• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Trump "No Answer" on Russian Associations during 01/11/2017 Press Conference

Cardinal said:
I gotta hand it to you. You definitely know how to stay in character.
Click to expand...

Being resolute is not a bad thing to some, look what we are up against.
 
iguanaman said:
And by "we" you mean Trump, Putin and you? That is disgusting.
Click to expand...

Not really. I meant Islam. A group of more resolute people you will never meet.
 
Objective Voice said:
I have to say I am stunned! :shock:

When asked and then further pressed at the end of his national press conference, President-elect Donald J. Trump refused to answer the direct question as to whether or not he or anyone directly connected to him or if anyone from his campaign had any association with Russian intelligence. Trump went on a long rant (once again) about how Russia, China, Japan, Mexico and all other nations would respect America once he became President, but on the question of Russian intelligence associations itself, he outright refused to answer the question even when further pressed after his press conference but before leaving the conference area.

No "no comment", no "I don't know, but I'll look into it"...nothing. He just walked off the stage and refused to answer.

To me, that rebuff/non-answer is more disturbing than the contents of any domestic intelligence report whether compiled by our federal intelligence agencies or some private investigative/consulting firm.
Click to expand...

The press screamed for months to have a press conference to address how he was going to avoid conflicts of interest. He postponed his press conference and the press got pretty haywire about it. This was the postponed press conference. Have you seen on discussion about the actual subject of the planned and announced subject of the press conference (conflicts of interest)? CNN published a totally idiotic and false article about him and he refused to answer questions for the same blatantly dishonest news organizaiton. Color me surprised. ****em. If I was him I would pull their White House press pass.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Doonesbury nailed it back before Christmas!

trumpbart-kkk.jpg
Click to expand...

There's that word "beautiful". I can't even remember how many times he said that yesterday. And every time he did, I cringed.

Everything is "beautiful" now.
 
RickJames3000 said:
This is becoming SOP for Trump and his rightwing lackeys. Evade questions or offer nothing of substance, and then complain how the "biased MSM" got it wrong again. It's not a genius approach unless you only have to placate the fools who support you.
Click to expand...



He could be like obama take 9 minutes to answer each question, without any substance.
 
NIMBY said:
The Anti-Defamation League is none too happy with trump for his nazi comments about the media, scolding him for trivializing the Holocaust.

We've been through a Nixon/Agnew presidency that beat up on the media during Vietnam.

Now we have a president who borrowed a lot from Nixon's playbook on his way to the top
Click to expand...

So many of us have been angry at Democratic lawmakers through the years who use Nazi Germany as a point of comparison. Remember when Dick Durbin compared the troops to Nazi Germany? Ohhhh how the right, myself included, screamed and pounded the table in outrage that he diminished the impact of the Holocaust and how terrible it was to compare our troops to the Nazis.

Trump made a terrible mistake doing that, and except for his devoted followers, most people with any sense will acknowledge that it was a mistake. I hope he doesn't make that mistake again.
 
Cardinal said:
The more I thought back on the press conference the more I took in how combative he was to the very notion of a media that reveals critical things about him. This will be the most opaque and least accountable President in modern history.

As for what the press conference was intended to accomplish, it was bread and circuses for his supporters who want to hear him tell the media to go to hell. It was also an opportunity to tell all of his critics to go to hell by mentioning all the silly straw man arguments against him, especially on the issue of the Emoluments clause.
Click to expand...

That sums it up perfectly, deny, deny, deny; lie, lie, lie.....


He plays to the pent up resentments of media, along with the meme's and fake news. As it is in Machiavelli's "The Prince", as long as he can keep them angry over **** they have no control.....he has their minds and hearts.

It's not rocket science, convince enough people there is a threat to their way of life and they will let anyone do anything, especially in the excited states.

And they been fooling you since the 50's and the ****ing "domino theory"...a 'theory' that claimed the lives of 500 thousand Americans and made the US a laughing stock. Trump will find his 'domino theory' and use it to cancel elections maybe.
 
Last edited:
Fearandloathing said:
That sums it up perfectly, deny, deny, deny; lie, lie, lie.....


He plays to the pent up resentments of media, along with the meme's and fake news. As it is in Machiavelli's "The Prince", as long as he can keep them angry over **** they have no control.....he has their minds and hearts.

It's not rocket science, convince enough people there is a threat to their way of life and they will let anyone do anything, especially in the excited states.

And they been fooling you since the 50's and the ****ing "domino theory"...a 'theory' that claimed the lives of 500 thousand Americans and made the US a laughing stock. Trump will find his 'domino theory' and use it to cancel elections maybe.
Click to expand...

500 thousand Americans?
 
calamity said:
President pleading the Fifth :lol:
Click to expand...

While it's true the past U.S. Presidents have used plausible deniability to protect themselves including pleading the 5th when it suited them, in every situation going as far back as Pres. Nixon, each have been caught in some way, shape or form for not coming forward OR were forced to either tell the truth or in Nixon's case resign.

So, I get that it happens. What I find troubling is how easy it has become for some people to be so glib about it as if this act of hiding the truth on any given matter behind legal barriers from the American people is okay.

And, the knuckle-draggers were worried about Hillary's ethics. :shock:
Click to expand...

A quaint slight at one's intelligence, but I'll have you know I never believed Hillary and Bill were working completely above board. In fact, I went so far as to paint a scenario as to how they could have schemed once Hillary became Sec. of State to slide projects her way while Bill continued collecting donations toward his Foundation. In the end, however, I was clear in my position that you'd never be able to draw that direct line from Bill's fundraising efforts to Hillary's project approvals at State.

That aside, it's not the same as a president(-elect) possible being aided by a foreign government in a covert manner to get elected. The two don't equate at all.
 
AlbqOwl said:
You must not have caught his press conference this morning in which he clearly and calmly stated that he had no business dealings of ANY kind in Russia, no loans, no debts, no association whatsoever. He believes Russia has hacked us as we have them. He doesn't know what Putin thinks about him or if better relationships can be accomplished with Russia. He does see it is a profitable opportunity for the USA for him to try.
Click to expand...

I caught it. And to ensure I didn't misunderstand him and his answer to the question, I watched the press conference again just moments ago. The first part of the reporter's 2-part question was:

Can you stand here today once and for all and say that no one connected to you or your campaign had any contact with Russia leading up to and during the presidential campaign...?
Click to expand...

Yes, he responded to questions concerning is business operations and business (financial) interests and as they involved Russia, but he never answer the question of contact with Russia outside of himself, his family or members of his campaign.
 
Objective Voice said:
While it's true the past U.S. Presidents have used plausible deniability to protect themselves including pleading the 5th when it suited them, in every situation going as far back as Pres. Nixon, each have been caught in some way, shape or form for not coming forward OR were forced to either tell the truth or in Nixon's case resign.

So, I get that it happens. What I find troubling is how easy it has become for some people to be so glib about it as if this act of hiding the truth on any given matter behind legal barriers from the American people is okay.
Click to expand...
It's not OK. And, I suspect it will eventually blow up in his face. But, yes, it is troubling to see that those who support him are turning a blind eye to this obvious problem with his integrity. In fact, it's frustrating.



A quaint slight at one's intelligence, but I'll have you know I never believed Hillary and Bill were working completely above board. In fact, I went so far as to paint a scenario as to how they could have schemed once Hillary became Sec. of State to slide projects her way while Bill continued collecting donations toward his Foundation. In the end, however, I was clear in my position that you'd never be able to draw that direct line from Bill's fundraising efforts to Hillary's project approvals at State.

That aside, it's not the same as a president(-elect) possible being aided by a foreign government in a covert manner to get elected. The two don't equate at all.
Click to expand...
I never for one minute thought the Clintons were clean. It's one of the main reasons I did not vote for her. But, I suspect the bigger reason, at least for me, was that I did not want to see the likes of Rahm Emanuel, Mark Penn, Terry McAuliff et al back in Washington. Add to that the Clinton strangle hold on the Democratic party would have become entrenched.

So, Trump's victory is bittersweet. The Clintons and their henchmen have been slain. The downside is that we now have Trump, and the possibility that he is a Russian mole. :(
 
Fearandloathing said:
That sums it up perfectly, deny, deny, deny; lie, lie, lie.....


He plays to the pent up resentments of media, along with the meme's and fake news. As it is in Machiavelli's "The Prince", as long as he can keep them angry over **** they have no control.....he has their minds and hearts.

It's not rocket science, convince enough people there is a threat to their way of life and they will let anyone do anything, especially in the excited states.

And they been fooling you since the 50's and the ****ing "domino theory"...a 'theory' that claimed the lives of 500 thousand Americans and made the US a laughing stock. Trump will find his 'domino theory' and use it to cancel elections maybe.
Click to expand...

"Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
 
Absentglare said:
"Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Click to expand...

Link?
 
Absentglare said:
I kinda sympathize with Trump, how the hell would he know if ANYONE on his campaign had ANY association with Russia? However, he really should have responded with a "Not that i'm aware of," or something.
Click to expand...

I agree, but he couldn't do that. Why? Because he'd be lying. How do I know that? Because there's a video on YouTube of his son, Donald Trump, Jr. conducting an interview with a woman (whose identity is unknown, but I assume she's a journalist) where he admits to having visited Moscow recently. (The video is dated as being published on October 11, 2016 so it can be assumed he's referring having visited Russia in the summer of 2015.)



On top of that, we already know his former political adviser, Paul Manifort, had business dealings in the Ukraine. So, he really couldn't say no to that question given these to clear connections. Still, had he just said, "Yes, my son who attempted to do business in Russia but wasn't successful and my former political advisor, Paul Manifort, who as you know resigned because of how he believed his past business dealings in Russia might harm my electability," he could have put the issue to rest right then and there. But he didn't which leads me to believe there's more to this story than he's letting on.

It's very telling that he had a press conference. It's also telling that he explicitly acknowledged Russia's role in the hacking (good for you Trump). To me, he looks scared, like a deer in headlights. I've never seen him this scared; makes me think these allegations might have merit.
Click to expand...

He didn't look scared to me, but he was evasive especially at the end. That's what threw up red flags for me because as I stated above, it would have been so easy for him to answer that question with a clear, understandable explanation.

(Sidenote: I haven't reviewed your linked articles yet. I'll respond back after I've read over the material.)
 
LowDown said:
So the idea that he has not denied Russian associations is false.
Click to expand...

Again, it's not just about him. It's everyone else who makes up his inner circle - his wife (his place of birth notwithstanding), his adult children -- Donald, Jr., Eric, Ivanka -- and members of his campaign staff both former and current.

Everyone who answers speaking strictly to Donald J. Trump himself complete misunderstand the question that was posed.
 
Objective Voice said:
I have to say I am stunned! :shock:

When asked and then further pressed at the end of his national press conference, President-elect Donald J. Trump refused to answer the direct question as to whether or not he or anyone directly connected to him or if anyone from his campaign had any association with Russian intelligence. Trump went on a long rant (once again) about how Russia, China, Japan, Mexico and all other nations would respect America once he became President, but on the question of Russian intelligence associations itself, he outright refused to answer the question even when further pressed after his press conference but before leaving the conference area.

No "no comment", no "I don't know, but I'll look into it"...nothing. He just walked off the stage and refused to answer.

To me, that rebuff/non-answer is more disturbing than the contents of any domestic intelligence report whether compiled by our federal intelligence agencies or some private investigative/consulting firm.
Click to expand...

He has answered this question so many times it's ridiculous. He has repeatedly stated he has had no contact with Russians.
 
apdst said:
If he said no, you would say he's lying. Instead, he gives some far out response; coercing people to talk about the far out answer, instead.

And Libbos call him stupid. :lamo
Click to expand...

Clearly, you've forgotten, ignore or are completely unaware of the interview posted to YouTube where his son, Donald, Jr was interviewed about his business interest in Russia or his former political advisor, Paul Manifort, resigning over his business dealings in the Ukraine. So, yes, if he has answered "NO", I would have said he was lying. It's the fact that he said nothing that gave me pause.
 
Lutherf said:
Who are you trying to kid? Have you never seen how these scenarios play out? If he answered the question then the next two hours would have been CNN explaining how his answer really didn't clear anything up. Frankly, his "You're fake news" response was probably his best option because now other news outlets can talk about that instead of the ridiculous memo.
Click to expand...

Then you're all but admitting that his tactic was nothing more than deflecting from the topic at-hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom