POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
No doubt his tweet was stupid but APs tweet was definitely a bit misleading. Kind of makes it sound like it was a US Navy Seal.
Yeah because nothing like that ever happened to an Obama supporter
![[eyeroll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/rolleye/rolleye0011.r191677.gif "Eye roll [eyeroll]")
I'm really worried that the right has collectively gotten a case of the Alzheimer's. Don't seem to remember how they acted for 8 years.
I LOVE what Trump is doing. He is getting the left so pissed off they may finally start playing dirty like Republicans have for years. F bipartisanship and F the norms. For some reason, watching the Republicans steal a Supreme Court seat didn't seem to do it. So thank you Trump.
When we get control of the House, Senate and WH again, gloves need to come off. Push through more Supreme Court justices until the illegitimate Gorsuch nomination is rendered limp(well within Congress purview - 11 should do it), make universal voter registration a thing, grant statehood to DC and Puerto Rico, allow California to break up into 7 states, expand the federal courts, pass new voting rights act that gives felons who have done their time the right to vote again and gets rid of Voter ID laws, give illegals a path to citizenship, and move to multi-member House districts to negate gerrymandering. SInce Trump can slap tariffs in the name of national security, use the same excuse to create a national green energy plan that destroys the coal and oil industry. Get rid of the Electoral College and replace with winner of popular vote. Restore power to the working class by reversing Citizens United, make it illegal to withhold any campaign donor names over $1000 to restore transparency. Tame the next 'Trump' by making it mandatory for a presidential candidate to release tax returns, illegal for candidate to own any business that gets money outside of our borders, and give people the ability to demand a recall election on a President after 2 years if 60% of voters want it. Should also make it illegal to have any family member hold an office higher than Post Master.
Time for Dems to fight fire with fire because Republicans don't respect bipartisanship or 'norms'. Notice none of these items have anything to do with abortion, gay rights, political correctness, universal healthcare, trans bathrooms, etc.
If I was Warren I'd tell Trump to release his tax returns and I'll take the test. Pretty sure someone already offered to donate to charity if Trump released taxes.
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/loser...is-30-year-old-cosplayer-with-long-rap-sheet/
Scumbag who assaulted 16 year old Trump supporter has long rap sheet, five DUIs, drug possession and is a cosplayer. He’s 30 and he worked as a part-time bartender.
Scumbag who assaulted 16 year old Trump supporter has long rap sheet, five DUIs, drug possession and is a cosplayer. He’s 30 and he worked as a part-time bartender.
From what I've seen there's only evidence of Brennan spying on journalists, not sure I have seen evidence this was directed by Obama. Regardless this is a black eye on his administration for sure. Of course Brennan is still a Republican in my eyes, regardless of how much he hates Trump.
And there's ZERO evidence Obama had the FBI spy on Trump. Now Paige was being watched by the FBI long before he came onto the Trump campaign. Was the FBI supposed to stop investigating shady characters simply because they now work for Trump's campaign?
It doesn't make sense that Obama would spy on Trump yet allow the FBI, who he supposedly wielded all this power over, continue to hound Hillary about the emails and make the remarks Comey did a week before the election. Sorry, not buying it.
While Trump himself may not have colluded with Russia, there's plenty of evidence that several people on his team were doing just that. In exchange for money, power, or both. How many on Trump's team have lied about meeting with Russians and then changed their stories when confronted with the evidence? NONE of that is shady to you huh?
Interesting you mention Wikileaks who was working with both the Trump campaign and the Russian government to systematically release these hacked Hillary emails.
You me, nor anyone else on here knows how much evidence Mueller has. I do know that what 5 or 6 people have been charged with something relating to this investigation. We know Trump tried to kill the investigation several times. That he constantly tries to undermine the investigation(which is also called obstruction of justice btw). For someone so innocent, he sure doesn't act like it.
Why is it that Trump is given a free pass for his and his associates actions but Obama is automatically guilty for anything that any Democrat 'may' have done. And the FBi is burned at the stake for what increasingly looks like 'doing their f'ing job'.
This kinda sums up the probable cause for collusion. If this was Obama, he would be guilty of treason in the eyes of everyone on this board. Compare this evidence to the evidence you just provided that 'proves' Obama committed treasonous espionage.
The circumstantial case for collusion
It’s worth backing up to recall what we all saw on camera before anyone knew anything about an FBI investigation, before FBI Director James Comey was fired in an effort to halt the investigation, and before Mueller and his team revealed anything:
That said, Trump was asked about this possibility explicitly during the campaign. And during the campaign and the transition, both he and his team issued at least 20 denials of any contact between his camp and the Russians. And where evidence really enters the picture is that they were lying.
There was extensive outreach between Trump and Russia
In reality, as exhaustively documented by the Moscow Project, there were extensive communications between people in Trump’s orbit and Russian government figures or others who had, or purported to have, close ties to the Putin regime.
Some of this communication — including Michael Cohen’s January 2016 email to Dmitry Peskov and Ivanka Trump’s October 2015 exchange with Dmitry Klokov — was ostensibly about efforts to construct a Trump-branded building in Moscow. Some of it, including the various escapades of George Papadopoulos and Carter Page, involved relatively peripheral players in Trumpworld, who didn’t have strong pre-campaign ties to Trump or play a post-campaign role in the administration.
But some of it was quite high-level and explicitly about the campaign. Donald Trump Jr., for example, took a meeting with the deputy governor of Russia’s central bank while attending the National Rifle Association’s annual convention in Kentucky in May 2016. The meeting was arranged by a US conservative activist named Paul Erickson, who got in touch with senior Trump campaign aide Rick Dearborn to set it up, explicitly as a step toward creating back-channel communications between Russia and the campaign.
And, of course, Trump Jr., along with Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort, attended the infamous Trump Tower meeting whose purpose was explicitly described as “part of Russia and its support for Mr Trump” and was said to involve incriminating information about Hillary Clinton.
That Trumpworld was clearly open to both political collusion and financial dealmaking with the Russian government doesn’t demonstrate that either actually occurred. But it’s unquestionably evidence in favor of the possibility. The fact that all of this was lied about and swept under the rug is further evidence (though, again, not proof) that there was Russia-related wrongdoing that is being covered up. And it’s striking that we continue to learn new things about contacts between Trump and Russia — the Ivanka story is new this week — rather than there having been a moment at which everyone got religion and decided to come clean.
And then there’s Paul Manafort.
The Manafort-Deripaska nexus is very suspicious
Paul Manafort had worked for years in Republican Party politics in the 1970s and ’80s, but by the second decade of the 21st century, he was primarily working in Ukraine. Then in March 2016, Donald Trump hired him to run his presidential campaign and smooth over badly frayed relations with the GOP establishment.
Two weeks after he boarded the Trump train, Manafort emailed Konstantin Kilimnik, who’d been his key lieutenant in Kiev for years:
“I assume you have shown our friends my media coverage, right?” Manafort wrote.
“Absolutely,” Kilimnik responded a few hours later from Kiev. “Every article.”
“How do we use to get whole,” Manafort asks. “Has OVD operation seen?”
OVD, in this context, is Oleg Deripaska, a wealthy Russian oligarch to whom Manafort was deeply in debt. Critically, despite the debts, Manafort agreed to go work for Trump for free. But he wanted to know how he could use his unpaid work for Trump to “get whole” with Deripaska.
Manafort, in other words, clearly saw his work for Trump as directly linked to his work for pro-Russian forces. Manafort is also currently preparing to stand trial for a broad array of financial crimes related to this work. It’s conventional for both the Trump camp and Manafort’s legal team to say that the charges are unrelated to the 2016 campaign, but that is merely assuming the conclusion. If Manafort did in fact use his US activities to “get whole” with his former client, then the two issues are clearly quite linked.
The truth in this matter is, as with much of the rest of the story, unclear. But, again, there is clearly evidence here.
It’s worth backing up to recall what we all saw on camera before anyone knew anything about an FBI investigation, before FBI Director James Comey was fired in an effort to halt the investigation, and before Mueller and his team revealed anything:
- Two separate hacks of Democratic Party emails — one purloining a trove of internal Democratic National Committee emails and one that stole a ton of correspondence from John Podesta’s personal Gmail account — were perpetrated over the course of 2016, by what are now believed to have been agents operating on behalf of the Russian government.
- These emails were not immediately released, and they were not released by the hackers who obtained them. Instead, the emails were disseminated to the public by using Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as an intermediary. Their releases also seemed strategically timed — the DNC emails disrupted efforts to create a show of unity between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders at the beginning of the Democratic National Convention, while the Podesta emails were released right after the infamous Access Hollywood tape.
- Trump and his campaign, at the time, believed these emails were a big deal and cited them frequently. Trump built substantial portions of his campaign messaging around narratives — typically half-true at best — contained in the emails, and made no bones about welcoming the hacking.
- “WikiLeaks, I love WikiLeaks,” he said on several occasions on the campaign trail, and he also explicitly called on the Russian government to hack and release Hillary Clinton’s emails.
- Trump also spent the 2016 campaign running an overtly pro-Russian campaign message, praising Vladimir Putin’s leadership, defending him from allegations of murdering his political opponents, and calling for a realignment of US strategy in Syria and Ukraine.
That said, Trump was asked about this possibility explicitly during the campaign. And during the campaign and the transition, both he and his team issued at least 20 denials of any contact between his camp and the Russians. And where evidence really enters the picture is that they were lying.
There was extensive outreach between Trump and Russia
In reality, as exhaustively documented by the Moscow Project, there were extensive communications between people in Trump’s orbit and Russian government figures or others who had, or purported to have, close ties to the Putin regime.
Some of this communication — including Michael Cohen’s January 2016 email to Dmitry Peskov and Ivanka Trump’s October 2015 exchange with Dmitry Klokov — was ostensibly about efforts to construct a Trump-branded building in Moscow. Some of it, including the various escapades of George Papadopoulos and Carter Page, involved relatively peripheral players in Trumpworld, who didn’t have strong pre-campaign ties to Trump or play a post-campaign role in the administration.
But some of it was quite high-level and explicitly about the campaign. Donald Trump Jr., for example, took a meeting with the deputy governor of Russia’s central bank while attending the National Rifle Association’s annual convention in Kentucky in May 2016. The meeting was arranged by a US conservative activist named Paul Erickson, who got in touch with senior Trump campaign aide Rick Dearborn to set it up, explicitly as a step toward creating back-channel communications between Russia and the campaign.
And, of course, Trump Jr., along with Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort, attended the infamous Trump Tower meeting whose purpose was explicitly described as “part of Russia and its support for Mr Trump” and was said to involve incriminating information about Hillary Clinton.
That Trumpworld was clearly open to both political collusion and financial dealmaking with the Russian government doesn’t demonstrate that either actually occurred. But it’s unquestionably evidence in favor of the possibility. The fact that all of this was lied about and swept under the rug is further evidence (though, again, not proof) that there was Russia-related wrongdoing that is being covered up. And it’s striking that we continue to learn new things about contacts between Trump and Russia — the Ivanka story is new this week — rather than there having been a moment at which everyone got religion and decided to come clean.
And then there’s Paul Manafort.
The Manafort-Deripaska nexus is very suspicious
Paul Manafort had worked for years in Republican Party politics in the 1970s and ’80s, but by the second decade of the 21st century, he was primarily working in Ukraine. Then in March 2016, Donald Trump hired him to run his presidential campaign and smooth over badly frayed relations with the GOP establishment.
Two weeks after he boarded the Trump train, Manafort emailed Konstantin Kilimnik, who’d been his key lieutenant in Kiev for years:
“I assume you have shown our friends my media coverage, right?” Manafort wrote.
“Absolutely,” Kilimnik responded a few hours later from Kiev. “Every article.”
“How do we use to get whole,” Manafort asks. “Has OVD operation seen?”
OVD, in this context, is Oleg Deripaska, a wealthy Russian oligarch to whom Manafort was deeply in debt. Critically, despite the debts, Manafort agreed to go work for Trump for free. But he wanted to know how he could use his unpaid work for Trump to “get whole” with Deripaska.
Manafort, in other words, clearly saw his work for Trump as directly linked to his work for pro-Russian forces. Manafort is also currently preparing to stand trial for a broad array of financial crimes related to this work. It’s conventional for both the Trump camp and Manafort’s legal team to say that the charges are unrelated to the 2016 campaign, but that is merely assuming the conclusion. If Manafort did in fact use his US activities to “get whole” with his former client, then the two issues are clearly quite linked.
The truth in this matter is, as with much of the rest of the story, unclear. But, again, there is clearly evidence here.
The collusion in plain sight
Last but by no means least, it’s worth recalling that there’s something fundamentally odd about the entire framing of the collusion question.
A political candidate’s relationship to a hostile foreign power would normally be framed differently. The discovery of covert collusion would be used as evidence that the candidate harbored a secret desire to repay the foreign power. But in Trump’s case, there was absolutely no secret! Trump quite openly ran on a pro-Russia platform, adopting Russian views on the conflicts in Syria and Ukraine, defending Putin’s character, and vowing to break up the NATO alliance.
It’s of course not illegal for a candidate for office to espouse pro-Russian foreign policy views. But to an extent, there was plenty of “collusion” in plain view throughout 2016 — crimes were committed and Trump openly praised them; he offered pro-Russia policy in exchange for Russian assistance, received the assistance that he sought, and has labored ever since to avoid investigating or punishing Russia’s crimes.
Here, ultimately, is where Paul Ryan’s argument completely falls apart. The speaker says “there’s no evidence of collusion” but also isn’t willing to go full Trump, denounce the investigation as a fraud, and call for its end. Instead, he says, “this is about Russia and what they did and making sure they don’t do it again.” But Trump has always been clear that he doesn’t think Russia did anything wrong, doesn’t want the full details to become known, doesn’t want anyone punished, and has no particular interest in making sure they don’t do it again. And that, itself, is perhaps the most powerful evidence of collusion.
Source: - https://www.vox.com/2018/6/11/17438386/trump-russia-collusion
Even more ridiculous: Trump wants to meet with Putin alone, no aides, no translators, nothing. Compare that to his meeting with the North Korean dictator. Hmmm, and this is probably BIGGER news to most Americans. LIke I've said over and over again, someone so innocent has never looked so guilty in the entire history of the world.
Last but by no means least, it’s worth recalling that there’s something fundamentally odd about the entire framing of the collusion question.
A political candidate’s relationship to a hostile foreign power would normally be framed differently. The discovery of covert collusion would be used as evidence that the candidate harbored a secret desire to repay the foreign power. But in Trump’s case, there was absolutely no secret! Trump quite openly ran on a pro-Russia platform, adopting Russian views on the conflicts in Syria and Ukraine, defending Putin’s character, and vowing to break up the NATO alliance.
It’s of course not illegal for a candidate for office to espouse pro-Russian foreign policy views. But to an extent, there was plenty of “collusion” in plain view throughout 2016 — crimes were committed and Trump openly praised them; he offered pro-Russia policy in exchange for Russian assistance, received the assistance that he sought, and has labored ever since to avoid investigating or punishing Russia’s crimes.
Here, ultimately, is where Paul Ryan’s argument completely falls apart. The speaker says “there’s no evidence of collusion” but also isn’t willing to go full Trump, denounce the investigation as a fraud, and call for its end. Instead, he says, “this is about Russia and what they did and making sure they don’t do it again.” But Trump has always been clear that he doesn’t think Russia did anything wrong, doesn’t want the full details to become known, doesn’t want anyone punished, and has no particular interest in making sure they don’t do it again. And that, itself, is perhaps the most powerful evidence of collusion.
Source: - https://www.vox.com/2018/6/11/17438386/trump-russia-collusion
Even more ridiculous: Trump wants to meet with Putin alone, no aides, no translators, nothing. Compare that to his meeting with the North Korean dictator. Hmmm, and this is probably BIGGER news to most Americans. LIke I've said over and over again, someone so innocent has never looked so guilty in the entire history of the world.
Cardkilla.
Shut up.
Good lord.
Shut up.
Good lord.
Like, why are you wasting your time?
Do you.think anyone sane on this board reads any of your drivel?
Seek mental help.
Sincerely, a concerned citizen.
Do you.think anyone sane on this board reads any of your drivel?
Seek mental help.
Sincerely, a concerned citizen.
This is the heart of the problem. Nobody listens to our fellow countrymen anymore because of what team they're on. If someone isn't on your side you dismiss every single thing they say. How are we supposed to come together or find any middle ground when both sides are just shouting at each other and no one is listening? Just going to result in alternating tyrannies depending on who won the last election. The confirmation nuclear options taken by both parties are a prime example of this.
You're lying. I know you've seen evidence of it because you read my post.
The whistleblower leaked email provided clearly says -- "There is specific tasker from the WH to go after anyone printing materials negative to the Obama agenda. Even the FBI is shocked"
What do you think "WH" stands for? Who do you think directed it? The DOJ and FBI didn't take it upon themselves to be so brazen. They had orders from the White House.
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
Your own source admits that none of it is actually evidence. There are FISA warrants, government surveilled campaign members, illegally unmasked names and moles who infiltrating the campaign proving the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign just like his adminstration spied on journalists. The best you have is Trump once said he loved Wikileaks.And last but not least, the writer's b.s. opinion, which is way off base, is the most powerful evidence of collusion he/she can offer us.
Let's break it down.
Trump has been clear that there was no collusion. He definitely thinks Russia did something wrong.
The Republicans have been fighting for two years for transparency. It's the Democrats, DOJ and FBI who have been fighting not to release information.
They claim redacted materials are a matter of national security, but when we finally see some of it unredacted, it's actually not sources and methods, but instead corruption they're trying to hide.
They're also guarding the FISA applications with their lives because they lied on them and submitted unverified "evidence" to the FISA judge, which is illegal.
Russia has been punished by Trump. It was the Obama administration who knew in advance what Russia was up to. Instead of stopping them, Obama's NSA gave the stand down order.
After two years the jury is out. Trump has been tougher on Russia than Obama. It's not what he says, but what has actually been done that counts.
Trump and Obama: Who's really tougher on Russia?
Despite the Apparent Bromance, Trump Has Been Tough on Russia
Trump is tougher on Russia than Obama was
That's why in his proposed '19 budget he's requesting a shit ton of money for all things cybersecurity. He requested it in '18, too. Again, it's all about what's being done. The opinions over at VOX are irrelevant.
Trump requests $3.3B for DHS cyber unit in 2019
Hates Trump, gets arrested for stealing a MAGA hat haha. Please God let Trump tweet about this.
Just more proof you are the dumbest tool in the shed.
You and Cardkilla have just shown you have the mental capacity of goddam lunatic fringe raisins so no one listens to you specifically.
You guys really are lunatics. I've said it plenty of times, Trump is the best I could hope for in a Democrat POTUS. He is a compromise. You lunatics have just moved so far left you can't tell your head from your ass anymore.
Like platinum he just skimmed until he got something to be outraged about and went with it.
No one listens to fringe idiots.
There are a lot of fringe idiots in this country.
You are one of them.
Heal thyself...then preach.
I actually agree with you somewhat.
Problem is most of us quit listening after one goes off the rails. Cardkilla is STILL stuck on Russia. RUSSIA.
@moe_schmoe has provided plenty of information pointing to the prior administration having more to do with Russia and their lack of action knowing they were meddling. Furthermore some observant people have came to the conclusion that Russia wanted to split the country via their meddling and weren’t out to support or hurt either candidate. But as you pointed out, card’s team was all in on Russia collusion... so he doesn’t let facts get in the way.
July 4 - Vox publishes a piece saying the American Revolution was a mistake
July 5- @cardkilla pastes a Vox opinion article as evidence that we should respect
July 5- @cardkilla pastes a Vox opinion article as evidence that we should respect
Brennan supported a communist candidate once and is for open borders, zero doubt he is a liberal democrat.
Rachel’s got you covered!
And if I was Warren I’d go make out with a Native American and then take the DNA swab test. An easy million for her charity and she gets to keep pretending she’s an Indian.
I’ll be damned, yet another of Obama’s inner circle is a big fan of the little socialist
Holder sure told him! Holder said he might run in 2020...
Some of Dylan Matthews' previous work and pictures.
"The case for open borders"
https://www.vox.com/2014/9/13/6135905/open-borders-bryan-caplan-interview-gdp-double
This is a good one that shows how ignorant he is.
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/p...x-youth-open-borders-solve-immigration-crises
Open borders and "the American Revolution was a mistake" are two gems of this leftist shit. But hey, no one is for open borders and no, the left isn't anti-American.
Similar threads
