Support NeoGAF

[Super Mario]

Wew, some people here are truly gone off the deep end with their unending defense of Trump no matter what he does. Can you imagine if Obama said that he trusts Putin over US intelligence? Even ignoring the entire collusion thing this was a pathetic display by him. He's a pussy whenever Russia is involved.

Because some realize that Russia isn't the mega threat the media makes them out to be. We've always been negative towards them just because they will not join the Liberal globalist agenda. It is counter-productive to continue negative relations with them.

 

[TheShadowLord]

What's funny about this whole thing is that liberals are currently yelling and screaming about this. If Obama was trying to build bridges with Putin, it'd be a different story. He'd be the good guy restoring our reputation around the world, peddling peace, and shitting on the Neocons.

But since it's Trump doing it, it's treason, and the neocons and the liberals are suddenly on common ground.

(And no I don't believe any of this collusion nonsense. Show me receipts.)

You mean if Obama is in the same shoes Trump is in? I would not and I hope other liberals would not.

 

[Harksteed]

Because some realize that Russia isn't the mega threat the media makes them out to be. We've always been negative towards them just because they will not join the Liberal globalist agenda. It is counter-productive to continue negative relations with them.

Maybe we'd have a better relationship if Russia didn't:
1) Invade Ukraine
2) Annex part of Ukraine
3) Shoot down a civilian place with almost 300 of my fellow countrymen and women
4) Attempt to assassinate political opposition in the UK
5) Interfere with elections and referendums in the US and Europe

The entire 'what's so bad about being friends with Russia' is the most cuck shit I've ever heard.

 

[Gander]

Trump will surpass Benedict Arnold as the nation's most famous traitor. BTW Benedict Arnold is a fascinating story, a lot of people think he was a coward he was actually one the nation's best generals ever. He was brilliant on the battlefield. I won't give it all away I'll let you find out the story.

 

[bucyou]

Fascinating how fast liberals turn into warhawks

 

[theignoramus]

Maybe we'd have a better relationship if Russia didn't:
1) Invade Ukraine
2) Annex part of Ukraine
3) Shoot down a civilian place with almost 300 of my fellow countrymen and women
4) Attempt to assassinate political opposition in the UK
5) Interfere with elections and referendums in the US and Europe

The entire 'what's so bad about being friends with Russia' is the most cuck shit I've ever heard.

Russia appeals to White nationalists the world over. They dont care about Russia's bad behavior and theyre willing to ignore it for that reason.

 

[dolabla]

Trump should make an immediate announcement he's going to be dropping some more bombs in Syria. Corporate media would light up with joy/excitement.

 

[12Goblins]

I see trumpets are making imaginary arguments to defend their love of the orange man. Cognitive dissonance hurts

Why won't putin join the Liberal globalist agenda!!... This means war!

 

[Forthefuture]

I see trumpets are making imaginary arguments to defend their love of the orange man. Cognitive dissonance hurts

I think they should stop worrying and learn to love the matryoshka. Look how happy their god looks with Vlad's hand up his ass.

 

[Harksteed]

Fascinating how fast liberals turn into warhawks

Liberals want war with Russia?

 

[lil puff]

Liberals want war with Russia?

I believe one lib went on the extreme saying that we were at war with Russia and we should fight back with war. I don't remember who it was.

And that got cherry picked into a popular talking point, The Liberals want war with Russia.

 

[Harksteed]

I believe one lib went on the extreme saying that we were at war with Russia and we should fight back with war. I don't remember who it was.

And that got cherry picked into a popular talking point, The Liberals want war with Russia.

I got my nukes ready

 

[KevinKeene]

I know about history, but I'll never understand why so many Americans apparently *want* to see Russians as the villain.

Like, stop that. It's another country far away, trying to be economically successful, same as any country. It has a dubious government, but so have Turkry, Hungary, Italy, China, and really the USA, too. Being wary is one thing, but this almost desire to hate Russia ... give it up.

 

[Harksteed]

I know about history, but I'll never understand why so many Americans apparently *want* to see Russians as the villain.

Like, stop that. It's another country far away, trying to be economically successful, same as any country. It has a dubious government, but so have Turkry, Hungary, Italy, China, and really the USA, too. Being wary is one thing, but this almost desire to hate Russia ... give it up.

The handwaving is getting pretty tiring.

 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Accusation of a thing happening without evidence of it happening being taken as proof it happened is a tactic first employed in the culture war. It's now being used in a geopolitical setting to foster war mongering and yellow journalism.

 

[Ke0]

Kind of weird to see Americans on social media tearing into their various intelligence agencies calling them corrupt and worthless sods who are all bad apples but in the same breath scream blue lives matter when really the two are the same just one is on a macro scale versus micro. But yet they still vote to keep these agencies working in the same capacity as they always have and constantly shrug off or even attack people who say these institutions are corrupt and need to be restructured.

Also really crazy to see people talking about how these agencies have been pumping drugs until neighborhoods for decades but then say people of various groups directly affected by this influx of drugs and guns that they deserve their treatment by the justice system and they should take personal responsibility.

One thing is certain, Trump and this surrounding him brings out the cognitive dissonance in Americans like no one else

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

You people maligning the the press, the fbi, the IC, and every other thing.

I honestly feel bad for you. There's no reason to buy into all that bullshit.

There's a whole thread of acts a to what russia is actually doing to lower the importance of the US.

 

[Chiggs]

Wew, some people here are truly gone off the deep end with their unending defense of Trump no matter what he does. Can you imagine if Obama said that he trusts Putin over US intelligence? Even ignoring the entire collusion thing this was a pathetic display by him. He's a pussy whenever Russia is involved.

Well, Obama was also quite the pussy with Russia. Might want to read up about 2011-2016 (Syria, Crimea, and his response to Russian meddling in our election). He was just very savvy with the media, and a skilled speaker. And had a far better reputation than Trump.

Anyway, since you've apparently forgotten about Obama making fun of Romney for calling Russia the United States' most dangerous enemy in the 2012 Presidential debates, a sentiment later echoed by John Kerry who made a Rocky IV joke at the 2012 Democratic National Convention, and Hillary Clinton's embarrassing Russian reset button stunt, I'll play your game:

First term:

• From the right: "Obama is committing high treason and needs to be removed from office immediately! He is a socialist monster and most likely a terrorist!"
• From the left: "Obama won the office by promising to unite the country, and there is no reason why he should stop at our borders. Isn't it about time we worked together with Russia to make the world a safer place? Remember, John F Kennedy was also heavily criticized for being weak for his willingness to engage Khrushchev. Nobody called him weak when he stared down the Russians in Cuba with a naval blockade. Remember, relying on flawed intel is exactly what got us into the Iraq debacle."

Second term:

• From the right: "Obama is committing high treason and needs to be removed from office immediately! He is a socialist monster and most likely a terrorist! He spent the last 4 years travelling the globe and kissing everyone's ass and apologizing for America! His dealings with Russia clearly show he is Putin's bitch. He is a complete disgrace!"
• From the left: "The American people have spoken: Obama is now a two term President that deserves more support than what the obstructionist Republicans are giving him, which is none. Obama engaging Russia is of key strategic interest to the United States, and the fact that the GOP is attacking him for promoting an agenda of peace and diplomacy clearly show they are only interested in a perpetual state of global conflict. Relying on flawed intel is exactly what got us into the Iraq debacle. With experience behind him, our President is simply too smart to fall for that nonsense."

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

Well, Obama was also quite the pussy with Russia. Might want to read up about 2011-2016 (Syria, Crimea, and his response to Russian meddling in our election). He was just very savvy with the media, and a skilled speaker. And had a far better reputation than Trump.

Anyway, since you've apparently forgotten about Obama making fun of Romney for calling Russia the United States' most dangerous enemy in the 2012 Presidential debates, a sentiment later echoed by John Kerry who made a Rocky IV joke at the 2012 Democratic National Convention, and Hillary Clinton's embarrassing Russian reset button stunt, I'll play your game:

First term:

• From the right: "Obama is committing high treason and needs to be removed from office immediately! He is a socialist monster and most likely a terrorist!"
• From the left: "Obama won the office by promising to unite the country, and there is no reason why he should stop at our borders. Isn't it about time we worked together with Russia to make the world a safer place? Remember, John F Kennedy was also heavily criticized for being weak for his willingness to engage Khrushchev. Nobody called him weak when he stared down the Russians in Cuba with a naval blockade. Relying on flawed intel is exactly what got us into the Iraq debacle."

Second term:

• From the right: "Obama is committing high treason and needs to be removed from office immediately! He is a socialist monster and most likely a terrorist! He spent the last 4 years travelling the globe and kissing everyone's ass and apologizing for America! His dealings with Russia clearly show he is Putin's bitch. He is a complete disgrace!"
• From the left: "The American people have spoken: Obama is now a two term President that deserves more support than what the obstructionist Republicans are giving him, which is none. Obama engaging Russia is of key strategic interest to the United States, and the fact that the GOP is attacking him for promoting an agenda of peace and diplomacy clearly show they are only interested in a perpetual state of global conflict. Relying on flawed intel is exactly what got us into the Iraq debacle. With experience behind him, our President is simply too smart to fall for that nonsense."

I want to point to this:

since you've apparently forgotten about Obama making fun of Romney for calling Russia the United States' most dangerous enemy in the 2012 Presidential debates,

legitimizing what they were doing, is not being a pussy. That's what they want. Obviously romney declined, but if you think that the obama admin wasn't looking at these acts?

You want to put the blame on someone. Look at congress.

There's a reason why it's not a good idea to legitimize people, and it's why trump keeps getting shit on for foreign policy.

 

[Arimer]

I"ve given Trump a pass on a lot of dumb stuff he's done but going against our own intelligence agencies and buddying up to Russia is just crap.

 

[Tesseract]

the '80s called, they want their foreign policy back.

 

[snausagesUK]

Because some realize that Russia isn't the mega threat the media makes them out to be. We've always been negative towards them just because they will not join the Liberal globalist agenda. It is counter-productive to continue negative relations with them.

Tell that to the people living in Salisbury UK afraid to walk down the street in case they contract deadly nerve agent.

Wait no maybe that's fake liberal elitist news as well. An inside job by the libs

 

[Forthefuture]

the '80s called, they want their foreign policy back.

Reagan used to pull them off too? The Cold War just got hot.

 

[12Goblins]

I know about history, but I'll never understand why so many Americans apparently *want* to see Russians as the villain.

Like, stop that. It's another country far away, trying to be economically successful, same as any country. It has a dubious government, but so have Turkry, Hungary, Italy, China, and really the USA, too. Being wary is one thing, but this almost desire to hate Russia ... give it up.

This is true, but what about the fact that all signs are starting to indicate that our president is subservient to Vladimir putin? This should be alarming if you know history. Disregarding the fact that we have turned our backs to our real allies... Do we just not believe that vlad is controlling trump, or do we just not care? ie, vlad did trump a favor by helping him win an election, secure him russian investments, etc so now trump and his base see vlad as an ally to their cause, owing vlad big favors, but just not enough to compromise our democratic values? Trying to see it from your POV

Noone is trying to vilify Russia, you guys need to stop saying that. Russia is what it is, and what it has been for years. The problem is that all evidence points to trump is being controlled by Russian leadership.

If we did a thought expirement and pretended that evidence came to light that vlad had damming evidence over trump, thereby being able to manipulate trump, would this be enough to turn against trump? Or would you still have enough faith in trump that despite this, American and democratic values would not be compromised and this situation is still a net positive as a whole?

 

[NickFire]

This is true, but what about the fact that clearly our president is subservient to Vladimir putin? This should be alarming if you know history, as you put it. Disregarding the fact that we have turned our backs to our real allies... Do we just not believe that vlad is controlling trump, or do we just not care? ie, vlad did trump a favor by helping him win an election, secure him russian investments, etc so now trump and his base see vlad as an ally to their cause, owing vlad big favors, but just not enough to compromise our democratic values? Trying to see it from your POV

Noone is trying to vilify Russia, you guys need to stop saying that. Russia is what it is, and what it has been for years. The problem is that all evidence points to trump is being controlled by Russian leadership.

Saying that in an opinion piece, comment section, or message board is not evidence. The only possible evidence would be his refusal to say he is certain they "meddled" the same as others claim, but even that would be undercut by his very visible desire to fight against the narrative pushed by dems and media that Russia changed the election's outcome and gave him the presidency. Can a credible argument be made that he is blinded by what he wants to believe? Well yeah, absolutely if you believe that the Russians meddled. But being willfully blind out of political convenience is not proof of actual subservience. Claiming it is, well, that's exactly what Trump is doing in reverse.

 

[Gander]

I know about history, but I'll never understand why so many Americans apparently *want* to see Russians as the villain.

Like, stop that. It's another country far away, trying to be economically successful, same as any country. It has a dubious government, but so have Turkry, Hungary, Italy, China, and really the USA, too. Being wary is one thing, but this almost desire to hate Russia ... give it up.

You know Russia already attacked one of our allies right?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/12/world/europe/yulia-skripal-russia.html

 

[PkunkFury]

Everyone in the high levels of government knew there was no WMDs, it was all bullshit, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 either. This is the person you trust?

Yay, you found a clip of Mueller talking about WMDs, good job! Mueller is referring to the "evidence" presented by Powell in this clip. He did not investigate WMDs. He is part of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He would not have any ability to concoct evidence for WMDS in a foreign country. All he is saying here is that if the evidence presented by Powell is correct, it follows that domestic terrorism is a concern for the FBI. He is part of these proceedings as FBI head, and he is relaying what the information would mean on a national level. This is his job. But great job finding a 20 second clip and dishonestly interpreting it without context

Butina isn't related to the Mueller investigation so not sure why you are bringing that up.

I did not bring up Mueller, you did! I specifically said "DOJ"! Quit making things up

Butina was arrested as a Russian spy by the DOJ, which is exactly what the poster I replied to claimed hasn't happened. Multiple organizations are working on the Russia interference.

 

[Trey]

Because some realize that Russia isn't the mega threat the media makes them out to be. We've always been negative towards them just because they will not join the Liberal globalist agenda. It is counter-productive to continue negative relations with them.

holy shit lmao

 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

There's good reason to doubt US intel agencies. They've lied and gotten away with it. They faced no accountability for violating the 4th amendment. They lied to COngress about it. Still no repercussion. And the guy who lied about it now works on a Russian investigation comittee. Also the Vault 7 leak revealed the CIA can fake foreign fingerprints.

And to top it off, there's no sign that Meuller's indictment is based on US intel or whether its still based on Crowdstrike, a foreign entity with foreign ties. (That never got a second look on their findings or the evidence because they destroyed the evidence once they were done.)

And I would be wary of this happening while the one most outspoken voice on the wrongdoings of the military industrial complex and surveillance state is gagged and locked up in the Ecuadorian Embassy.

 

[norm9]

The fuck is a liberal globalist agenda? Sounds like a mad-lib for sad cucks.

 

[12Goblins]

There's good reason to doubt US intel agencies. They've lied and gotten away with it. They faced no accountability for violating the 4th amendment. They lied to COngress about it. Still no repercussion. And the guy who lied about it now works on a Russian investigation comittee. Also the Vault 7 leak revealed the CIA can fake foreign fingerprints.

And to top it off, there's no sign that Meuller's indictment is based on US intel or whether its still based on Crowdstrike, a foreign entity with foreign ties. (That never got a second look on their findings or the evidence because they destroyed the evidence once they were done.)

And I would be wary of this happening while the one most outspoken voice on the wrongdoings of the military industrial complex and surveillance state is gagged and locked up in the Ecuadorian Embassy.

What is your education level and what are your views on climate change? What about crisis actors? Vaccines? Surely we draw the line on Flat earth, right?

 

[dolabla]

This is true, but what about the fact that all signs are starting to indicate that our president is subservient to Vladimir putin? This should be alarming if you know history. Disregarding the fact that we have turned our backs to our real allies... Do we just not believe that vlad is controlling trump, or do we just not care? ie, vlad did trump a favor by helping him win an election, secure him russian investments, etc so now trump and his base see vlad as an ally to their cause, owing vlad big favors, but just not enough to compromise our democratic values? Trying to see it from your POV

Noone is trying to vilify Russia, you guys need to stop saying that. Russia is what it is, and what it has been for years. The problem is that all evidence points to trump is being controlled by Russian leadership.

If we did a thought expirement and pretended that evidence came to light that vlad had damming evidence over trump, thereby being able to manipulate trump, would this be enough to turn against trump? Or would you still have enough faith in trump that despite this, American and democratic values would not be compromised and this situation is still a net positive as a whole?

Not worried because Trump isn't working for Putin. It's just another doom and gloom scenario that has no basis in facts.

Whether it's he's a Russian agent, or he's going cause nuclear holocaust with North Korea, or he's going to destroy the economy, or millions of people are going to die because of his policies, etc. You know what they say about crying wolf...........

What Trump is trying to do is EXACTLY why I voted for him. Willing to break with the status quo. I'd rather be on the side of Trump, Ron/Rand Paul, than to be on the side that has destroyed regions like John "we need to blow up every country" McCain.

If wanting to get along with Russia doesn't work out, it just doesn't work out.

If you could actually show 100% evidence that Trump is working on behalf of Putin instead of conspiracy theories, then I would most definitely turn on Trump. That right there would actually be treason.

 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

What is your education level and what are your views on climate change? What about crisis actors? Vaccines? Surely we draw the line on Flat earth, right?

I draw the line at respecting clowns like you.

 

[Chiggs]

You want to put the blame on someone. Look at congress.

We can definitely agree on that.

the '80s called, they want their foreign policy back.

Doesn't look so hot. Does Romney get a bump here?

 

[12Goblins]

I draw the line at respecting clowns like you.

I deserved that.

 

[Tesseract]

is trump's lethal arming of ukraine evidence of his putin puppetry, what about his bombing of assad's syria? what about his enormous expelling of russian diplomats, sanctioning of oligarchs, dismantling of iran deal ...

oh noes he never criticizes putin, is diplomatic with putin, therefore treason and stoogery?

okie doke

 

[Forthefuture]

The fuck is a liberal globalist agenda? Sounds like a mad-lib for sad cucks.

It is the latest buzzword for self-oppressed man children. Get with the times man.

 

[12Goblins]

Tesseract you're embarrassing yourself. maybe look into those issues lol

 

[PkunkFury]

There's good reason to doubt US intel agencies. They've lied and gotten away with it. They faced no accountability for violating the 4th amendment. They lied to COngress about it. Still no repercussion. And the guy who lied about it now works on a Russian investigation comittee. Also the Vault 7 leak revealed the CIA can fake foreign fingerprints.

Mueller did not lie about WMDs. The clip posted doesn't contain Mueller lying about anything. He is reporting as to what the implications are domestically of the content (lies) that was provided by Bush's team. That is his job. Every intelligence agency in the US and NATO was reporting on these claims. You are twisting quotes from proceedings to discredit Mueller. This is an RT talking point. RT is the first (and only, beyond forums) hit when you google "Mueller lied about WMDs" with this video

Once again, Mueller was not even in a position to lie about WMDs. The FBI doesn't have jusidiction over Iraq. You clearly have no idea how the American government operates

Do you want to know who did lie about WMDs? John Bolton, Trump's National Security Advisor. If you are so morally opposed to the war in Iraq, why not make a thread about how Trump's National Security Advisor was one of the prime drivers into that war? I'm sure you'll get right on that...

And to top it off, there's no sign that Meuller's indictment is based on US intel or whether its still based on Crowdstrike, a foreign entity with foreign ties. (That never got a second look on their findings or the evidence because they destroyed the evidence once they were done.)

What does this mean? Some of the intel is foreign and some is from the US. They are taking intel from a large number of sources. Some is from Steele, some is from Dutch intelligence, some is from other EU allies/Israel, some is from third parties, some is internal. Why would you not want the FBI to consider all sources of intel when making a case? How does it benefit anyone (aside from Russia) to restrict themselves to US intel?

And I would be wary of this happening while the one most outspoken voice on the wrongdoings of the military industrial complex and surveillance state is gagged and locked up in the Ecuadorian Embassy.

of course you would

What is your education level and what are your views on climate change? What about crisis actors? Vaccines? Surely we draw the line on Flat earth, right?

He's a brand new account that came to a gaming forum of all places to push Russian talking points in defense of trump without providing any facts or sources...

 

[Tesseract]

Tesseract you're embarrassing yourself. maybe look into those issues lol

they ain't issues, just facts that support trump's toughness re: russia

sorry, mate

 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Pkunk, I was talking about James Clapper and not Mueller, but you do bring up that they lied about WMDs. So thiaks for that.

If they're using Crowdstrike and Steele Dossier then both of those sources are unreliable.

I think the people can only hold these powers to account if they ask for evidence. There's no reason to blindly trust US Intel and no reason to trust Putin's denial. Supply the evidence. This appeal to authority is a terrible idea.

And if you want links, then I'll give you links. I expected people engaging in this conversation to already know these things.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...a-and-should-be-fired/?utm_term=.9c021f90cb36



https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/confirmed-nsa-spying-millions-americans

https://freedomhacker.net/vault-7-marble-framework-cia-evaded-forensics-5361/

 

[Arkage]

If I was to fashion the tinfoil-hat right now, it almost feels like there may be a larger scheme at play where the things at surface level and the commentary you mentioned are just the very tip of it.

That was not an insult to you, it is just me looking at it and thinking how ridiculous this drama seems to appear (on the surface) with the complexity of everything that's involved.

As a side note, lol, has Trump ever mentioned "New World Order" yet like the all the presidents in the last 40-50 years?

I used to be a part of an end-times cultish Christian group back in the day, so I know all about the conspiracies surrounding a "New World Order." Of course now I think it's a bunch of baloney. I might as well start saying the Illuminati controls pop singers and rappers because of supposed demonic symbology in their videos. (This is a real thing people claim all the time through youtube).

In any case I don't think Obama has ever mentioned the phrase. He referenced an "international order" once in reference to the post-nuclear balance of power/NATO, since, I mean, NATO is an international order/organization of world leaders.

I think the people can only hold these powers to account if they ask for evidence. There's no reason to blindly trust US Intel and no reason to trust Putin's denial. Supply the evidence. This appeal to authority is a terrible idea.

The evidence and methods will come to light once the investigation is complete/when people start going to trial. You don't tip your hand until you're done, especially if you're still using those resources to gather evidence. Suffice it to say all of the Russian indictments and Flynn/Manafort have nothing to do with the dossier, and they certainly didn't rely solely upon cloudstrike as that company's job was literally just to trace IPs and find out how it was hacked. And if you're going to assert there's a conspiracy behind all of this then you've drunk the coolaid and I have no interest in further debating you.

It's also incredibly disingenuous to "both sides" the unethical behavior of Putin and US Intel. US intel is run by normal American citizens. Not secret shadow governments that live in secret bunkers and hang out with the Illuminati. US Intel clearly has the best interests of America in mind even if they fuck up sometimes. Trump even appointed the heads of both agencies - yet you think Trump can't trust his own appointees anymore than a murdering dictator that has a long history of trying to undermine the US? Christ, you sound like a Putin propaganda mouthpiece.

is trump's lethal arming of ukraine evidence of his putin puppetry, what about his bombing of assad's syria? what about his enormous expelling of russian diplomats, sanctioning of oligarchs, dismantling of iran deal ...

oh noes he never criticizes putin, is diplomatic with putin, therefore treason and stoogery?

Trump's arming of Ukraine was something his advisers constantly pushed for, as they actually give a shit about the geopolitical moves Russia is making. And in many ways Trump signing off on it was likely damage control for how his campaigned pushed the RNC to change it's policy platform on Ukraine to remove the language of supplying them "lethal defense weapons," which was largely seen as a pro-Russia move.

He bombed Syria but gave the Russians a heads up before hand so they wouldn't get mad or hurt in the bombing. And the expelling of diplomats only happened because Russia literally assassinated someone on UK soil, because they don't give a fuck. And the Iran deal has literally nothing to do with Russia, so I'm not sure why you brought that up.

This isn't going "tough" on Putin. He's doing the bare minimum to maintain and image that he's even handed and only being tough if they, you know, chemically bomb civilians or assassinate people on our allies soil. How very tough! Ripping up trade deals to cripple their economy would be tough. Tariffs would be tough. Making any sort of public accusation against them, which he still hasn't done, would go a long way towards dissipating the claim that he panders to Putin. But he explicitly refuses to do so. And once again this past week he says he trusts Putin more than his own intelligence agencies of which he appointed the leadership for. If you don't think that is fucked up than you have no understanding of the political power that words have.

 

[12Goblins]

they ain't issues, just facts that support trump's toughness re: russia

sorry, mate

did you even look into the syrian bombing ? lol =[

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

Pkunk, I was talking about James Clapper and not Mueller, but you do bring up that they lied about WMDs. So thiaks for that.

If they're using Crowdstrike and Steele Dossier then both of those sources are unreliable.

I think the people can only hold these powers to account if they ask for evidence. There's no reason to blindly trust US Intel and no reason to trust Putin's denial. Supply the evidence. This appeal to authority is a terrible idea.

And if you want links, then I'll give you links. I expected people engaging in this conversation to already know these things.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...a-and-should-be-fired/?utm_term=.9c021f90cb36



https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/confirmed-nsa-spying-millions-americans

https://freedomhacker.net/vault-7-marble-framework-cia-evaded-forensics-5361/

The ironic thing about this is that he had to clarify the testimony of the term "wittingly".

because right now there are dozens (allegedly) people being unwittingly part of a scheme that doesn't exist to some.

 

[PkunkFury]

Pkunk, I was talking about James Clapper and not Mueller, but you do bring up that they lied about WMDs. So thiaks for that.

Clapper left his official position in 2017 so obviously I had no idea who you were talking about. You brought this up in the same sentence you claim "There's good reason to doubt US intel agencies.". Why on Earth would I assume you are talking about a nonprofit, non-partisan Russian investigation committee with no official capacity?

If they're using Crowdstrike and Steele Dossier then both of those sources are unreliable.

The sources are only reliable/unreliable if proven so. They start with this and other information and use it to search for evidence. They are also starting with the evidence that the hacks took place (the obvious dissemination of information), the evidence from the Dutch intelligence team, and mountains more

I think the people can only hold these powers to account if they ask for evidence. There's no reason to blindly trust US Intel and no reason to trust Putin's denial. Supply the evidence. This appeal to authority is a terrible idea.

This is exactly what is happening. Evidence is forthcoming. We've only recently seen the first arrest that will go to trial

And if you want links, then I'll give you links. I expected people engaging in this conversation to already know these things.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...a-and-should-be-fired/?utm_term=.9c021f90cb36

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/confirmed-nsa-spying-millions-americans

https://freedomhacker.net/vault-7-marble-framework-cia-evaded-forensics-5361/

Once again, I had no reason to believe you were talking about Clapper. I don't understand why we should care about Clapper at this point. He's had no power for awhile and he is not affecting the investigation
You posted that immediately after I refuted someone who claimed Mueller lied about WMDs, so it looked like you were making the exact same claim about Mueller which is a hot take right now

 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Why should we care about Clapper? Because he didn't act alone. The Intel community knows they can lie. They have learned there is no accountability. Thus they are at liberty to mislead the public. "Evidence is forthcoming" is not a good answer. Leading people down a narrative with a promise of evidence sometime later on is public manipulation. Demand the evidence first. Accountability must be reintroduced or we're dealing with a problem much bigger than the right/left tribal war.

 

[Hotel Security]

is trump's lethal arming of ukraine evidence of his putin puppetry, what about his bombing of assad's syria? what about his enormous expelling of russian diplomats, sanctioning of oligarchs, dismantling of iran deal ...

oh noes he never criticizes putin, is diplomatic with putin, therefore treason and stoogery?

Yeah, I don't get why it's so hard for folks to comprehend that it's perfectly normal for Trump to disagree with Putin on many things while, at the same time, agreeing with him on other things.

This is basically how humans work in a nutshell yet we pretend that these are cartoon character who are always evil or always good so we can easily label them. Politics really does dumb people down. When people here get into a real workplace setting, they would see this in action but sadly too many folks on these boards are younger people who haven't experienced this yet.

 

[Arkage]

"Evidence is forthcoming" is not a good answer. Leading people down a narrative with a promise of evidence sometime later on is public manipulation. Demand the evidence first. Accountability must be reintroduced or we're dealing with a problem much bigger than the right/left tribal war.

Do you just not understand how trials and investigations work concerning when evidence is presented? Because it really seems like you don't. I mean, did you even read the gigantic release of information about the indicted Russia hackers? Because that goes into great detail about the methods they used and the order of events and the gritty details etc. A lot of evidence is already out there. The Intel community has it's narrative, Trump has his, and Putin has his. Guess who I'm going to most likely believe? Not an orange pussy grabbing, pedophile endorsing dictator-wannabe, and not an actual dictator who assassinates reporters and political opponents so he can stay in power. I put my trust in the normal American citizens that are actually doing their job to the best of their ability to investigate and secure our country.

 

[PkunkFury]

Why should we care about Clapper? Because he didn't act alone. The Intel community knows they can lie. They have learned there is no accountability. Thus they are at liberty to mislead the public.

The Intel community will not be able to lie in court, they will have to provide evidence or they will not succeed. From what I understand, unless she's given back to Russia, Butina will be tried in court.
Russian intelligence also lies, so I'm not sure why I should trust them over US Intel. I'd prefer to go by what is uncovered via the investigation and presented in court

"Evidence is forthcoming" is not a good answer. Leading people down a narrative with a promise of evidence sometime later on is public manipulation. Demand the evidence first. Accountability must be reintroduced or we're dealing with a problem much bigger than the right/left tribal war.

This is exactly how the system works, though. Why would you expect the special council to present all evidence as it is discovered, before making formal accusations? That would be a recipe for evidence to be destroyed, tampered with, perps to flee the country, witnesses to be corrupted, etc. I'm not sure what you want here

We have the indictments and affidavit from the past few days. It gives us indications as to what evidence will be presented and what crimes the investigation is uncovering. We will not know any more until the investigation is ready to make more formal accusations, or until trials start

 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

PKunk you're talking yourself towards how much of a stunt this whole thing is. I doubt the Russia stuff goes to trial. Maybe Butina does. We don't know what she has to do with anything else. The hacking indictment was specifically made in such a way where it will never go to trial and thus never have to be proven.

This is how you win the court of public opinion by sacrificing winning in any actual court: You make suggestions and have those suggestions repeated through the press. You string out a narrative. You promise real evidence later on but it never comes. You create a smoke machine and say "where there's smoke there must be fire". Doing this for a long enough period of time lowers the public's expectation of proof. The more you use this tactic, the lower the barrier for proof comes to be.

Remember Papadooulos? This was October's proof of Russian collusion. He plead guilty to not including his meeting meeting with a Professor who had Russian ties. This Prof apparently had info that Russia had thousands of Hilary's emails.

But those emails never materialized and the emails that did materials did so on Wikileaks via a Freedom of Information Act. The dates also do not line up with the email dump. But it was plenty of smoke and some were convinced that was the proof. It wasn't but it lowered the standard for future "proof". We're now at the point where an accusation is taken as proof.