[jogs]

rmnka447, on 2017-May-14, 02:02, said:

Just some food for thought -- The Russians aren't fools. With Hillary Clinton heavily favored to win the election by most analyst and polls, wouldn't it be very likely that Russia would also try to put in place some "friends" to influence Hillary as well? So, after the current investigation is completed (whatever the outcome), it would probably be worthwhile to look for possible infiltration by the Russians among the Democrats.

The Russian ambassador said he tried to meet with both the Hillary Clinton campaign and Trump campaign as often a possible.
After nearly a year there is no evidence of any Russian/Trump conspiracy to win the election. Schumer and the democrats just loves to waste money. There should be an investigation on how the Russians try to influence American politics. The Democrats should be the losers on this investigation. Investigate Hillary, Podesta, and Obama along with Trump.

[jogs]

Winstonm, on 2017-May-12, 12:22, said:

Russia attacked the U.S. election system, ....

Israel, Brexit, France, etc. How many foreign elections has Obama interfered with?

[Winstonm]

jogs, on 2017-May-14, 07:46, said:

Israel, Brexit, France, etc. How many foreign elections has Obama interfered with?

News Flash: Obama is not in office.

[Winstonm]

nige1, on 2017-May-13, 15:12, said:

If you consider "prejudice" to be a inappropriate, I apologise. Please substitute "preconception".

So far in this thread, lots of allegations have lacked proof.

Many of my statements are almost tautologies, for which proof isn't really needed. For example: It's hard to achieve a peaceful outcome in negotiation with Russians, if you're convinced that you're "sworn enemies".

But, IMO, you should still try: the 1984 scenario, fostered by the weapons-lobby, risks "Armageddon". In such circumstances, it's foolhardy to rule out a peaceful solution.

Yes, when a nation such as Russia is actively attacking it is difficult to negotiate a peaceful outcome until they stop attacking. Perception has nothing to do with it.

[nige1]

Winstonm, on 2017-May-14, 08:53, said:

Yes, when a nation such as Russia is actively attacking it is difficult to negotiate a peaceful outcome until they stop attacking. Perception has nothing to do with it.

The Ministry of Truth said:

We defend rebels against the wrong kind of democracy.
They attack our allies, who are holy men creating a benign Caliphate for the glory of God.
We arm, train, and support freedom-fighters. They support terrorists.
We condemn discrimination, in general, but Russians are fair game.

Even if we accept this view, we should still negotiate, for the sake of world-peace.

[Winstonm]

nige1, on 2017-May-14, 09:28, said:

Even if we accept this view, we should still negotiate, for the sake of world-peace.

I never said there should not be dialogue, only that with eyes open one should understand with whom one is dealing. It would be ludicrous to believe that a handshake from Vladimir Putin and his personal promise not to interfere in our elections would accomplish anything other than making the believer look foolish and naive.

[Al_U_Card]

PassedOut, on 2017-May-13, 11:03, said:

Should be obvious to everyone that Trump fired Comey because he fears what the FBI investigation will find. I don't think Trump will be able to suppress it over the long haul.

You would think that after 5 decades of J Edgar, director-appointees (at the behest of the President...) would understand the need to get dirt on everyone in power so that they could ensure that "justice" was done...

[rmnka447]

Trinidad, on 2017-May-14, 03:35, said:

Yes, it would be a near certainty that the Russians tried that. However, the difference between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump lies in the likelihood that the Russians would succeed. For Clinton: close to 0, for Trump: close to 1.

There is zero evidence for inappropriate contacts between the Clinton team and the Russians, most likely because Clinton knows that inappropriate contacts with Russians are ... inappropriate. There have been plenty of inappropriate contacts between the Trump team and the Russians, most likely because the word inappropriate doesn't exist in Trump's vocabulary.

And just to make this clear. The fact that the likelihood that the Russians wouldn't succeed with Clinton isn't anything special. Anybody who would take a governing job serious would make sure that enemies don't influence their policies. So, regardless of who would have been president: Hillary, Bernie, Ted or Big Bird, they would have had the integrity and brains to prevent getting compromised by the enemy. It is pretty unique that someone who seems to lack either one or both makes it to the White House.

Rik

The essence of your comments is that any contact between Russians and anyone associated with Trump was inappropriate, but any similar contacts with Hillary or her team weren't. No one knows whether that's true or not either way. But progressives seem to be absolutely sure any contact with Trump's campaign weren't. It's a belief not a fact as yet. That's why the FBI investigation needs to get completed to get to the truth.

[nige1]

deleted
.

[Winstonm]

jogs, on 2017-May-14, 07:43, said:

The Russian ambassador said he tried to meet with both the Hillary Clinton campaign and Trump campaign as often a possible.
After nearly a year there is no evidence of any Russian/Trump conspiracy to win the election. Schumer and the democrats just loves to waste money. There should be an investigation on how the Russians try to influence American politics. The Democrats should be the losers on this investigation. Investigate Hillary, Podesta, and Obama along with Trump.

Is there anything that could be found in Trump's history that you would consider serious enough to invalidate him as president?

I am wondering as there is a growing list of suspicions and accusations - non-official from a Dutch documentary - of a history of money-laundering, racketeering, mafia connections, and cooperation with entities funding terrorism.
https://www.youtube....h?v=gvd7PqI_Lx0

Would any of those rise in your view as a reason to remove Trump from office?

Actually, from the growing list of suspicions it seems collusion with the Russians during the election might be the least of Trump's concerns.

[Winstonm]

A new poll pretty well nails Trump's core trolls supporters:

Quote

Just 29 percent of Americans approve of President Donald Trump’s decision to fire James Comey as FBI director, according to a new poll.

\

Quote

Surely an independent investigation is on the horizon:

The NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey found that 38 percent disapprove of the decision. Among those who said they have been following the news closely, 33 percent approve, while 53 percent disapprove. Additionally, 78 percent of respondents said they would be in favor of an independent special prosecutor to oversee the probe into possible Trump-Russia ties.

[PassedOut]

Terrorism isn't just an Islamist threat: They hate the US government, and they're multiplying: the terrifying rise of 'sovereign citizens'

Quote

Although the Trump administration is reportedly planning to restructure the Department of Homeland Security’s countering violent extremism (CVE) program to focus exclusively on radical Islam, a 2014 national survey of 175 law enforcement agencies ranked sovereign citizens, not Islamic terrorists, as the most pressing terrorist threat. The survey ranked Islamic terrorists a close second, with the following top three threats all domestic in origin and sometimes overlapping: the militia movement, racist skinheads, the neo-Nazi movement.

I have a close relative in law enforcement who has dealt with these 'sovereign citizens' on the streets and in court, and he's seen first hand that they're as dangerous as they are deranged.

Quote

According to data from the Anti-Defamation League, at least 45 police officers have been killed by domestic extremists since 2001. Of these, 10 were killed by leftwing extremists, 34 by rightwing extremists, and one by homegrown Islamist extremists.

Political correctness prevents Trump and his followers from calling out these right-wing extremists as the domestic terrorists they are. But it will be a serious mistake for Trump to divert resources from this threat--more political correctness run amok.

[helene_t]

winstonm said:

Additionally, 78 percent of respondents said they would be in favor of an independent special prosecutor to oversee the probe into possible Trump-Russia ties.

I don't think such polls are enlightening. Most people would favour independent enquiries into anything that isn't settled. Then, when the enquiry doesn't show what they wanted it to show, they may changer their opinion or they may say it wasn't independent.

Better simply to ask how likely they personally think it is that Trump's policies are influenced by his ties to Russia (or some such).

[Winstonm]

helene_t, on 2017-May-15, 09:34, said:

I don't think such polls are enlightening. Most people would favour independent enquiries into anything that isn't settled. Then, when the enquiry doesn't show what they wanted it to show, they may changer their opinion or they may say it wasn't independent.

Better simply to ask how likely they personally think it is that Trump's policies are influenced by his ties to Russia (or some such).

I think the importance of this poll is that it shows 78% of those polled do not trust the U.S. Congress to hold a non-partisan investigation.

My personal view is that an independent commission is needed - a special prosecutor is not needed until there is evidence of actual crimes.

[jogs]

Winstonm, on 2017-May-14, 12:52, said:

Is there anything that could be found in Trump's history that you would consider serious enough to invalidate him as president?

NO. What did Obama do for working class Americans during his 8 years? What did Obama do for the inner cities?

[awm]

jogs, on 2017-May-15, 14:32, said:

NO. What did Obama do for working class Americans during his 8 years? What did Obama do for the inner cities?

I'm not sure what you expect a president to do. Obama accomplished all the following:

1. Big increase in jobs; accompanied by a drop in unemployment.
2. Continued the downward trend in crime rates.
3. Managed to slightly reduce the US incarceration rate, despite no help from congress.
4. Drastically reduced the percentage of Americans without health insurance.
5. Used the federal review process to help police departments deal with racism and bias (for example in Baltimore); police departments in many cases welcome assistance from the feds, but now Trump's attorney general is rolling back the program.
6. Obama created the deferred action program which allows children whose parents brought them across the border illegally to stay in the country.

All of the above seem pretty good to me. In fact, I live in a downtown area and my wife teaches "inner city" kids. Things improved substantially for our community in general (fewer shut down businesses, generally more people working) and for her students in particular (more/better jobs, less fear of being deported) during the Obama presidency. The reaction of her students to Trump has been pure terror, and not unreasonably considering the new policies on immigration and (racist) enforcement of minor drug offenses.

Are there still problems? Sure, there are still gangs, there is still racism. College is still too expensive and not everyone has a good job. But things got better during Obama's administration and now things are getting worse.

[cherdano]

Remember when it was Clinton who is supposedly extremely careless with classified information?

[ldrews]

cherdano, on 2017-May-15, 17:35, said:

Remember when it was Clinton who is supposedly extremely careless with classified information?

Didn't she say: "It doesn't really matter!"

[Winstonm]

Winstonm, on 2017-May-14, 14:52, said:
Is there anything that could be found in Trump's history that you would consider serious enough to invalidate him as president?

jogs, on 2017-May-15, 14:32, said:

NO.

Thank you. You have just classified yourself as an idiot, and I can now peacefully place you on ignore. Goodbye.

[Winstonm]

ldrews, on 2017-May-15, 18:30, said:

Didn't she say: "It doesn't really matter!"

Swing and a miss!