LA Grant Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 (edited) This is getting buried in the various Russian threads and warrants its own topic, particularly since the other threads are all about the narrative that none of this is true, or it's all a feint. I suppose it's fair to call both narratives "conspiracy theories" but they can't both be right. Either Trump was a cooperative Russian patsy, or it's all a big Hillary/Soros/Globalist plot to rig the election against Trump and then falsely investigate him to actually investigate the globalists. Or something like that. You can decide which is more plausible. Jane Mayer's report in the New Yorker is fantastic, regardless, and wouldn't be at all surprising if she won a Pulitzer for it. Mayer's been doing great investigative work her entire career, including previously winning a Polk for her article on the NSA official prosecuted by Obama administration for whistleblowing, which helped lead to charges being dropped. This is a must read (or listen) about the full story behind the British spy who set most of the Trump/Russia investigation into motion. It's long but thorough, well-written, and easier to stomach than any of the 100 page threads where poor Rhino is descending into madness. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/12/christopher-steele-the-man-behind-the-trump-dossier Virtually every line in the piece could be its own individual discussion. There is A LOT in there, and my pulls below are by no means comprehensive — read the full thing, seriously. It's not even really about left/right as much as it is about oil, oligarchy, and indirect attacks aimed to destabilize. Trump was just the perfect fool to play. Putin was pissed about sanctions after the Ukraine episode 4 years ago and vowed revenge. With Brexit and Trump, can't say Putin didn't pull it off. Trump won't do anything against them, and so the US won't do anything against them until he's gone. Round one of Cold War II absolutely goes to Russia, thanks in part to the efforts of the fools who keep falling for it. Quote Even before Steele became involved in the U.S. Presidential campaign, he was convinced that the Kremlin was interfering in Western elections. In April of 2016, not long before he took on the Fusion assignment, he finished a secret investigation, which he called Project Charlemagne, for a private client. It involved a survey of Russian interference in the politics of four members of the European Union—France, Italy, the United Kingdom, and Germany—along with Turkey, a candidate for membership. The report chronicles persistent, aggressive political interference by the Kremlin: social-media warfare aimed at inflaming fear and prejudice, and “opaque financial support” given to favored politicians in the form of bank loans, gifts, and other kinds of support. The report discusses the Kremlin’s entanglement with the former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and the French right-wing leader Marine Le Pen. (Le Pen and Berlusconi deny having had such ties.) It also suggests that Russian aid was likely given to lesser-known right-wing nationalists in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. The Kremlin’s long-term aim, the report concludes, was to boost extremist groups and politicians at the expense of Europe’s liberal democracies. The more immediate goal was to “destroy” the E.U., in order to end the punishing economic sanctions that the E.U. and the U.S. had imposed on Russia after its 2014 political and military interference in Ukraine. ^ Russian aid given to right-wing nationalists to inflame fear and disrupt a Western election... that could never happen here, tho: https://www.npr.org/2018/03/01/590076949/depth-of-russian-politicians-cultivation-of-nra-ties-revealed There may be proof the Kremlin was directly involved in Tillerson pick. Quote One subject that Steele is believed to have discussed with Mueller’s investigators is a memo that he wrote in late November, 2016, after his contract with Fusion had ended. This memo, which did not surface publicly with the others, is shorter than the rest, and is based on one source, described as “a senior Russian official.” The official said that he was merely relaying talk circulating in the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but what he’d heard was astonishing: people were saying that the Kremlin had intervened to block Trump’s initial choice for Secretary of State, Mitt Romney. (During Romney’s run for the White House in 2012, he was notably hawkish on Russia, calling it the single greatest threat to the U.S.) The memo said that the Kremlin, through unspecified channels, had asked Trump to appoint someone who would be prepared to lift Ukraine-related sanctions, and who would cooperate on security issues of interest to Russia, such as the conflict in Syria. If what the source heard was true, then a foreign power was exercising pivotal influence over U.S. foreign policy—and an incoming President. The article goes into a lot of detail on Steele's reputation and credibility, as well as of what we can know about his sources: Quote [Comey] also said that the F.B.I. had “confidence” in the dossier’s author—a careful but definite endorsement—because it had worked not only with him but with many of his sources and sub-sources, whose identities the Bureau knew. “He’s proven credible in the past, and so has his network,” Comey said. Quote "Steele had spent more than twenty years in M.I.6, most of it focussing on Russia. For three years, in the nineties, he spied in Moscow under diplomatic cover. Between 2006 and 2009, he ran the service’s Russia desk, at its headquarters, in London. He was fluent in Russian, and widely considered to be an expert on the country." Quote It isn’t known what [Steele and Mueller] discussed, but, given the seriousness with which Steele views the subject, those who know him suspect that he shared many of his sources, and much else, with the Mueller team. Quote They’d discussed the possibility that Steele’s sources in Russia were wrong, or spreading disinformation, but concluded that none of them had a motive to lie; moreover, they had taken considerable risks to themselves to get the truth out. Mueller investigating at least one death as a result of the dossier. Earlier in the article, there are stories of Putin critics, in and out of intelligence, being poisoned or disappearing. hocking, I know. Quote During Glenn Simpson’s testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, his lawyer asserted that “somebody’s already been killed as a result of the publication of this dossier.” ... One possibility that has been mentioned is Oleg Erovinkin, a former F.S.B. officer and top aide to Igor Sechin, the Rosneft president. ... No evidence has emerged that Erovinkin was a Steele source, and in fact Special Counsel Mueller is believed to be investigating a different death that is possibly related to the dossier. Probably lots of "u up?" texts from Putin with the ? emoji. Quote Robert Hannigan, then the head of the U.K.’s intelligence service the G.C.H.Q., had recently flown to Washington and briefed the C.I.A.’s director, John Brennan, on a stream of illicit communications between Trump’s team and Moscow that had been intercepted. (The content of these intercepts has not become public.) You have to wonder which is more likely — Hillary orchestrating a triple-double-reversal spy game, or Dems trying to "go high" and lose as a result? See, it's always the same weak sh*t from the Democrats, from gerrymandering to everything above. Hindsight is 20/20 but there's no room for playing nice in a fight against nihilists anymore. Quote But, before releasing the report, the intelligence chiefs—James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence; Admiral Mike Rogers, the N.S.A. director; Brennan; and Comey—shared a highly classified version with Obama, Biden, and the other officials. The highly classified report included a two-page appendix about the dossier. Comey briefed the group on it. According to three former government officials familiar with the meeting, he didn’t name Steele but said that the appendix summarized information obtained by a former intelligence officer who had previously worked with the F.B.I. and had come forward with troubling information. Comey laid out the dossier’s allegations that there had been numerous contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials, and that there may have been deals struck between them. Comey also mentioned some of the sexual details in the dossier, including the alleged golden-showers kompromat. “It was chilling,” the meeting participant recalls. Obama stayed silent. All through the campaign, he and others in his Administration had insisted on playing by the rules, and not interfering unduly in the election, to the point that, after Trump’s victory, some critics accused them of political negligence. The Democrats, far from being engaged in a political conspiracy with Steele, had been politically paralyzed by their high-mindedness. Biden asked, “How seriously should we take this?” Comey responded that the F.B.I. had not corroborated the details in the dossier, but he said that portions of it were “consistent” with what the U.S. intelligence community had obtained from other channels. He also said that the F.B.I. had “confidence” in the dossier’s author—a careful but definite endorsement—because it had worked not only with him but with many of his sources and sub-sources, whose identities the Bureau knew. “He’s proven credible in the past, and so has his network,” Comey said. “If this is true, this is huge!” Biden exclaimed. We saw this play out in real-time but always worth pointing out — f*** Mitch McConnell, turtle-looking motherf***er. Quote In early September, 2016, Obama tried to get congressional leaders to issue a bipartisan statement condemning Russia’s meddling in the election. He reasoned that if both parties signed on the statement couldn’t be attacked as political. The intelligence community had recently informed the Gang of Eight—the leaders of both parties and the ranking representatives on the Senate and House Intelligence Committees—that Russia was acting on behalf of Trump. But one Gang of Eight member, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, expressed skepticism about the Russians’ role, and refused to sign a bipartisan statement condemning Russia. After that, Obama, instead of issuing a statement himself, said nothing. And of course Kerry would p***y out like this. Quote When [Secretary of State] Kerry was briefed, though, he didn’t think there was any action that he could take. He asked if F.B.I. agents knew about the dossier, and, after being assured that they did, that was apparently the end of it. Finer [John Finer - Kerry's chief of staff] agreed with Kerry’s assessment, and put the summary in his safe, and never took it out again. Nuland’s [Victoria Nuland, director of policy planning at State, of "!@#$ the EU" fame during the Ukraine crisis] reaction was much the same. She told Winer to tell Steele to take his dossier to the F.B.I. The so-called Deep State, it seems, hardly jumped into action against Trump. Steele and Orbis (his private intelligence company) had habitually reported national security risks when they came across relevant information, not just to the U.S. but to European countries, as well. Furthermore, the dossier was never entirely funded by the Clinton campaign's law firm, as it was initially funded by a Republican against Trump. Quote For all the Republicans’ talk of a top-down Democratic plot, Steele and Simpson appear never to have told their ultimate client—the Clinton campaign’s law firm—that Steele had gone to the F.B.I. Clinton’s campaign spent much of the summer of 2016 fending off stories about the Bureau’s investigation into her e-mails, without knowing that the F.B.I. had launched a counter-intelligence investigation into the Trump team’s ties to Russia—one fuelled, in part, by the Clinton campaign’s own opposition research. No f***ing sh*t. Quote As a top Clinton-campaign official told me, “If I’d known the F.B.I. was investigating Trump, I would have been shouting it from the rooftops!” The full article provides a detailed timeline that makes the Republican/Trump theory that this was all a coordinated hit on Trump at the behest of Hillary/Obama an even bigger stretch than Tasker's waistband. Below precedes the story of Russia's meddling with the FIFA Cup results to help them win before they started messing with elections. Quote Republican claims to the contrary, Steele’s interest in Trump did not spring from his work for the Clinton campaign. He ran across Trump’s name almost as soon as he went into private business, many years before the 2016 election. Two of his earliest cases at Orbis involved investigating international crime rings whose leaders, coincidentally, were based in New York’s Trump Tower. Great line. Quote “It was as if all criminal roads led to Trump Tower,” Steele told friends. Even better. ????? Quote His free time is devoted largely to his family, which includes three cats, one of whom not long ago replicated the most infamous allegation in the Steele dossier by peeing on a family member’s bed. Quote On June 14, 2016, five days after the Trump Tower meeting, the Washington Post broke the news that the Russians were believed to have hacked into the Democratic National Committee’s e-mail system. The first reports were remarkably blasé. D.N.C. officials admitted that they had learned about the hack months earlier. (It later surfaced that in November of 2014 Dutch intelligence officials had provided U.S. authorities with evidence that the Russians had broken into the Democratic Party’s computer system. U.S. officials reportedly thanked the Dutch for the tip, sending cake and flowers, but took little action.) When the infiltration of the D.N.C. finally became public, various officials were quoted as saying that the Russians were always trying to penetrate U.S. government systems, and were likely just trying to understand American politics better. Quote The attitudes of Democratic officials changed drastically when, three days before the start of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, WikiLeaks dumped twenty thousand stolen D.N.C. e-mails onto the Internet. The e-mails had been weaponized: what had seemed a passive form of spying was now “an active measure,” in the parlance of espionage. The leaked e-mails, some of which suggested that the D.N.C. had secretly favored Clinton’s candidacy over that of Bernie Sanders, appeared just when the Party was trying to unify its supporters. The Party’s chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, was forced to resign, and recriminations and demonstrations disrupted the Convention. Trump’s response was exultant. He said, “If it is Russia—which it’s probably not, nobody knows who it is—but if it is . . . Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the thirty thousand e-mails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.” His campaign later described these comments as a joke. Quote At this point, a Clinton foreign-policy adviser, Laura Rosenberger, who had held various positions at the National Security Council and at the State Department during the Bush and Obama Administrations, grew seriously alarmed. She’d already noticed that Trump had pro-Russian positions on many issues, which seemed to her to be inexplicably outside the Republican mainstream. She’d also been struck by Trump’s hiring of Paul Manafort, who had worked as a political consultant for pro-Kremlin forces in Ukraine. Trump’s team then appeared to play a role in modifying the G.O.P. platform so that it better reflected Russia’s position on Ukraine policy. “It was all beginning to snowball,” she told me. “And then, with the e-mail leaks, it was, like, ‘Oh, !@#$’—excuse my French—‘we are under attack!’ That was the moment when, as a national-security adviser, you break into sweats.” Quote Rosenberger, meanwhile, had no idea that the Clinton campaign had indirectly employed a Russia expert: Steele. Orbis’s work was sealed off, behind a legal barrier. Marc Elias, the attorney at Perkins Coie who was serving as the Clinton campaign’s general counsel, acted as a firewall between the campaign and the private investigators digging up information on Trump. It’s a common practice for law firms to hire investigators on behalf of clients, so that any details can be protected by attorney-client privilege. Fusion briefed only Elias on the reports. Simpson sent Elias nothing on paper—he was briefed orally. Elias, according to people familiar with the matter, was flabbergasted by the dossier but wasn’t sure what to do with the allegations. “Sex stuff is kind of worthless in a campaign,” Simpson told me. In the absence of live accusers or documentary evidence, such material is easy to dismiss, and can make the purveyor look sleazy. Quote Mook told me, “The problem with the Russia story is that people just weren’t buying it. Today, it’s, like, ‘Of course!’ But back then people thought that we were just desperately peddling conspiracy theories.” After the D.N.C.’s e-mails were hacked, Mook went on TV talk shows and pointed the finger at Russia, but, he says, his comments were often dismissed as “spin.” On Jake Tapper’s “State of the Union,” he declared, “What’s disturbing to us is that experts are telling us that Russian state actors broke into the D.N.C., stole these e-mails, and other experts are now saying that the Russians are releasing these e-mails for the purpose of actually helping Donald Trump.” Tapper then interviewed Donald Trump, Jr., who ridiculed Mook’s accusation as “disgusting” and “phony”—even though it’s now known that, just a few weeks earlier, he had met at Trump Tower with a Russian offering dirt on Clinton. The right counter-narrative propaganda is currently going on about FISA, hoping that might be enough to cast doubt on the Dossier and throw it all out. The Post has a clear analysis of why that argument simply doesn't hold enough water. Quote If you want to argue that the Nunes memo reveals flaws in the FISA process, that's one thing. If you want to argue that it reveals a potential conspiracy by the FBI to obscure its relationship with Democrats and spy on Trump associates, that's a much bigger stretch. And yet, it's still being stretched. The first line sums it up simply but there's obviously more detail in the full article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/02/07/the-fatal-flaw-of-the-nunes-memo-conspiracy-theories-in-one-exchange/?utm_term=.a8c5e1d1b9a1 ALSO, please be sure to go on record & say whether or not you think Republican President Donald Trump is guilty of treason. Here's the definition. Quote Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States Edited March 9, 2018 by LA Grant 1
ALF Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 A lot of research there , good job. Need both sides of a story , the truth is out there somewhere. I will wait till it all plays out , don't want to guess wrong on something this complex and serious.
njbuff Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 Wow, the left really is clueless as to what will happen if Trump is impeached. This isn't a partisan issue. If Trum is out, his hardened base will react in a not so pretty way. it will be dangerous times in our country if Trump is bounced from office.
LA Grant Posted March 9, 2018 Author Posted March 9, 2018 (edited) By the way, none of that goes into Bob Mercer, the crazy extreme right-winger who wants to essentially abolish all government in favor of corporations. Mercer is the guy who bankrolls Steve Bannon/Breitbart and staffed much of the Trump campaign. Mayer covered this angle a few months back here: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/27/the-reclusive-hedge-fund-tycoon-behind-the-trump-presidency Here's a quicker summary from an interview she did later: Quote JANE MAYER: Well, right. And this was—really, Trump’s campaign was—it was floundering. It was in August, and there was headline after headline that was suggesting that Paul Manafort, who had been the campaign manager, had really nefarious ties to the Ukrainian oligarchs and pro-Putin forces. And it was embarrassing. And eventually, after a couple days of these headlines, he was forced to step down. And the campaign was, you know, spinning in a kind of a downward spiral, when, at a fundraiser out in Long Island, at Woody Johnson’s house—he’s the man who owns the Jets—Rebekah Mercer, the daughter of this hedge-fund tycoon, Bob Mercer, sort of cornered Trump and said, “You know, we’d like to give money to your campaign. We’ll back you, but you’ve got to try to, you know, stabilize it.” And basically, she said, “And I’ve got just the people for you to do the job.” And they were political operatives who the Mercer family had been funding for a couple of years, the main one being Steve Bannon, who is now playing the role to Trump—he’s the political strategist for Trump—that’s the role he played for the Mercer family prior to doing it for Trump. So, these are operatives who are very close to this one mega-donor. The other was Kellyanne Conway, who had been running this superfund, as you mentioned in your introduction, for the Cruz campaign, that was filled with the money from the Mercers. And so she became the campaign manager. Bannon became the campaign chairman. And a third person, David Bossie, whose organization Citizens United was also very heavily backed by the Mercer family, he became the deputy campaign manager. So, basically, as Trump’s campaign is rescued by this gang, they encircle Trump. And since then, they’ve also encircled Trump’s White House and become very key to him. And they are the Mercers’ people. Quote And what [Bob Mercer]'s done is he has tried to take this fortune and reshape, first, the Republican Party and, then, America, along his own lines. His ideology is extreme. He’s way far on the right. He hates government. Kind of—according to another colleague, David Magerman, at Renaissance Technologies, Bob Mercer wants to shrink the government down to the size of a pinhead. He has contempt for social services and for the people who need social services. Quote AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about when they first met, the Mercers, Robert and Rebekah Mercer, first met Andrew Breitbart, and what that progression was and how they came to be linked up with Bannon? JANE MAYER: Well, sure. The Mercer family, Robert and his daughter Rebekah, met Andrew Breitbart back—I think it was late 2011 or early 2012, speaking at a conference of the Club for Growth, another right-wing group. And they were completely taken with Andrew Breitbart. He was pretty much the opposite kind of character from Bob Mercer. Breitbart was outspoken and gleefully provocative and loved to offend people and use vulgar language just to catch their attention. And you’ve got this kind of tight-lipped hedge-fund man from the far right who just fell for Breitbart big time. And he—mostly what he was captivated by, I think, was Breitbart’s vision, which was, “We’re going to”—he said, “Conservatives can never win until we basically take on the mainstream media and build up our own source of information.” He was talking about declaring information warfare in this country on fact-based reporting and substituting it with their own vision. And what he needed, Breitbart, at that point, was money. He needed money to set up Breitbart News, which was only just sort of a couple of bloggers at that point. AMY GOODMAN: And talk about Breitbart News, about what the “alt-right” represented, whether we’re talking about anti-Semitism or white supremacy, and why they were attracted to this. JANE MAYER: Well, I mean, you know, it changed. What happened was—I mean, it started as a—Andrew Breitbart had helped The Huffington Post get set up. And his idea was that he was going to launch The Huffington Post of the right. And so, he was setting it up, and his very close friend was Steve Bannon. And Bannon had been in investment banking. So Bannon got the Mercers to put $10 million into turning this venture into something that was really going to pack a punch. And they were just about to launch it in a big day—big way. They were a few days away from it, when Andrew Breitbart died. That was in March of 2012. He was only 43, and he had a sudden massive heart attack. And so, this operation was just about to go big. It was leaderless. And that’s when Steve Bannon stepped in and became the head of Breitbart News. And in Bannon’s hands, it became a force of economic nationalism and, in some people’s view, white supremacism. It ran, you know, a regular feature on black crime. It hosted and pretty much launched the career of Milo Yiannopoulos, who’s sort of infamous for his kind of juvenile attacks on women and immigrants and God knows what. You know, just it became, as Bannon had said, a platform for the “alt-right,” meaning the alternative to the old right, a new right that was far more angry and aggressive about others, people who were not just kind of the white sort of conservatives like themselves. https://www.democracynow.org/2017/3/23/jane_mayer_on_robert_mercer_the https://www.npr.org/2017/03/22/521083950/inside-the-wealthy-family-that-has-been-funding-steve-bannon-s-plan-for-years All of the totally coincidental times Mercer happened to hang out around Russian oligarchs. http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/national-govt--politics/yachts-trump-financial-backer-russian-oligarch-seen-close-together/gI074W3JLqvEYrQ0hm9zlN/ Quote Mercer used the Bermuda companies to avoid a little-known US tax of up to 39% on tens of millions of dollars in investment profits amassed by the foundation and a retirement fund for the staff of Mercer’s hedge fund, Renaissance Technologies. Bannon’s group was crucially important because it helped create the only dossier on Russian collusion that actually affected the outcome of the 2016 election. This was not the infamous document compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, which had its own secret funding (more on that below). It was the manuscript for the book, Clinton Cash, written by Peter Schweizer and paid for by the Government Accountability Institute. Schweizer is now editor-at-large at Bannon’s Breitbart News, also funded by the Mercers. Clinton Cash included material derived from investigative reporting by legitimate journalists and some new donor records from the Clinton Foundation, adding a few original nuggets here and there. Its most damaging finding focused on a Russian uranium deal and a multimillion-dollar contributor to the Clinton Foundation. The book laid out a corrupt quid pro quo in which Hillary Clinton’s state department approved the deal for Russia to acquire large US uranium assets after large contributions to the foundation from the donor and his associates. There were obvious holes in the story. Clinton herself said she had nothing to do with approving the deal. The state department was one of nine federal agencies involved in the 2010 decision and usually approved such foreign transactions. When Trump seized on the story as a central part of his Crooked Hillary brief, Politifact rated it “mostly wrong”. Still, Bannon, flush with the cash from Mercer’s tax-averse foundation, had amazing success getting the Schweizer dossier into the right hands, the mainstream media. The New York Times and Washington Post forged “exclusive” deals to see the Clinton Cash manuscript (AKA dossier) before publication and to use it for leads. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/08/robert-mercer-offshore-dark-money-hillary-clinton-paradise-papers Edited March 9, 2018 by LA Grant
njbuff Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 3 minutes ago, LA Grant said: By the way, none of that goes into Bob Mercer, the crazy extreme right-winger who wants to essentially abolish all government in favor of corporations. Mercer is the guy who bankrolls Steve Bannon/Breitbart and staffed much of the Trump campaign. Mayer covered this angle a few months back here: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/27/the-reclusive-hedge-fund-tycoon-behind-the-trump-presidency Here's a quicker summary from an interview she did later: https://www.democracynow.org/2017/3/23/jane_mayer_on_robert_mercer_the https://www.npr.org/2017/03/22/521083950/inside-the-wealthy-family-that-has-been-funding-steve-bannon-s-plan-for-years All of the totally coincidental times Mercer happened to hang out around Russian oligarchs. http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/national-govt--politics/yachts-trump-financial-backer-russian-oligarch-seen-close-together/gI074W3JLqvEYrQ0hm9zlN/ https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/08/robert-mercer-offshore-dark-money-hillary-clinton-paradise-papers It is a dangerous time in our country with Trump in office. Yeah, because azzholes like you can't accept election results. Yeah, Trump is so bad that it looks like we are avoiding war with NK. it's a dangerous time now because of you bat sh!t crazy lefties are off your rockers because of Trump's mere presence, not because he's the President. You don't have to be a right wing nutjob to see this, which I'm not. But you and people like Fib, Bob in Mich, garybusey can continue saying Trump's all of these, when, IN FACT, the left is far far worse. It's a fact of life which you pinheads are utterly clueless about. And I didn't even vote for Trump. 1
Tiberius Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 43 minutes ago, njbuff said: Wow, the left really is clueless as to what will happen if Trump is impeached. This isn't a partisan issue. If Trum is out, his hardened base will react in a not so pretty way. it will be dangerous times in our country if Trump is bounced from office. I think you are wrong. The left has been pretty silent on impeachment and are holding their fire on purpose. Trump is great for the Dems on a recruitment level, is really energizing the base and seems to be leading the Dems at every level of government to a resurgence. But the guy guy seems to be a traitor in the highest office in the land. So leaving him in office is as dangerous as impeaching him. What if the mid term "results" are a suprising Republican sweep where they pick up seats even though the pre done polling, the exit polls etc all say the Dems should have won. The Republicans will laugh and say too bad and the Republic will be cast into chaos.
PearlHowardman Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 15 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Trump is great for the Dems on a recruitment level, is really energizing the base and seems to be leading the Dems at every level of government to a resurgence. And that's the way that long time registered New York Democrat Donald Trump wants it. Trump isn't going to let Julian Assange and Wikileaks win.
boyst Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 Grant. You're an !@#$. A self righteous, full of Schiff !@#$. There are 2 or 3 threads about this already in some facet and you chose to make one that: 1) no one will read the entirety of. 2) espousing of your Schiff 3) wasting time to actually compose it when you won't even discuss the topic at hand or topic at large because your bias is natural. You're just an !@#$, dude.
PearlHowardman Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 (edited) Grant. What is the Statute of Limitations on treason? Also, what is the distinction between treason and high treason? Edited March 9, 2018 by PearlHowardman 1
boyst Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 ......... Ok I did read it by the way. You won't find a single sane individual who doesn't agree Russia interference was occuring. Including 45. It's obvious. So you have no argument there. And you can't stop it. Your write off that either Trump was in cahoots with Russia or some intricate fabrication of work was done with the DNC and Clinton's to assure a Clinton win is telling. More evidence to the latter than former. And you're in denial to not agree. Russia has sent more to this country in various forms to interfere with more than the alternative right douchebags. Look around, there is proof. They've sent money to antifa, blm, the wetbacks, etc. A claim that something was done to keep something happening is as generic as possible. There has to be a lot of proof to make anyone believe and then prove Romney was the first choice and tkllerson was picked because Russia. It's like the god damn Brady bunch. Russia Russia Russia. It needs to be cankles cankles cankles! Your blue team lost because Clinton sucks. Not because blue team had orange. You quoting Comey is terribly discomfortjng. The guy has been proven to be a fraud. And my family knows this guy, met him, etc. Unfortunately I never got the chance bur he is a likeable personable guy. But, he's a fraud. Replying to you doesn't matter. Youre so deep sucking the schiff out of the Democratic donkey dick you not only need your stomach pumped but your colon removed because you've gone septic with a case of meningitis directly affecting your thinking ability because it's clear your head is up your ass.
PearlHowardman Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 Boyst62 - Why are you so angry? Play poker with Grant. Compare Donald Trump's alleged treason with Barack Obama's accidental open mic PROVEN treason. That'll shut Grant up quick.
DC Tom Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 This didn't need a new thread. Your ego did; I understand that. But this didn't. 1
Tiberius Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 25 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: ......... Ok I did read it by the way. You won't find a single sane individual who doesn't agree Russia interference was occuring. Including 45. It's obvious. So you have no argument there. And you can't stop it. This is probably going to be the argument going forward as Russia steps up it efforts perhaps with the presidents help. Republicans will say sorry, just how it is. Too bad libs, you don't deserve to vote anyway.
boyst Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 7 minutes ago, Tiberius said: This is probably going to be the argument going forward as Russia steps up it efforts perhaps with the presidents help. Republicans will say sorry, just how it is. Too bad libs, you don't deserve to vote anyway. You're an idiot. Russia can have presidential help without even direct ties, with out a common link or the canidiate having knowledge. If I'm Russia I'm doing that. I am looking at the Democratic front-runner been pumping money into them for 2020. Then I am looking at ways to hide all of that and make it look like there is no title Russia or anything else but Grassroots Americans but leaving a special paper trail which will magically come about at the exact wrong time to make it look like the candidate was involved the whole time and all the money does come back to Russia. Further discourse in American politics occurs. This isn't a republican issue this isn't a democratic issue this is simply not really an issue. There's really nothing we can do to stop it and the only reason this came about is common knowledge was the Democrats blamed Russia when it was their own faulty security that allowed it at the very least. Though it's now appearing that they actually were in cahoots with the ruskies 29 minutes ago, PearlHowardman said: Boyst62 - Why are you so angry? Play poker with Grant. Compare Donald Trump's alleged treason with Barack Obama's accidental open mic PROVEN treason. That'll shut Grant up quick. I'm not angry dude
Tiberius Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 Yup, can't do anything! Just get use to permanent Republican/Russian rule.
boyst Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 16 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Yup, can't do anything! Just get use to permanent Republican/Russian rule. How does that make sense you dillywag? Russia would want a government relationship they could either exploit or unite. Republicans don't offer that. You're lack of basic government structures is beyond LA Grants ignorance. Though, it's schtick. You're accidentally stupid. He's just a complete useless twat. Maybe I'll call him tranny labia major.
Tiberius Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 8 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: How does that make sense you dillywag? Russia would want a government relationship they could either exploit or unite. Republicans don't offer that. You're lack of basic government structures is beyond LA Grants ignorance. Though, it's schtick. You're accidentally stupid. He's just a complete useless twat. Maybe I'll call him tranny labia major. You are the one saying to do nothing about a foreign attack and treason. That's your position.
boyst Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 4 minutes ago, Tiberius said: You are the one saying to do nothing about a foreign attack and treason. That's your position. What part is treason?
Tiberius Posted March 9, 2018 Posted March 9, 2018 Just now, Boyst62 said: What part is treason? Conspiring with a foreign power to defraud the United States
Recommended Posts