President Donald J. Trump

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
User avatar
Still Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 43376
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Still Baron » 10 Mar 2019, 20:57

Snarfyguy wrote:
Jimbo wrote:
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - The trial of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort has found no evidence of any collusion with Russia, Manafort’ s lawyer Kevin Downing told reporters.


Odd thing to lead with considering charges of that sort were not in play at this trial.


That’s what Jimbo’s link said!?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 16110
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 11 Mar 2019, 00:33

Snarfyguy wrote:
Jimbo wrote:
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - The trial of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort has found no evidence of any collusion with Russia, Manafort’ s lawyer Kevin Downing told reporters.


Odd thing to lead with considering charges of that sort were not in play at this trial.


Don't play dumb like you, along with the lying NYT and Madcow Rachael Maddow, weren't hoping the trial wouldn't somehow reveal collusion.
Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity. Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid. - William Blum

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67993
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Diamond Dog » 11 Mar 2019, 01:52

Jimbo wrote:
Snarfyguy wrote:
Jimbo wrote:


Odd thing to lead with considering charges of that sort were not in play at this trial.


Don't play dumb like you, along with the lying NYT and Madcow Rachael Maddow, weren't hoping the trial wouldn't somehow reveal collusion.


Trump quoted the judge as saying he had found 'no collusion'. The judge had said no such thing.
"Excuse my dust."
"In the back room, Under the stars, And your ceiling is my floor"
"It put me back in my place and made me realize, yes I'm just a cunt in a clown suit."

User avatar
Charlie O.
Posts: 40033
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:53
Location: In-A-Badda-La-Wadda, bay-beh

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Charlie O. » 11 Mar 2019, 02:30

Jimbo, this trial was about taxes and bank fraud. If Manafort had happened to volunteer that there was collusion with Russia, that would've been sweet, but no-one who was actually paying attention was expecting that.
Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 16110
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 11 Mar 2019, 02:43

Diamond Dog wrote:
Jimbo wrote:
Snarfyguy wrote:
Odd thing to lead with considering charges of that sort were not in play at this trial.


Don't play dumb like you, along with the lying NYT and Madcow Rachael Maddow, weren't hoping the trial wouldn't somehow reveal collusion.


Trump quoted the judge as saying he had found 'no collusion'. The judge had said no such thing.


Like the Baron said: according to the article:

The judge also pointed out that the sentence is not related to the Russian investigation.


Trump is right - this time.

But my larger point is that it isn't worth risking a war falsely blaming Russia for an internal and rather piddly political matter. Nonetheless, HRC supporters like Bill Maher and Stephen Colbert and a few of us here continue to make jokes about how Trump was put in office by Putin. Time after time that's been proved wrong and then to make fun of Trump for gloating over this indicates an inability to admit they were wrong. And forget the off-the-charts anti-Russia fake news bullshit still being spewed by the UK media and government! Good luck finding a British court to exonerate Russia. Enjoy your war.
Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity. Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid. - William Blum

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 16110
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 11 Mar 2019, 02:52

Charlie O. wrote:Jimbo, this trial was about taxes and bank fraud. If Manafort had happened to volunteer that there was collusion with Russia, that would've been sweet, but no-one who was actually paying attention was expecting that.


Image

Who's being naive, Kay?
Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity. Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid. - William Blum

User avatar
Charlie O.
Posts: 40033
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:53
Location: In-A-Badda-La-Wadda, bay-beh

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Charlie O. » 11 Mar 2019, 03:08

You are, James.

Like in the post above, where you suggest that "the sentence is not related to the Russian investigation" is the same as "the judge [said he'd] found 'no collusion'."
Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 16110
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 11 Mar 2019, 03:24

If only Trump were guided by Putin. In the latest Russian version of America's State of the Union speech:

most of the address was about: eradication of remaining poverty; low, subsidized mortgage rates for families with two or more children; pensions indexed to inflation above and beyond the official minimal income levels (corrected and paid out retroactively); high-speed internet for each and every school; universal access to health care through a network of rural clinics; several new world-class oncology clinics; support for tech start-ups; a “social contract” program that helps people start small businesses; another program called “ticket to the future” that allows sixth-graders to choose a career path that includes directed study programs, mentorships and apprenticeships; lots of new infrastructure projects such as the soon-to-be-opened Autobahn between Moscow and St. Petersburg, revamped trash collection and recycling and major air pollution reductions in a dozen major cities; the list goes on and on.


https://off-guardian.org/2019/03/11/put ... are-swine/
Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity. Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid. - William Blum

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67993
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Diamond Dog » 11 Mar 2019, 05:58

Charlie O. wrote:You are, James.

Like in the post above, where you suggest that "the sentence is not related to the Russian investigation" is the same as "the judge [said he'd] found 'no collusion'."


Well, quite.
"Excuse my dust."
"In the back room, Under the stars, And your ceiling is my floor"
"It put me back in my place and made me realize, yes I'm just a cunt in a clown suit."

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67993
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Diamond Dog » 11 Mar 2019, 06:17

Jimbo wrote:But my larger point is that it isn't worth risking a war falsely blaming Russia for an internal and rather piddly political matter. Nonetheless, HRC supporters like Bill Maher and Stephen Colbert and a few of us here continue to make jokes about how Trump was put in office by Putin


I don't recall anyone on here making such a claim (I may be wrong) - but saying that there was some Russian help/influence isn't the same as saying that that collusion was enough to put Trump in office, is it? I think it's you that is going overboard with the significance of the claims - but any level of collusion with a foreign power - by itself- is surely enough to warrant Trump unfit for the office he was up for ?
"Excuse my dust."
"In the back room, Under the stars, And your ceiling is my floor"
"It put me back in my place and made me realize, yes I'm just a cunt in a clown suit."

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 53246
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Snarfyguy » 11 Mar 2019, 13:11

Pardon me for quoting at length. I don't see what there is to argue about concerning any of the below. From The New Yorker:

The anticipated conclusion of Robert Mueller’s investigation into the Trump campaign’s connections to Russia has given way to a broad sense of anticlimax. Media coverage has fixated on the potential that Mueller will produce new revelations of impeachable conduct, emphasizing heavily the expectation he will not. This belief simply shows how the case has already been proven and it simply has not registered.

A great many intelligent people who hold no brief for Trump have nonetheless refused to believe that he is hiding some deep, dark secrets regarding Russia. As more and more evidence has appeared over the last two and a half years, that bloc of skeptics has melted away but failed to disappear completely.

The cause of this incredulity, I have come to suspect, lies in the vast distance the mind must travel between the normal patterns of American politics and the fantastical crimes being alleged. The Russia scandal seems to hint at a reality of fiction or paranoia, a baroque conspiracy in which the leader of the free world has been compromised by a mafiocracy with an economy smaller than South Korea’s.

The flaw lies in the assumption about what constitutes “normal.” In this case, the baseline should not be previous American elections, but other foreign elections in which Russia has intervened. There are several, and they follow a pattern. Moscow has cultivated right-wing parties overseas through a combination of covert payments to their leaders (often disguised as legitimate business transactions), illegal campaign donations, and propaganda support through traditional and social media. Russian election corruption scandals pop up in Europe all the time. Russia secretly and illegally funded Ukraine’s “Party of Regions”; France’s National Front party got a secret 2014 election loan from a Russian bank; the Brexit vote benefited from a huge donation from a British businessman who has secretly met with Russian officials dangling lucrative business deals. Just last month, Italian journalists discovered the leader of a right-wing party had negotiated a lucrative secret transaction with a Russian firm.

When you bear these events in mind, it no longer seems strange to believe that Vladimir Putin formed a corrupt alliance with Trump. Given all the outward signs of their relationship, it would be curious if he didn’t.

The fact that the same person who managed the campaign for the pro-Russian candidate in Ukraine next turned up (after a brief disappearance) to run the campaign of the pro-Russian candidate in the United States is merely one of an overwhelmingly long list of clues placing Trump in the pattern. Trump’s defenders have invested enormous energy into parsing the term “collusion,” which they note is not the name for a discrete crime. So let’s say instead that Trump, like many other right-wing politicians, has been corruptly influenced by Russia and elected knowingly with its aid. Some of the clues establishing this pattern lie in the carefully redacted indictments that Mueller has already filed; others sit before us in plain sight.

First, Trump developed financial ties with Russia, an effort that dates back to the 1980s. Within the last decade, it accounted for a significant, if not dominant, share of his income. “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,” said Donald Trump Jr. in 2008; “We don’t rely on American banks. We have all the funding we need out of Russia,” Eric Trump reportedly boasted in 2014. Trump spent the campaign negotiating a deal to build a massive tower in Moscow, the existence and extent of which he dissembled about at the time and for years afterward, but which offered a payday in the hundreds of millions of dollars, reported Michael Cohen, who negotiated it.

He has concealed the extent of these ties by refusing to publish his tax returns, but a lot of Russian financing of his business over the last decade and a half is a matter of public record. Unlike open-market states with reliable rule of law, Russia is a crony capitalist economy in which large business interests routinely serve Putin’s. The scope of Russia’s financial leverage over Trump remains hidden, but the basic fact of it is undeniable. Trump had, at minimum, a strong financial incentive to stay in Putin’s good graces that precluded him from devising a Russia policy based solely on the national interest.

Second, Trump and Russia cooperated actively. During the campaign, 17 campaign officials and advisers had 100 contacts with Russians between them. They attempted to cover up these contacts by lying about them repeatedly, frequently risking perjury charges by doing so before Congress or the FBI. The breadth and the depth of their commitment in refusing to acknowledge their Russian contacts is striking, and impossible to square with any innocent explanation.

Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos met in April 2016 with Joseph Mifsud, who told Papadopoulos he had returned from Moscow and had learned “dirt” about Hillary Clinton. Papadopoulos later said he “couldn’t guarantee” he didn’t share this information with fellow campaign staffers. Donald Trump Jr. set up a meeting in Trump Tower premised on what was pitched to him as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” and invited the campaign manager and the president’s influential son-in-law to attend.

While Russia was exerting itself on Trump’s behalf through emails hacks and social media messaging, Trump did nothing to disavow the help, and several things to enable it. He frequently denied Russians had stolen Democratic emails, even after U.S. intelligence agencies had fingered them. He publicly implored Russia to steal more emails (“Russia, if you’re listening…”), an invitation Russian hackers accepted and tried to act upon hours later. And he did everything in his power to magnify their impact, touting the importance of WikiLeaks some 164 times in the last month of the campaign alone.

The basic fact of this cooperative relationship is not in question. All that remains to be established, again, is its extent, and any laws that may have been broken in the process. Mueller has revealed a few tantalizing hints. During the campaign, Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort passed campaign data on to Konstantin Kilimnik, his former business partner and an active Russian intelligence agent. This was not political gossip, but “very detailed” data running to 75 pages in length.

Trump also clearly used Roger Stone as an intermediary to WikiLeaks. The indictment of Stone notes “a senior Trump campaign official was directed to contact Stone about any additional releases and what other damaging information” the organization had. (Who but Trump can “direct” senior officials?) Michael Cohen has testified to Congress that he overheard a conversation between Trump and Stone about WikiLeaks.

Another Trump campaign operative, Peter W. Smith, working under Michael Flynn, attempted to acquire more Clinton emails by reaching out to Russian hackers.

The unanswered questions here center on how much deeper this cooperation goes, and what laws might have been tripped. Trump campaign officials, and possibly Trump himself, could potentially be charged for conspiracy to defraud the United States, the crime for which Mueller indicted Russian hackers. What we know already is that Trump was not the passive beneficiary of Russian assistance, but welcomed it and took at least some steps to encourage more of it.

Third, Trump gave Russia a return on its investment. A few weeks after announcing his candidacy, Trump appeared at a public forum, where — of all people — Russian operative Maria Butina asked him about his position toward Moscow. Unlike his customary instinct of catering to the crowd (a Republican base that had been trained to mock Obama for surrendering to Russia), Trump went the other way by promising to get along better. And also in contrast to his default posture of getting tough with other countries and seizing more leverage, Trump instead called the sanctions unnecessary.

Given the staunchly anti-Russian orientation of the party Trump took over, his Russophillic agenda was bound to face opposition in Congress and his own foreign policy bureaucracy. That tension has merely served to highlight the depths of Trump’s commitment to placating Russia. In contrast to his rapid capitulation on so many of his other heterodox stances — universal health insurance, closing the carried interest loophole, allowing reimportation of prescription drugs, pulling out of NAFTA — the tenacity with which Trump has fought for his idiosyncratic Russia policy is striking.

The Trump campaign’s sole intervention in the 2016 Republican platform debate was to beat back an amendment that would have endorsed arming Ukraine, which was facing slow dismemberment by Russia. During the campaign, Manafort and Kilimnik discussed a plan to recognize Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a version of which Michael Cohen hand-delivered to Michael Flynn, Trump’s national security adviser, in early 2017.

Russia’s primary policy objective, winning relief from Obama-era sanctions, was thwarted, when veto-proof supermajorities in both chambers of Congress voted to escalate sanctions in retaliation for Russia’s election interference. Trump was reportedly “apoplectic” over the bill, delayed signing it for four days, and has dawdled on implementation, but has been unable to roll it back.

Trump has managed to wrest control of his personal diplomacy with Putin, meeting the Russian dictator repeatedly without aides present to record the discussions. The discussions seem to have left a deep impression. After his most public meeting with Putin, in Helsinki last summer, Trump praised his counterpart’s plan to allow Russian intelligence to interrogate various American critics of the regime. Trump has, at various times, described NATO ally Montenegro as aggressive and a threat to Russia, defended the 1980 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, disbelieved U.S. intelligence reports of a North Korean missile launch because Putin had assured him Kim Jong-un had no such capability, and halted American military exercises with South Korea at Putin’s suggestion. Trump has likewise tangled with the leaders of Canada, Britain, France, and Germany while frequently calling into question the American commitment to NATO.

There will almost certainly never be proof of any direct quid pro quo agreement for Putin to support Trump’s candidacy in return for policy outcomes. But while the pro remains conjecture, both the quid and the quo are abundantly evident.

And finally, Trump has obstructed the investigation. Trump has employed precious little artifice in his obstruction. This is largely because he does not understand obstruction of justice as a crime, but rather as his natural and proper right as head of the Executive branch. Trump has repeatedly expressed his view that obstruction of justice simply means “fighting back.” He does not believe obstructing justice is improper, let alone criminal. And he acted on this view from the beginning of his presidency.

Trump’s obstruction efforts began almost immediately into his presidency, when he pulled FBI Director James Comey aside, and (according to Comey) tried to create a patronage relationship while leaning on Comey to let Michael Flynn — then the primary known link to the Russia investigation — off without charges. After firing Comey, Trump ordered the draft of a memo stating he was fired over the Russia investigation, settled for a memo creating a cover story for the firing, before blurting out his real reason in a television interview with Lester Holt (“when I decided to just do it, I said to myself — you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story”), and in an Oval Office meeting with Russian officials (“He was crazy, a real nut job. I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”).

He has stated, also publicly, his belief that covering up presidential crimes is the attorney general’s proper role:

Holder protected President Obama … when you look at all of the tremendous, ah, real problems they had, not made-up problems like Russian collusion, these were real problems. When you look at the things that they did, and Holder protected the president. And I have great respect for that, I’ll be honest, I have great respect for that.

And he has followed through on this vision. Trump raged against his attorney general for following ethical guidelines and recusing himself, tried to get him to violate those guidelines by un-recusing himself, and then fired him. He instructed Michael Cohen to falsely testify about his dealings with Russia during the campaign, according to Cohen, by prompting him, before his testimony, with what both men knew were lies. His lawyer dangled pardons before key witnesses, even while Trump was heavily hinting at the same in public (i.e., Trump tweeted, “I feel very badly for Paul Manafort and his wonderful family. ‘Justice’ took a 12 year old tax case, among other things, applied tremendous pressure on him and, unlike Michael Cohen, he refused to “break” — make up stories in order to get a “deal.” Such respect for a brave man!”)

There is a reasonable argument that a president can legally use a pardon in a case involving himself, because doing so shifts responsibility in the public mind to the president. But there is no case for floating a pardon in advance, which obscures the president from any accountability and which absolutely qualifies as obstruction of justice.

Most recently, Trump was overheard thanking Matt Gaetz, a sycophantic congressional Republican who crudely attempted to intimidate Cohen before his public testimony.

***

Trump’s efforts to obstruct justice have been so persistent and flagrant that his supporters have hardly bothered to deny it. Instead they have presented obstruction as a “process crime,” a runner-up prize sought by Mueller in lieu of finding proof of true wrongdoing.

But the real wrongdoing is rampant and sitting in front of our faces. And the obstruction is the reason no conclusion Mueller reaches can clear Trump of all suspicion. If the president were innocent, or if he wanted his critics to concede his relationship with Russia broke no laws, he could have encouraged his allies to cooperate with the investigation. But obstructing the investigation, while making it harder to produce evidence of criminality, makes it impossible to produce exoneration. Trump, using his pardon power, persuaded the two campaign staffers in closest touch with Russia’s campaign operations, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone, to shut their mouths.

Trump has prevailed upon his underlings to lie and lie and lie about every aspect of his financial and political dealings with Russia. They have conceded nothing voluntarily, admitting only that which has been proven (and sometimes not even that), replacing old lies with new ones. They are hiding a corrupt relationship with Vladimir Putin’s gangster state. All that remains to be learned is details.


http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/ ... uilty.html
GoogaMooga wrote: The further away from home you go, the greater the risk of getting stuck there.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 16110
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 11 Mar 2019, 13:36

Thank you for posting this. These are repeats of points we've heard over the last few years from the MSM and many have been debunked.

And this may seem nitpicky but without footnotes or links an article like this is worthless. Please note how most alternative reporters use links extensively to back up what they write.

And this oft repeated point gets on my nerves.
He publicly implored Russia to steal more emails (“Russia, if you’re listening…”)

The orange dolt was joking. :roll:

EDIT. Please disregard for now my point about footnotes. I checked and the original seems to have links. I will reread it on site.
Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity. Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid. - William Blum

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 16110
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 11 Mar 2019, 16:24

I reread the article and opened up many of the links and if Mueller lays out his case as it is presented here it will be hard to refute. Nonetheless, it is still a circumstantial case. Even the author says so.

There will almost certainly never be proof of any direct quid pro quo agreement for Putin to support Trump’s candidacy in return for policy outcomes. But while the pro remains conjecture, both the quid and the quo are abundantly evident.


Most intriguing was the pattern the author found of Russian bankers funding right wing causes and candidates in France, UK and Italy - so why would Trump's run be different?

As so often happens my sources will rebut. So far I have found no rebuttals but it is still a recent article and there is a lot to rebut. Stay tuned.
Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity. Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid. - William Blum

User avatar
Charlie O.
Posts: 40033
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:53
Location: In-A-Badda-La-Wadda, bay-beh

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Charlie O. » 11 Mar 2019, 16:40

Snarfyguy wrote:I don't see what there is to argue about concerning any of the below.

You did know that that wouldn't stop Jimbo, right?
Image

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 53246
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Snarfyguy » 11 Mar 2019, 17:30

Jimbo wrote:Nonetheless, it is still a circumstantial case. Even the author says so.

All evidence is circumstantial evidence except direct testimony (or, say, a security cam tape showing a crime) and confessions.

There's unlikely to be a smoking gun here, but that doesn't mean Trump and his inner circle are blameless.
GoogaMooga wrote: The further away from home you go, the greater the risk of getting stuck there.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 16110
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 11 Mar 2019, 18:00

Snarfyguy wrote:
There's unlikely to be a smoking gun here, but that doesn't mean Trump and his inner circle are blameless.


Oh, I'd enjoy seeing Trump brought down but oddly it's Putin whom I'd like to see exonerated. Your article has crafted a case that makes my boy look like he was involved in attempting to shape US and some other countries policies. Despite the still circumstantial evidence I have listened to a few of Putin's speeches and interviews and seen how he has rebuilt Russia into a prosperous and advanced country and find it hard to imagine he's a bad guy. The article speculates he's done these shenanigans to divide us somehow like backing Brexit, but it was Cameron who proposed the stupid referendum in the first place. Is there another pee pee tape somewhere? Speaking of which, the tape goes unmentioned in the article. Did Trump deal with Russians? Yes, but these were probably actual business deals. And even if, Trump's policy toward Russia has been more hawkish than Obama's so it looks like he isn't doing the Russians any favors that's for sure. But we'll see and I'll keep an open mind.
Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity. Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid. - William Blum

User avatar
Charlie O.
Posts: 40033
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:53
Location: In-A-Badda-La-Wadda, bay-beh

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Charlie O. » 11 Mar 2019, 19:57

Jimbo wrote:Despite the still circumstantial evidence I have listened to a few of Putin's speeches and interviews and seen how he has rebuilt Russia into a prosperous and advanced country and find it hard to imagine he's a bad guy.

You mean to tell me he never once said in any of those speeches and interviews that, for example, he regularly has people who disagree with him murdered or disappeared? Gee, you could be right, maybe we've been too hard on the guy all along.
Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 16110
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 12 Mar 2019, 07:05

Charlie O. wrote:
Jimbo wrote:Despite the still circumstantial evidence I have listened to a few of Putin's speeches and interviews and seen how he has rebuilt Russia into a prosperous and advanced country and find it hard to imagine he's a bad guy.

You mean to tell me he never once said in any of those speeches and interviews that, for example, he regularly has people who disagree with him murdered or disappeared? Gee, you could be right, maybe we've been too hard on the guy all along.


Here is part one of four of the Putin interview with Oliver Stone. I believe Putin.

Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity. Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid. - William Blum

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 16110
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 12 Mar 2019, 15:33

It's all over now - probably.

Pelosi Tacitly Admits That Russiagate Is Bullshit
Caitlin Johnstone

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/pelo ... 0334bea729
Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity. Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid. - William Blum

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 12724
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Sneelock » 12 Mar 2019, 15:56

meanwhile, in things that really matter-land..
how about that budget?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... fc2d7cd2a3
let me guess... the budget proves that "Russia-gate" is bullshit.
why not? everything goddam else does. :roll:

sing it, Paul!
Charlie O. wrote:You guys are killing my buzz!