Spectre

Trump - Russia Thread

1,402 posts in this topic

13 minutes ago, falconsd56 said:

The question is....if the contact with Russia was mundane....and for the record I think much of it was....why lie about it??

Sessions volunteered information that was  lie.

There have been multiple people from the campaign lie about contacts....

Why did they lie???

Sessions didn't lie.  This is the problem with this story.  He was asked specifically about contacts regarding the campaign.  His contacts with an ambassador was as a Senator and had nothing to do with the campaign.  There have been several experts that have come out and stated than anyone trying to label this as perjury is just incorrect.  Things like what Pelosi and Schumer are doing are exactly why I discount all this Russia business.  It comes off as sour grapes when they do those types of things and cheapens anything else around it... 

James Bond 007 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Leon Troutsky said:

Does the fact that Roger Stone, a long-time Trump friend and campaign advisor, had back channel conversations with Wikileaks while the hacked emails were being released not bother you or raise suspicion?

Not particularly.

Edit for clarification:  Stone resigned/fired whatever well over a year prior to the election, that's why it doesn't concern me and with some of the things he's said, not sure he's the most credible person.  He's said some way out there things at times...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, capologist said:

Sessions didn't lie.  This is the problem with this story.  He was asked specifically about contacts regarding the campaign.  His contacts with an ambassador was as a Senator and had nothing to do with the campaign.  There have been several experts that have come out and stated than anyone trying to label this as perjury is just incorrect.  Things like what Pelosi and Schumer are doing are exactly why I discount all this Russia business.  It comes off as sour grapes when they do those types of things and cheapens anything else around it... 

Ummn yeah he did.

 

He clearly said that he did not have contact......when he did.

That is a lie.

Now  again I doubt that what ever was talked about was nefarious in nature. But the fact is that he said something that he knew was untrue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, falconsd56 said:

Ummn yeah he did.

 

He clearly said that he did not have contact......when he did.

That is a lie.

Now  again I doubt that what ever was talked about was nefarious in nature. But the fact is that he said something that he knew was untrue.

And that's been explained so no, it's not lie.  It's being blown way out of proportion like pretty much everything else has so far...

James Bond 007 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the funny thing is.....we was not even asked if he had contact with Russia.

Had he just answered the question that was asked he would not be brought up in this conversation

BrockSamson and big_dog like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, falconsd56 said:

Ummn yeah he did.

 

He clearly said that he did not have contact......when he did.

That is a lie.

Now  again I doubt that what ever was talked about was nefarious in nature. But the fact is that he said something that he knew was untrue.

:lol:

He had contact as a Senator in that capacity but not as a Trump surrogate...the rabbit hole must be a comfortable place for you guys.  That's why you've been losing seats since 2010 at an alarming rate.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, capologist said:

Not particularly.

Edit for clarification:  Stone resigned/fired whatever well over a year prior to the election, that's why it doesn't concern me and with some of the things he's said, not sure he's the most credible person.  He's said some way out there things at times...

Um, what are you talking about?  He was an official member of the Trump campaign until August 2016 and remained a close advisor to Trump after he left the campaign.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Leon Troutsky said:

Ah, thanks, I misread.  Still, he remained a close advisor to Trump throughout the campaign, as I understand it.

No, it was a contentious split actually.  Trump claimed to have fired Stone while Stone claimed to "fire Trump" (his words not mine).  They wished each other well but that's about the extent of it.  Edit:  I looked for contact after the resignation but found nothing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stone is still up Trump's ***. He did an AMA on Reddit and it was just painful to read his blatant shilling for Trump. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Spectre said:

Stone is still up Trump's ***. He did an AMA on Reddit and it was just painful to read his blatant shilling for Trump. 

He's said and done some wacky stuff so nothing surprises me with him to be honest...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, falconsd56 said:

Ummn yeah he did.

 

He clearly said that he did not have contact......when he did.

That is a lie.

Now  again I doubt that what ever was talked about was nefarious in nature. But the fact is that he said something that he knew was untrue.

As I've been saying, we need to be careful with this.

Clinton clearly said that there was no classified information on her email server.  There was.

That is a lie?

A false statement is not always a lie.  A false statement under oath is not always perjury.  

AF89 and falconsd56 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Spectre said:

If it was no big deal, why did he recuse himself in response to this coming out? Why did he go out of his way to lie about something he wasn't even asked? 

If Russia is such a big threat to the US why did Obama lie?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

If Russia is such a big threat to the US why did Obama lie?

 

Pure hypocrisy on the left. Russia is no threat when convenient. Uranium one debacle under their watch. Trump may be a lot of things but working for Russia isn't one of them.

WhenFalconsWin likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Spectre said:

Whataboutism. Obama and Hillary are not running the government. 

BOOM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Spectre said:

Whataboutism. Obama and Hillary are not running the government. 

Obama is still trying to run it.  Obama operatives leaking out fake BS.  He should be investigated.

James Bond 007 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

Obama is still trying to run it.  Obama operatives leaking out fake BS.  He should be investigated.

Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent to lawful authority.

Obama/Soros for Prison!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JDaveG said:

A lot to do about nothing.  

But, sorry, if you care about this, then let’s back up and see the exchange in context:

FRANKEN: CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week that included information that, quote, “Russian operatives claimed to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say, quote, “There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump’s surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.”

Now, again, I’m telling you this as it’s coming out, so you know. But if it’s true, it’s obviously extremely serious, and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?

SESSIONS: Senator Franken, I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn’t have—did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.

Now, unless you’ve gone into full “time for some game theory” mode, you would be hard-pressed to miss that that “communications with the Russians” is shorthand for “communications of the sort that CNN is alleging,” not “any sort of communication with any Russian official ever.”

capologist likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

Now, unless you’ve gone into full “time for some game theory” mode

That^^ was another good article. I linked it back when it came out:

On 12/17/2016 at 1:48 PM, Billy Ocean said:

Whatever Russia did or didn’t do, the idea that its interference is what cost Hillary Clinton the election is utterly ludicrous and absolutely false. What cost Hillary Clinton the election can be summed up by a single line from Sen. Chuck Schumer, soon to be the country’s highest-ranking Democrat: “For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.” As it turned out, he was fatally wrong. It wasn’t the Russians who told the Democratic Party to abandon the working-class people of all races who used to form its electoral base. It wasn’t the Russians who decided to run a presidential campaign that offered people nothing but blackmail—“vote for us or Dangerous Donald wins.” The Russians didn’t come up with awful tin-eared catchphrases like “I’m with her” or “America is already great.” The Russians never ordered the DNC to run one of the most widely despised people in the country, simply because she thought it was her turn. The Democrats did that all by themselves.

What the Russia obsession represents is a massive ethical failure on the part of American liberals. People really will suffer under President Trump—women, queer people, Muslims, poor people of every stripe. But so many in the centrist establishment don’t seem to care. They’re far too busy weaving themselves into intricate geopolitical power plays that don’t really exist, searching for a narrative that exonerates them from having let this happen, to do anything like real political work. They won’t accept that Trumpism is America, in all its blood-splattered horror—that the dry civics lesson of a democracy they love so much is capable of creating a monster. Decades of neoliberal policy disenfranchised people to the extent that Donald Trump could look like a savior; far better to just hide your bad conscience somewhere far away in Eastern Europe. It wasn’t us, it wasn’t our country, we were all duped by Putin. And if this means falling into reactionary paranoia, screaming red-faced about traitors and spies, slobbering embarrassingly over the incoherent rants of any two-bit con artist whose name isn’t Donald Trump—so be it. None of this will help anyone or achieve anything, but that’s not the point.

“The Rise of the Alt-Center,” Sam Kriss, Slate

 

WhenFalconsWin likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now