Trump and Russia

[Deranged Rhino]

[B-Man]

 

 

Hey, remember when Trump was a Putin stooge and the "Siberian Candidate"? Good times, good times.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

Hey, remember when Trump was a Putin stooge and the "Siberian Candidate"? Good times, good times.

 

Right? Funny how that narrative died down recently... especially with State now looking into whether or not Russia was directly involved in the attacks this week.

 

The weekend is coming at the perfect time for the corporate news teams to find a way to right the ship...

[GoBills808]

 

Right? Funny how that narrative died down recently... especially with State now looking into whether or not Russia was directly involved in the attacks this week.

 

The weekend is coming at the perfect time for the corporate news teams to find a way to right the ship...

I think it could be both. A media narrative that was fueled by the myriad connections, speculative and otherwise, between team Trump and Russia.

 

Seems like they're taking a much stronger line what with the bombing and Tillerson now calling Russian handling of Syria 'incompetent'... what a difference a few days make.

[Deranged Rhino]

I think it could be both. A media narrative that was fueled by the myriad connections, speculative and otherwise, between team Trump and Russia.

 

Seems like they're taking a much stronger line what with the bombing and Tillerson now calling Russian handling of Syria 'incompetent'... what a difference a few days make.

 

Probably because the bombing in Syria had more to do with China / DPRK than it did Syria / Russia.

[Meathead]

i dont think theres any doubt don is putins stooge so far. kinda comical anyone could see it any different. hes been an abject failure so far, rendered moot. imagine that, an american president with total congressional monopoly, and the best hes done so far is bomb syria unilaterally

 

stooge with a capital ooge

[Meathead]

no matter how annoyed vlad is at dons little temper missile slappy fight, its a far cry from having arch villain hillary and her huge black penis staring him down

 

hillary is indeed a confirmed lying cheating fraud, she would never get my vote until she atoned and then it would still only be maybe. yet right now theres really no contest she would be far far faaaaaaaaar better equipped experience, wisdom, and temperament wise than this lie infested jester of a self consciousness driven flaming dung pile of a man

[TakeYouToTasker]

i dont think theres any doubt don is putins stooge so far. kinda comical anyone could see it any different. hes been an abject failure so far, rendered moot. imagine that, an american president with total congressional monopoly, and the best hes done so far is bomb syria unilaterally

 

stooge with a capital ooge

This is a biased reporting which reflects only the author's desire to see the President fail.

 

Calling balls and strikes with this administration, he's been mostly positive with a few negatives.

 

Everything he's done in regards to border enforcement has been a huge win given this was his major campaign issue, his nomination of Gorsuch to the SCOTUS was everything a conservative/libertarian could have hoped for, his response in Syria was a breath of fresh air after the last eight years of non-foreign policy/appeasement.

 

The only true downside was his poorly rolled out travel ban.

 

Everything else is pretty much par for the course for a new President learning on the job.

Edited April 10, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker

[Meathead]

[Meathead]

obviously i couldnt disagree more

 

the only thing i can say that actually appears to have improved is actual legit border screening. but what that bc of dons great vision or just the next logical step after the stunning, destructive, and embarrassing defeat of his ill concieved muslim ban?

 

id also have to give him grudging support for the missile strikes, but i thought that was appropriate last time too when congress should have approved it - republicans then opting instead of course for another just say no moment. so kudos for don not following rules there but how much credit does he really deserve? and how does he handle the ultra delicate situation hes inflamed now?

 

only time will tell if he botched it or he has some great vision thats only beginning to emerge. i think i know which way that question will go

[TakeYouToTasker]

obviously i couldnt disagree more

 

That's because you're incapable of objectively calling balls and strikes. You are letting your personal distaste for the man color your judgment.

 

 

 

the only thing i can say that actually appears to have improved is actual legit border screening. but what that bc of dons great vision or just the next logical step after the stunning, destructive, and embarrassing defeat of his ill concieved muslim ban?

This demonstrates a lack of knowledge surrounding policy initiatives.

 

First, there was no "muslim ban"; there was a temporary travel ban put in place from a list of very specific countries whose governments either do not exist, or won't aid us in our vetting process. That was the standard. The ban being struck down was one of the most extra-Constitutionally dangerous things I've ever seen from the courts, with the ruling being not placed on the wording of the President's order, but rather the entering of campaign statements into a legal opinion.

 

Second, the President immediately put into place steps to get our border under control on many fronts. He instructed ICE to do it's job, and changed the way the department handles it's priorities by executive order. This was intentional.

 

 

 

id also have to give him grudging support for the missile strikes, but i thought that was appropriate last time too when congress should have approved it - republicans then opting instead of course for another just say no moment. so kudos for don not following rules there but how much credit does he really deserve? and how does he handle the ultra delicate situation hes inflamed now?

The fact that you have to give him grudging support speaks volumes about your inability to be objective here.

 

What the President did was engage in force diplomacy. Assad, a brutal dictator who gassed his own people, was testing the resolve of the current President as he did the last. This President responded incredibly appropriately.

 

It served as a check on both Assad, who now knows his actions will have consequences; and on Russia and Putin, who have been informed that they had best do a better job keeping their dog on a leash.

[GG]

That's because you're incapable of objectively calling balls and strikes. You are letting your personal distaste for the man color your judgment.

This demonstrates a lack of knowledge surrounding policy initiatives.

 

 

First, there was no "muslim ban"; there was a temporary travel ban put in place from a list of very specific countries whose governments either do not exist, or won't aid us in our vetting process. That was the standard. The ban being struck down was one of the most extra-Constitutionally dangerous things I've ever seen from the courts, with the ruling being not placed on the wording of the President's order, but rather the entering of campaign statements into a legal opinion.

 

Second, the President immediately put into place steps to get our border under control on many fronts. He instructed ICE to do it's job, and changed the way the department handles it's priorities by executive order. This was intentional.

The fact that you have to give him grudging support speaks volumes about your inability to be objective here.

 

 

What the President did was engage in force diplomacy. Assad, a brutal dictator who gassed his own people, was testing the resolve of the current President as he did the last. This President responded incredibly appropriately.

 

It served as a check on both Assad, who now knows his actions will have consequences; and on Russia and Putin, who have been informed that they had best do a better job keeping their dog on a leash.

I'm always amazed at how obvious things aren't obvious to everyone.

[Meathead]

agreed

[DC Tom]

agreed

[This is an automated response.]

 

 

Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.9.

[B-Man]

This is a biased reporting which reflects only the author's desire to see the President fail.

 

Calling balls and strikes with this administration, he's been mostly positive with a few negatives.

 

Everything he's done in regards to border enforcement has been a huge win given this was his major campaign issue, his nomination of Gorsuch to the SCOTUS was everything a conservative/libertarian could have hoped for, his response in Syria was a breath of fresh air after the last eight years of non-foreign policy/appeasement.

 

The only true downside was his poorly rolled out travel ban.

 

Everything else is pretty much par for the course for a new President learning on the job.

 

 

Charles C. W. Cooke

‏

It's just as much a "law" as any other, but Republicans are using it so it must be either "obscure" or a "loophole."

POLITICO‏Verified account @politico 5h5 hours ago

Using an obscure law, Trump and his allies are quietly wiping out parts of Obama’s regulatory regime

http://politi.co/2oXpYGc

 

[meazza]

agreed

[Deranged Rhino]

It served as a check on both Assad, who now knows his actions will have consequences; and on Russia and Putin, who have been informed that they had best do a better job keeping their dog on a leash.

 

My speculation:

 

It served this purpose - to a degree. But I think that wasn't the true intention, more a two-birds-one-stone kind of thing.

 

The timing of the strike and who 45 was at that time is perhaps more indicative of who that message was truly for.

 

If it was more about sending a message to Assad and Putin than it was to Jinping and the DPRK the attack would have hit something more crucial to Syria's war efforts. The strikes were timed to happen exactly as the meeting between 45 and Jinping ended, the Chinese president found out about the attacks as he was walking back to his room after dinner. What's the big takeaway from the meeting between Jinping and Trump? A sense of agreement on working together to deal with the DPRK.

 

We'll see if that's fleeting, but it sure seems like China was the real target with this "message".

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

My speculation:

 

It served this purpose - to a degree. But I think that wasn't the true intention, more a two-birds-one-stone kind of thing.

 

The timing of the strike and who 45 was at that time is perhaps more indicative of who that message was truly for.

 

If it was more about sending a message to Assad and Putin than it was to Jinping and the DPRK the attack would have hit something more crucial to Syria's war efforts. The strikes were timed to happen exactly as the meeting between 45 and Jinping ended, the Chinese president found out about the attacks as he was walking back to his room after dinner. What's the big takeaway from the meeting between Jinping and Trump? A sense of agreement on working together to deal with the DPRK.

 

We'll see if that's fleeting, but it sure seems like China was the real target with this "message".

That was an important element as well.

 

With the global power vacuum President Obama created through his "foreign policy exclusively for the purposes of domestic electoral politics", he emboldened China and North Korea in addition to rogue governments in the Middle East, and Northern Africa.

 

Our actions in Syria in response to Assad speak to all geo-political foes that America is back in charge; and that dogs will heal, and keepers of dogs will keep them on a leash.

[Magox]

 

My speculation:

 

It served this purpose - to a degree. But I think that wasn't the true intention, more a two-birds-one-stone kind of thing.

 

The timing of the strike and who 45 was at that time is perhaps more indicative of who that message was truly for.

 

If it was more about sending a message to Assad and Putin than it was to Jinping and the DPRK the attack would have hit something more crucial to Syria's war efforts. The strikes were timed to happen exactly as the meeting between 45 and Jinping ended, the Chinese president found out about the attacks as he was walking back to his room after dinner. What's the big takeaway from the meeting between Jinping and Trump? A sense of agreement on working together to deal with the DPRK.

 

We'll see if that's fleeting, but it sure seems like China was the real target with this "message".

 

 

I don't want to give Trump too much credit for having this much forethought but if conventional wisdom surrounding Syria is to be believed (which I personally put at about 75%), then this potentially achieved many thing for Trump.

 

A) Gave Syria some pause regarding what they can and cannot do.

B) Let Russia know that there is a new sheriff in town

C) Let Iran know that pretty much everything that they thought they had with the US is no longer the case and that they will have to rethink their strategy

D) Let Suni Middle East allies know that Trump most likely has their back

E) Provided conventional US allies such as England, Germany France etc. a sigh of relief and that a more conventional FP is among them.

F) Made N Korea a lot more paranoid of what the US may do and that Trump could be on the verge of taking their leader and their nuke capabilities out.

G) Provided a lot more breathing room with these Russia "scandals". He no longer will be viewed as a Putin Puppet. Takes a lot of the steam out of that argument.

[GoBills808]

 

My speculation:

 

It served this purpose - to a degree. But I think that wasn't the true intention, more a two-birds-one-stone kind of thing.

 

The timing of the strike and who 45 was at that time is perhaps more indicative of who that message was truly for.

 

If it was more about sending a message to Assad and Putin than it was to Jinping and the DPRK the attack would have hit something more crucial to Syria's war efforts. The strikes were timed to happen exactly as the meeting between 45 and Jinping ended, the Chinese president found out about the attacks as he was walking back to his room after dinner. What's the big takeaway from the meeting between Jinping and Trump? A sense of agreement on working together to deal with the DPRK.

 

We'll see if that's fleeting, but it sure seems like China was the real target with this "message".

I love this. It makes sense, although China really has nothing to lose by saying they're going to work with the US to deal with North Korea.