Deranged Rhino Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 It's not like the last election's runner up, a close confidant of the last loser who is considering a run of his own, or a close confidant of the last VP loser also considering a run, might have their own agenda there
Tiberius Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 Trump's meeting with Putin has some serious historical ancestry. The WW2 meeting were very important, and Yalta had foreign and domestic ramifications, Potsdam's where Truman told Stalin he had a big weapon but Stalin already knew. Not sure if Ike met Krucheov (sic) or not, but the Gary Powers shoot down stopped a summit between them. VP Nixon had a really famous meeting with Nakita K in a kitchen and K went on yelling about how much more advanced the communists were, lol. Sputnik and all. Kennedy had a famous meeting in Vienna with Nakita and he lectured the young president about capitalist imperialism, blah blah and Kennedy was said to be shaken. LBJ I don't think met the Russians, but not sure. Nixon had some crazy meetings with Brezhnev where they went driving around at night in Russia. SALT talks I can't recall any Carter meetings but I'm sure he did. Reagan had some really important and influential meetings, telling Gorby that we were going to have a missle defense system which really scared the Russians. That was a real big deal and pushed the Russians into Glostnos. Reagan really did well there as did HW who basically talked Gorby into holding elections in Germany. End of Cold War. Don't remember Bush meeting Putin, and Obama had one I believe. This might be one of those meetings history really remembers
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 Democrats seem to be moving the goalposts on the collusion story a bit and Politico has a story today noting the shift: As usual, there is no evidence leading anyone to this conclusion, at least none that anyone can discuss in public. So how is this any different from the collusion story Democrats have been promoting for months? As far as I can tell the difference is that this version is less specific, i.e. it doesnt say the collusion was with Trump or his people. So there are two ways to look at this. One is that the Democratic leadership, especially those close to Hillary Clinton, are still angry and are still looking for a magic bullet to explain their 2016 loss. Since the claim that Trumps campaign colluded with Russia doesnt seem to be working out as planned, they are now moving the goalposts, i.e. maybe it wasnt Trump or his people but someone in America was colluding with Russia to make this happen. The other way to look at this is that Dem leadership wouldnt be going out on a limb with this (again!) unless they had heard something that made them believe it would pay off. Maybe, behind the scenes where Dem investigators are leaking classified information to within Clintonworld, they see a light at the end of this tunnel. They cant be more specific yet because that would mean revealing where they got the information, but they think something is coming to, at least partly, backstop their months of unsupported collusion claims. http://hotair.com/archives/2017/07/05/democrats-new-collusion-theory/ . They need to drudge up something, anything, at this point so that they can then play Seven degrees of Kevin Bacon with the administration. It's a Hail Mary.
K-9 Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 Trump's meeting with Putin has some serious historical ancestry. The WW2 meeting were very important, and Yalta had foreign and domestic ramifications, Potsdam's where Truman told Stalin he had a big weapon but Stalin already knew. Not sure if Ike met Krucheov (sic) or not, but the Gary Powers shoot down stopped a summit between them. VP Nixon had a really famous meeting with Nakita K in a kitchen and K went on yelling about how much more advanced the communists were, lol. Sputnik and all. Kennedy had a famous meeting in Vienna with Nakita and he lectured the young president about capitalist imperialism, blah blah and Kennedy was said to be shaken. LBJ I don't think met the Russians, but not sure. Nixon had some crazy meetings with Brezhnev where they went driving around at night in Russia. SALT talks I can't recall any Carter meetings but I'm sure he did. Reagan had some really important and influential meetings, telling Gorby that we were going to have a missle defense system which really scared the Russians. That was a real big deal and pushed the Russians into Glostnos. Reagan really did well there as did HW who basically talked Gorby into holding elections in Germany. End of Cold War. Don't remember Bush meeting Putin, and Obama had one I believe. This might be one of those meetings history really remembers "I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul; ... He met Putin alright.
DC Tom Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 Democrats seem to be moving the goalposts on the collusion story a bit and Politico has a story today noting the shift: As usual, there is no evidence leading anyone to this conclusion, at least none that anyone can discuss in public. So how is this any different from the collusion story Democrats have been promoting for months? As far as I can tell the difference is that this version is less specific, i.e. it doesn’t say the collusion was with Trump or his people. So there are two ways to look at this. One is that the Democratic leadership, especially those close to Hillary Clinton, are still angry and are still looking for a magic bullet to explain their 2016 loss. Since the claim that Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia doesn’t seem to be working out as planned, they are now moving the goalposts, i.e. maybe it wasn’t Trump or his people but someone in America was colluding with Russia to make this happen. The other way to look at this is that Dem leadership wouldn’t be going out on a limb with this (again!) unless they had heard something that made them believe it would pay off. Maybe, behind the scenes where Dem investigators are leaking classified information to within Clintonworld, they see a light at the end of this tunnel. They can’t be more specific yet because that would mean revealing where they got the information, but they think something is coming to, at least partly, backstop their months of unsupported collusion claims. http://hotair.com/archives/2017/07/05/democrats-new-collusion-theory/ . So their new theory is that someone other than people in the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to "hack" the election by...stealing and releasing DNC emails? ****...I'm just going to throw this theory out there: Clinton herself colluded with Putin to sabotage her own campaign, in a backfired attempt to garner sympathy from the electorate by making herself out to be the victim. Do I think so? No. Does it make as much sense as any other theory I've heard? Hell, yes. He met Putin alright. I'd love to know what Putin really thinks, having seen this country go from a Howdy-Doody-lookin' dimwit like that to a complete rube like Obama to the current clown show.
Deranged Rhino Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 I'd love to know what Putin really thinks, having seen this country go from a Howdy-Doody-lookin' dimwit like that to a complete rube like Obama to the current clown show. His glee is pretty apparent in the new Oliver Stone 4 part doc. Which is worth watching, if only to see Stone who spends the film looking like he's two days out from a three week bender.
K-9 Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 So their new theory is that someone other than people in the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to "hack" the election by...stealing and releasing DNC emails? ****...I'm just going to throw this theory out there: Clinton herself colluded with Putin to sabotage her own campaign, in a backfired attempt to garner sympathy from the electorate by making herself out to be the victim. Do I think so? No. Does it make as much sense as any other theory I've heard? Hell, yes. I'd love to know what Putin really thinks, having seen this country go from a Howdy-Doody-lookin' dimwit like that to a complete rube like Obama to the current clown show. Me, too. In the meantime, I assume he is informed by past experience like most people. And some of his were downright scary from what I can gather. When he was a young officer in East Berlin and was told to guard the embassy as it was being evacuated and the chanting mobs started to form, I think he was scared schitless. And I don't think he's forgotten that, either.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 (edited) Todays joke Obama did a poor job with Russia, Question #1 Frump. What can or will you do that does work? You can talk the talk, now lets see how you walk. (w/o a wobble that is) We all see how your expectations of China working with us turned out. the article Trump insists 'nobody knows for sure' who meddled in election, … President Trump Thursday again appeared to cast doubt again on the U.S. intelligence "I think it was Russia, but I think it was probably other people and, or countries, and I see nothing wrong with that statement. Nobody really knows. Nobody really knows for sure," Trump said in his first press conference overseas as president. The president also again placed blame on his predecessor, President Obama, for not taking stronger action to confront Russia’s interference in the election, accusing the former president of not taking action because “he thought Clinton was going to win the election." So which is it Donny? Obama's fault Vis-à-vis Russia or Obama's fault for not chasing ghosts in the machine? Winning. Edited July 6, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan
Tiberius Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 He met Putin alright. That's right! Forgot that one.
Tiberius Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 A couple of former national security officials describe how Putin might be briefed on meeting for Trump: Our objective for this meeting is simple: Keep the momentum in our favor. On style, you will want U.S. reporters to capture the two of you as close friends, smiling and laughing, which will feed the turmoil over the Trump campaigns possible collusion with us (which you know the full truth about). This issue weakens America, and we want to keep it front and center. Obtaining the necessary media coverage can be accomplished by stroking Trumps large ego, which you did so effectively during the U.S. presidential campaign. This did not happen by chance; it happened because we took action. We undertook the most successful covert political influence campaign since World War II. We kept our nemesis Hillary Clinton out of the White House, and we installed a president who is deepening existing schisms in his country while creating new ones at home and abroad. This is the first time in history that the United States has been attacked by another country and not come together as a nation; instead, our actions have caused it to come apart. This is a great victory for us. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/what-putins-team-is-probably-telling-him-about-trump/2017/07/05/6f5e1a5c-619e-11e7-a4f7-af34fc1d9d39_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-e%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.08d50d24a75d
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 Tiberius Private meeting - I don't think Frump will want the cameras on. Putin on the other hand will have cameras
Tiberius Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 Tiberius Private meeting - I don't think Frump will want the cameras on. Putin on the other hand will have cameras Just like in the WH with ambassadors
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 Just like in the WH with ambassadors Exactly
row_33 Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 That's the call of the participants in any meeting, whether or not it is taped.
Deranged Rhino Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 That's the call of the participants in any meeting, whether or not it is taped. Unless there's espionage afoot.
row_33 Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 (edited) Unless there's espionage afoot. Well, of course if you didn't want it taped, and you are not of the political party or race or religion I deem is righteous, then it is 100% evil intent to not tape it... Edited July 6, 2017 by row_33
Recommended Posts