1. So pretty much Trump family ( not trump himself ) wanted dirt on Hillary as a just in case at the time.Sounds like standard politics. But hey, nevermind about all those people that died before testimony could be given on Hillary. What was the count? 40ish? Or any of the other medalling (sp?) of the election from the left. ( Some rights are guilty as well, but there is a percentage of them called RINOs for a reason ).

    Also, trump family being more transparent about this than Dems from what I'm seeing.

    -edit- we must also consider the source. Let's get information from multiple different sources. Not just known Dems oor Republicans ones.
  2. Getting dirt on your political enemies from foreign state especially Russia? Is that how it supposed to be done?
    For USA election process to be influenced by Putin?

    I was under the assumption that's the other way around. For your country to have power over other countries.

    And that has nothing to do with the issue but hey, go ahead use the deflection strategy.

    Transparent? They were forced. The emails are one year old so only resurfaced after everyone started to dig. We already knew about them, about the meeting.
    So they were forced to show their cards in order to prevent other stuff to come up.
    That's incompetent and desperate.
    If they show this which goes against so much they said in the past and what Russian government said what else are they hiding?

    What source? The emails come directly from Trump Jr himself. What other source to consider?
  3. nothing burger
  4. 1. There isn't supposed to be any dirt on anyone to be used by any party in an ideal election process. Unfortunately, sometimes it takes a foreign power to expose 'deep shit' to the surface. Wikileaks should not have had to do what was done to influence the election for Trump.

    2 Election process influenced by putin versus how many foreign county donors and how much into the Clinton foundation to help her win and secure favors from her? Therefore having power over her ( and the Dem party ) and thus other countries having power over the US.

    3. The Dems want to limit the issue to 'Meddling in the election by Russia' so they can look good. The true is 'Meddling in the election' in general which would then bring in Dem party and have them guilty far worse. This is not deflection ( unlike Hillary completely blaming everyone else but herself for losing ). This is bring in the true issue at hand. Said 40ish or so people testimonies' could worked out to be either for or against either party and added more for the voter to consider. By limiting things in the fashion in the Dem fashion, it casts a vote for 'It's okay for Democrats to do it for themselves, but not okay when it is used against them.'

    4. Notice I did not say completely transparent. Compare this to the Clinton emails. There wasn't exactly much coming forward by Dems ( that I could find ) aside from the one Dem that leaks the emails to wikileaks and paid his life for it. If the emails were already known about, etc. Then why the resurfacing if nothing came out of it because of the 'russian agent' not deliverying? Making the republicans look bad but more attack the Trump family. if Hillary had won, chances are these emails wouldn't have resurfaced. Not to mention Loretta Lynch using her power to mess with things ( investigation vs matter ).

    5. Another person might call it 'lose the battle, but win the war.' 'Quit while you are ahead'. Cut losses early to prevent greater losses in the long run. Done throughout history by winning and losing empires.

    6. Good question to be asked of both parties. What else is Republican party hiding, but mainly what else is Democrat hiding that they hae to go so far as to give America a crash course in 50 differents ways that a president can be kept from office and/or taken out of office. Especially considering the mainstream left ran the 'anti-hillary' evidence at a bare minimum to try to do damage control. While the 'Damage Trump' agenda goes on and on and on ad naseum.

    7. Sources of information that will inevitably stem due to things being looked into beyond these resurfaced emails. For all we know this 'Russian Agent' could have been a plant.
    Potential interpretation to be pushed by the Left: OMG!! Trump and family to be bed with Russia to eliminate political opponents.
    Potential interpretation to be pushed by the Right: We didn't want to bring it to light because nothing came of it. The 'Russian agent' did not come through. So there was nothing to find out. End of story.
    If the 'Russian agent' did come through, then it would have been the responsibility of Trump Jr to report information to the appropriate authorities. Even if many of thoee authorities were in Dem pocket. Or make the choice of saying 'Screw everyone ' and leak it out to the public. Somewhat like Wikileaks fashion.

    -sidenote: Do note that I am Independant and chose the 'lesser of two evils'. Cane may have put it as the hanging noose versus gullotine ( think that it was how he put it ), but it was thanks to the hanging noose that all this juicy political shit gets to be found out and we can't trust no politician thanks to the 'extra time'.
  5. CNN Collusion News Network

  6. What Clinton did is irrelevant in this case. you keep saying that Clinton colluded as well, that she apparently murders people (checked the list and is pulling over 3 decades of deaths but sure. lets make them all victims of her and bill's) is not applicable in this situation.
    she is not the president.

    Trump is and his people.

    So while all that bad stuff DNC did might have influenced your vote. It does not change the problem of having Russia help in the election. What you are doing is simple deflection. Ah look at those guys they are much worse. This is not valid argument against or for the issue.

    As eastern European (although not living there) America's weakening power and influence over the world worried me. Now having Russia not only playing around in Syria, East Ukraine but toying with presidential election (which just 20 years ago would have resulted in impeachment. Seeing how easily they fought Clinton) is really worrisome. Nothing good can come from it.
  7. @HC - keep in mind what you're saying, too. You're saying that Clintons can cover up 40 murders, but couldn't stop the FBI director from writing a few nastygrams about her emails. To my knowledge, the Clintons murdering people is a hoax without any verification. Here's the Snopes on it:


    You're also saying it was up to the Russians to dig up the dirt. Are your ends justifying the means? What they did was completely illegal, and could actually constitute an act of war. That's worth it to discover she's two-faced and had talks with wallstreet execs? She's a politician, of course she's two-faced.

    What Clinton did with her emails - send classified emails over an unclassified network - is an offense that most underlings get fired for. It's listed as that grievous because it potentially allows foreign powers to get classified information.

    What Russia did was actually hack us for classified information, and you're saying it's good because otherwise it would never have turned up that they mishandled classified information?

    The Trump administration officials lied under oath, a criminal(!!) offense, saying that they never met with anyone from Russia. They did, evidence showed they did, and only now are they begrudgingly coming clean once journalists (the same ones Trump decries as "fake news") proved they did.

    You're willing to believe wild rumors about the Clintons, and overlook the Trump campaigns numerous lies and flaws. You may want to reassess your independence.

    Politicians on both sides have been meddling in the elections, thanks to gerrymandering. You can at least write that off as the elections still being in the US's control. You're saying the Russians meddling in our election isn't a big deal, because Democrats do it too. No, it's a big deal because it's a foreign power asserting control over our leadership.

    It worked, too - Putin got his puppet. Trump's already planning on returning compounds to Russia that they lost when Obama kicked them out for meddling in the election.


    Note that this is the Hill - it's conservatively biased.

    Trump also wanted to work with Russia on a cyber security initiative, and only backed off once everyone and their mother told him it was an incredibly dumb idea. He's bending over backwards to be friends with Putin, and Putin's just doing whatever he wants in return. Every intelligence agency is saying that Russia actively interfered with the elections, and we want to ignore that? Just look at what's happened since he won.
    dreed likes this.
  8. Also, because why not, 3 subjects in one day!


    Long story short, FDA demanded actual studies be done before looking at a drug. The CEO went to Trump, now the FDA has a sudden reversal and says it'll evaluate the drug.

    Congress is supposed to stop things like this from happening, but I think checks and balances is long past dead at this point.
  9. Hah.


    Trump Jr himself was under impression that she is working for government.

    Again HC. This is again deflection. It's not addressing the problem but instead trying to create a secondary target to divert from the problem. a tactic politicians love to use.
    Both sides of your government spectrum. They are equally to be blamed for the actions.

    And the second link is hilarious bad. There is no even attempt to be balanced. it's like reddit poster instead of journalism. Its unreadable.

    That's my attack on the sources of info so let's move on.

    Trump junior met in his mind with foreign agent connected to the government of a country who has a bit of beef with USA.
    In order to get dirt on political enemy.

    He willingly was allowing Russia to influence who is going to run the country as well as provide blackmail against said person.

    Now I am in complete agreement that nothing came out of THAT meeting. Otherwise he would not release the emails at any cost.

    What emails show is that they have been lieing all the time about their Russian connections and are willing to betray the country just to get in power.

    While I can't speak about the legality of that. I've seen enough of this kind of actions in history including my own country that those actions arw really bad.

    At best it makes Trump aides naive and incompetent.
    At worst they don't give a fuck and want to make money.

    I'm leaning to first one as other actions show lack of their understanding on how things operate.


    Apologies for my style of writing. I'm at work during lunch posting from phone.
  10. So before I say anything, I want to say that I'm very, very thankful for the links. Citing sources is going to be the biggest way to influence my thought processes, as I like to get as close to the original material as I can.

    I do, however, want to bring a few things to your attention.

    Mike Cernovich - from Wikipedia:
    (I hope you can read that, the forum and copy/paste tend to do be wonky for me)

    Essentially he's known for propagating false information without correction. There is already one person going to jail for "self-investigating" the pizza parlor because of these baseless claims.

    Ariseresist.com - I had never heard of this site, but as Dreed mentioned it doesn't even pretend it's not biased. However, what I wanted to bring to your attention is this - the was registered for 1 year back in April (2017), and it was registered privately/anonymously. If you compare that to say, Fox News, who registered their domain(s) extensively and publicly, it looks extremely bad. These domain registrations are the red flags for "fake news" sites. They pop up out of nowhere, say what they want, and disappear when they want.

    I thought Constitution.com might be similar, but it's actually not - it was registered back in 2010, so it's far less likely (though not impossible) it's "fake news." I poked around the site a bit, and the following stuck out to me:

    • Nearly every article on their root website is written by one person - Andrew West.
    • The articles seem to be opinion pieces.
    Example: http://constitution.com/shariah-law...terrifying-tactics-in-refugee-rocked-germany/

    A lone gunman is not sharia law being enforced. That's like me waving a gun around and someone else saying that I'm a judge capable of enforcing the law... with my gun. The writer references two sources, one of which is Breitbart. That's a big flag. The 2nd references an article (in German) talking about possible Chechen criminals targeting Chechens as "morality police." That's a far cry from "sharia law enforcement" and I have no idea where he's getting "refugee rocked Germany."

    I caution you on using sites like these that reference sources that provide known false information. Alex Jones has been widely rebuked for posting potentially dangerous remarks that have no factual basis, so when I see people or articles that link to them I'm very wary.

    Ariseresist.com seems to have come out of nowhere, and doesn't seem to intend on sticking around. If you look at the headlines, it's got all of the "clickbait checkboxes." When I see 'click here to find out' I know the site is more interested in my ad revenue than anything else.
    dreed likes this.
  11. Formatting can be an issue sometimes, highlight the text and use the eraser in the upper left of the comment box, next to the font options. It will remove any extra formatting and default it to the skin's formatting
    XandorXerxes and San Goku like this.
  12. This whole thing with Kushner is getting ridiculous... I have been interviewed by OPM because friends have used me as a character witness on their security clearance forms. It's a federal felony to lie or intentionally omit information on that form. Yet, he's added 100 names to the list of meetings he hadn't disclosed before when he first filled out the form. Not only that, he did not list the people that were in the meeting with him and JR.
    San Goku likes this.
  13. Hillary should have been fired for what she did. I don't see any reason Kushner is any different. Comey was unable to find malicious intent with Hillary, and let her off with a slap on the wrist. I'm finding it very difficult for Kushner to have anything but malicious intent - he left it off because he knew it would look bad for a variety of reasons, and potentially jeopardize Trump or his chances at getting a clearance.

    Hopefully one day perjury, obstruction of justice, and clearance penalties will get enforced on politicians.
    superbob likes this.
  14. You can't find anything shady with Hilary but you can with Kushner? :rolleyes:
  15. Umm...what? Oppositional research as a basic concept isn't some corruption of civil politicking, it's a foundational tool upon which most elections are won and lost. Gone are the days(if they ever existed at all) when a governmental election was an exercise in meritorious evaluation and selection of the most qualified candidate. Winning is about juxtaposing your "Virtues" with that of your opponent and then declaring with unbridled fervor the imminent destruction of democratic unity and populace fellowship if the unthinkable "Other" assumes power. Nothing about that is inherently dirty when you realize that a binary choice dips naturally into the waters of "Good Vs. Bad, Right Vs. Wrong" as it was designed to do. The process becomes murky when the sediment starts to pile up and water turns to mud, and as politicians are wont to do, they cant resist the urge to fling it in excessive quantities.

    That said, What Jr. did wasn't on its face egregious.... but context is a bitch with 3 inch nails. Those emails contained damning evidence of political shortsightedness and duplicity on the part of the trump team who've been declaring categorical innocence ala "Richard kimble" from the fugitive for months and months, that there was not a patina of truth to the allegations that any sort of coordination no matter how small and insignificant with Russia or affiliated proxies ever took place.

    Add into the mix the constant fluctuation of the story, let alone the players present, and the language included in the emails that lay out in no uncertain terms the vested interest the Russian government had in supporting then candidate trump and we arrive at one unavoidable question:

    What would the story be with the shoe on the other foot?
    Rhetorical question, I already know the answer.

    Oh come now, lets maintain at least a semblance of consistency here. The democrats are utilizing partisan gamesmanship in keeping a spotlight on the Russian angle, leapfrogging from outright hacking and election theft to "Influencing electoral sovereignty" in the same manner the republicans are jumping from "No collusion" to "But is it a crime?", which the answer is technically no. But for a majority of the election and much into the waning months of trumps first hundred days they spliced their denouncements of the accusation with affronted tones that suggested they considered it an ethically impeachable(emphasis on "ethically") offense that was being falsely weaponized by acrimonious LOOOSERS! Now the talking heads are peppering their obsequious defensive battle strategies(also known as "Talking points") with oblique advocacy via the "Its technically not illegal" defense.

    Its all S-T-U-P-I-D.

    Trump has damaged himself to a far greater extreme than the democrats have and quite frankly, ever could. It was a foregone conclusion that those jackasses were going to be obstructionists regardless of the congeniality of their opponent, expecting anything less was a naïve oversight on the part of the Grande Old Pissants. But trump is and continues to be his own worst enemy when it comes to his credibility and the examples are A:Well documented, And B: Too numerous for me to even begin to delineate. Instead of accepting the inevitable game that was going to be played, his Id and ego refused to make policy and governing his first priority and instead have spent the entirety of the first leg of his first term Re-litigating every personal slight and perceived offense known to man because his engorged pride is incapable of withstanding even the weakest of love-taps.

    For a man so adept at political pugilism, he appears to have been born with chin comprised entirely of sugar glass.

    The analogy was an allusion to death, I.e both choices lead to mutually assured inescapable destruction.
    Whenever you choose the "Lesser of two evils", you're choosing the method not the outcome.
    Arguing its better to die "This way" rather than "That way" may be comfortingly poetic, but in the end its just a pretty ornament you place on top of a tree fire in an effort to make yourself feel better about your values burning to a cinder.
  16. I'm so confused, I'm not sure where any part of that statement came from. They're both shady as hell, and they both broke the law. Comey let Hillary off because of her intent, thus the slap of the wrist. I used the same standard (intent) to point out Kushner fails it. I'm essentially pointing out the double standard of the Trump administration, since they called for Hillary's head but won't touch Kushner.
    San Goku likes this.
  17. So... does this count as blackmail, given our conversation on the CNN journalist? Dissent with the new federal voter registration database, have your information published online. By our government.


    Guess we're not getting any reasonable privacy laws in the near future.

Share This Page