sauce potus. Russia ran wild... China expanded into international water trade routes... what middle east country is better? Libya? Lol... no objective person respects the job Obama did in foreign policy.

Sooo... given the known results... why keep doing the same thing? Isn't that an example of insanity?

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I'd like to play by one set of rules and standards... that's all. Don't confuse that with defending trump.

Obviously you're incapable of understanding that past alleged wrongs by governmental figures have nothing to do with correcting current dangerous situations.  Trying to make us believe that prior failed attempts to mollify N. Korea's leader, somehow justify the provocations Trump issues almost daily to rile his opponent.  What any other American politician did in relation to this situation is totally irrelevant.  The only issue that counts is whether the current idiot in the White House will succeed in getting us into a disastrous nuclear war that was unnecessary.    

Mollify is a good word to express our past efforts to deal with nk. Has it worked?

Why keep doing the same thing with the same failed result? The past is certainly/always relevant.


Let's hear your advice on how to handle N. Korea.  We have but two choices: 1) negotiate a settlement or 2) attack N. Korea, what would you suggest we do?

Aggressive rhetoric with the firm threat of his destruction if he attacks anyone is worth a try. Does that include calling N. Korea's leader "Rocket man?" or any of the many insults Trump has tweeted to disparage Kim Jong Un and his administration? Stop trying to justify the madman who Russia has placed in our driver's seat!

Why are you afraid of bargaining from a position of strength? Bought into the Obama Nobel policy? How'd that work out? What major foreign relation is better? Results matter. Even his Iran and Cuba deals were complete give always... among the many weak positions... he'll be remembered as the weak sauce potus. Russia ran wild... China expanded into international water trade routes... what middle east country is better? Libya? Lol... no objective person respects the job Obama did in foreign policy.

Sooo... given the known results... why keep doing the same thing? Isn't that an example of insanity?

View user profile
Disparage the despot? Lmao... you're hilariously clueless. And that "russia thing" isn't likely to involve trump. So try to calm down. We can agree to hang any guilty of either party on the national mall.

So we're got that... right? A thorough unbiased investigation that covers all Russian involvement.

View user profile
I think President Obama kept his campaign promises to bring our troops home and let others bear the burden of the region. A 95% cut in troops in the middle east is his crowning achievement as he tried to pull us out of the foreign policy mess of non declared wars on nations which had nothing to do with 911. He got Bin Laden, and stayed back to let others handle their own messes. We are not the shill for Saudi Arabia and Israel. It took courage to say NO. There is no reason to complete the exit from the middle east.....period.

In regard to Korea it is quite simple. Almost any third world country can develop nuclear weapons. It is 80 year old technology which is easy to replicate and improve. The only myth which seems to continue to exist is that America could win a war against North Korea and China. We would stalemate again and lose millions of life. Why. We need to pull back American troops which are seen as a threat to N korea and China. Pull back to Japan with only a few thousand American troops in Korea. Reduce our military and we will be safer as a nation. More offensive military strategies does nothing to protect America or Americans. Our Military is a paper tiger when actually fighting nation states which have no qualms about using tactical nuclear weapons to neutralize our carrier groups.......a toothless tiger.

View user profile
2seaoat wrote:I think President Obama kept his campaign promises to bring our troops home and let others bear the burden of the region.  A 95% cut in troops in the middle east is his crowning achievement as he tried to pull us out of the foreign policy mess of non declared wars on nations which had nothing to do with 911.  He got Bin Laden, and stayed back to let others handle their own messes.  We are not the shill for Saudi Arabia and Israel.  It took courage to say NO.  There is no reason to complete the exit from the middle east.....period.

In regard to Korea it is quite simple.  Almost any third world country can develop nuclear weapons.  It is 80 year old technology which is easy to replicate and improve.  The only myth which seems to continue to exist is that America could win a war against North Korea and China.  We would stalemate again and lose millions of life.  Why.  We need to pull back American troops which are seen as a threat to N korea and China.  Pull back to Japan with only a few thousand American troops in Korea.  Reduce our military and we will be safer as a nation.   More offensive military strategies does nothing to protect America or Americans.  Our Military is a paper tiger when actually fighting nation states which have no qualms about using tactical nuclear weapons to neutralize our carrier groups.......a toothless tiger.

You're absolutely right Seaoat. We are a paper tiger. With all our armaments and high technology, Russia, China and N. Korea are leaps and bounds ahead of us in weaponizing computer attack capabilities. And for anyone who insists we're the strongest military power on earth, ask yourself, just how many wars have we won in the last three decades? Our Navy is incapable of dodging huge cargo ships on the open ocean, Russian fighters can outperform our best, and a single nuclear tipped missile will sink every ship in one of our attack fleets. Our tanks are equaled by the best of those of our enemies. And finally, thanks to a no-draft policy, we're badly outnumbered on the battlefield. If we're so powerful, why are we still fighting in Afghanistan?

View user profile
http://www.newsweek.com/americans-scream-helplessly-sky-donald-trump-election-anniversary-690889


THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS WILL SCREAM HELPLESSLY AT THE SKY ON TRUMP'S ELECTION ANNIVERSARY

Thousands of concerned citizens will take part in a new ritual of sorts: commemorating the anniversary of Donald Trump's election by screaming at the sky.

Over 4,000 Facebook users have RSVP'd—another 33,000 are interested in attending—to the Nov. 8 event being held in Boston that is literally titled "Scream helplessly at the sky on the anniversary of the election."

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:http://www.newsweek.com/americans-scream-helplessly-sky-donald-trump-election-anniversary-690889


THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS WILL SCREAM HELPLESSLY AT THE SKY ON TRUMP'S ELECTION ANNIVERSARY

Thousands of concerned citizens will take part in a new ritual of sorts: commemorating the anniversary of Donald Trump's election by screaming at the sky.

Over 4,000 Facebook users have RSVP'd—another 33,000 are interested in attending—to the Nov. 8 event being held in Boston that is literally titled "Scream helplessly at the sky on the anniversary of the election."

There's a better way -- but it requires true American patriots who will stand up for principles, and who are republicans serving in Congress. People like Senators McCain, Corker and Flake. Reality

View user profile
Wordslinger wrote:

There's a better way -- but it requires true American patriots who will stand up for principles, and who are republicans serving in Congress.  People like Senators McCain, Corker and Flake.  Reality

Pretty sure that Facebook thing's a joke. The 4Chan crowd have been having idiot fun posing as "liberals" and doing stupid things. They don't really know their enemies, so they're wasting their time with silliness.

Most lefties I know are just donating to candidates, getting ready to vote, and a few are stocking up on ammo in case some fucker tries to suspend elections. Wink It won't come to that, I'm sure, but what the hell, the stuff's got a pretty good shelf-life.

Meanwhile, the conservative base is dying of old age and fireworks-related injuries. Hannity can't scrape up enough ratings to beat Maddow anymore.

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum