• 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!

Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence

Rogue Valley said:
:prof Everything to the left of Breitbart is fake news.
Click to expand...


Which is indeed everything.

Breitbart people remain convinced Andrew Breitbart's death was murder ordered by Obama. One of many ordered by Obama. Rightwingwatch explains the Bannon, er, Breitbart lunacy...


Garrow: Breitbart’s ‘Big Mouth’ Got Him, Michael Hastings & Tom Clancy All Killed By President Obama

October 22, 2013

Garrow also revealed that the Obama administration was responsible for the deaths of right-wing blogger Andrew Breitbart, journalist Michael Hastings, and novelist Tom Clancy, all of whom knew that Obama was, in reality, an agent of the Saudi Arabian government. In fact, Garrow said, it was the fact that Breitbart couldn’t keep his mouth shut about it that caused all three of them to be killed:

Garrow: Breitbart’s ‘Big Mouth’ Got Him, Michael Hastings & Tom Clancy All Killed By President Obama | Right Wing Watch


Lunatics in the White House. Flynn getting evacuated in this flap changes nothing in there.
 
Erod said:
Russia wants that oil in Crimea.
Click to expand...

Russia's not the only one. Trump wants it, too. Rachael Maddow has done a few segments on her show on how U.S. sanctions put a halt on a big U.S./Russian oil deal that went south once the Obama Administration imposed sanctions on Russia for invading Crimea. The additional sanctions he put on them before leaving office didn't help matters at all.
 
upsideguy said:
1. Over the past 15 years, the FBI pretty much watches all calls between America and Russian officials, as well as officials of most Arab countries. As a caller, you would have to be pretty stupid not to know you are being watched.
Click to expand...

In and of itself, is there anything illegal (or immoral) in the December 2016 phone call between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyek? Even if it talked of sanctions?

I mean, correct me if wrong, but at the time it happened, Obama had just kicked out several long-standing Russian diplomats. It doesn't seem odd that one of them would ask an acquaintance with potential influence coming in, 'Hey, what's gonna be up with the new administration? Please let my folks back in the global sandbox!'

2. The Russians meddled in the US election of which Trump was the beneficiary. They have been investigating that since July, as was an attack on US sovereignty by an arch enemy. Investigations go where the trail of evidence leads them.
Click to expand...

I get there is a palpable desperation for any explanation of the 2016 election other than "Middle America voted for Trump, and with the Electoral College's distribution of votes to expressly safeguard against pure majority (mob) rule, Trump won." But who did this sway? Grandma Moses in Nebraska was not swayed by Putin, and that's who won the election.

Also, when did "hacking" the DNC - a private organization - become worth this much drama? Russian middle schoolers probably have such l33t haX0r skillz that they can get into all kinds of poorly secured cyber-cites. The DNC got caught with its pants down, and had their embarrassing dirty laundry exposed, at least vis a vis Bernie and Hillary, but who in Hell's half acre thinks that really swayed anyone?

So, seriously, who did it sway?

The 1M illegal voters still voted for Hillary, and mostly on the coasts, which, AGAIN, was not enough to overcome the checks and balances against mob rule of the Electoral College.

3. Trump's behavior has been remarkably soft towards Putin
4. Trump foolishly through the US intelligence community under the bus by publicly denying above and questioning the competence of the intelligence community.
Click to expand...

That's a lot for Trump to do in less than 1 month in office, yeah?

But honestly, what would you have Trump do?

Sorry, but even a guy that flunked out the police academy would connect the dots of above and say that the link between Trump's campaign and Russia needs to be better understood. Trump voters were foolish if they ignored the clouds of suspicion that were well formed before the election; and they are complete idiots if they are truly denying there isn't a problem now. Though I suspect, most of these people realize there is something that isn't right, they are just too embarrassed to admit it.

Wait, the article says it well:

"...But the intercepts alarmed American intelligence and law enforcement agencies, in part because of the amount of contact that was occurring while Mr. Trump was speaking glowingly about the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin. At one point last summer, Mr. Trump said at a campaign event that he hoped Russian intelligence services had stolen Hillary Clinton’s emails and would make them public..."



The clouds of suspicion were well formed before the election and obvious to anyone that was paying attention.

Donald Trump’s Russia connections – POLITICO
Donald Trump company?s server was connected to Russian bank: Report - Salon.com
Manafort resigns from Trump campaign
The Donald Trump Russia Connection: 5 Facts You Should Know About Candidate's Possible Ties To Putin

This continues to be a developing story around an outgoing investigation. There is much more to learn, but there was plenty to fuel suspicion months ago.
Click to expand...

I don't think those articles do anything other than show that, in making a is for Leader of the Free World, he sought international contacts. That's actually an asset. Isn't it?

Here is a good timeline for the Russian (non) scandal. It is a shame that Flynn resigned but better to jettison him with the true hysteria crazy that has swept a large part of the nation.
Michael Flynn: A Timeline of His Rise and Fall and the Russia Call - NBC News
 
Last edited:
TigerJez said:
In and of itself, is there anything illegal (or immoral) in the December 2016 phone call between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyek? Even if it talked of sanctions?

I mean, correct me if wrong, but at the time it happened, Obama had just kicked out several long-standing Russian diplomats. It doesn't seem odd that one of them would ask an acquaintance with potential influence coming in, 'Hey, what's gonna be up with the new administration? Please let my folks back in the global sandbox!'



I get there is a palpable desperation for any explanation of the 2016 election other than "Middle America voted for Trump, and with the Electoral College's distribution of votes to expressly safeguard against pure majority (mob) rule, Trump won." But who did this sway? Grandma Moses in Nebraska was not swayed by Putin, and that's who won the election.

Also, when did "hacking" the DNC - a private organization - become worth this much drama? Russian middle schoolers probably have such l33t haX0r skillz that they can get into all kinds of poorly secured cyber-cites. The DNC got caught with its pants down, and had their embarrassing dirty laundry exposed, at least vis a vis Bernie and Hillary, but who in Hell's half acre thinks that really swayed anyone?

So, seriously, who did it sway?

The 1M illegal voters still voted for Hillary, and mostly on the coasts, which, AGAIN, was not enough to overcome the checks and balances against mob rule of the Electoral College.



That's a lot for Trump to do in less than 1 month in office, yeah?

But honestly, what would you have Trump do?



I don't think those articles do anything other than show that, in making a is for Leader of the Free World, he sought international contacts. That's actually an asset. Isn't it?

Here is a good timeline for the Russian (non) scandal. It is a shame that Flynn resigned but better to jettison him with the true hysteria crazy that has swept a large part of the nation.
Michael Flynn: A Timeline of His Rise and Fall and the Russia Call - NBC News
Click to expand...

You had a reasonably sane, credible post that I might have responded to except you ruined your credibility with the notion that 1 million illegal people voted for Hillary. Obviously, you are way into fake news and alternative facts and not worthy of my attention.

Since I don't let people get away with posting things that are only supported by the voices in their head. Fess up. Show us, on what basis, you make the claim that 1.0 million people voted for Hillary. Are they the same 1.0 million that showed up for the Trump inguaration? You know, the invisible people that rest of us can not see?
 
upsideguy said:
You had a reasonably sane, credible post that I might have responded to except you ruined your credibility with the notion that 1 million illegal people voted for Hillary. Obviously, you are way into fake news and alternative facts and not worthy of my attention.

Since I don't let people get away with posting things that are only supported by the voices in their head. Fess up. Show us, on what basis, you make the claim that 1.0 million people voted for Hillary. Are they the same 1.0 million that showed up for the Trump inguaration? You know, the invisible people that rest of us can not see?
Click to expand...

With such erstwhile flame-out, you are familiar with the Washington Times article and its studies. Other examples can be found in the calls for voter fraud investigation. For example:

Illegals Did Vote In November, And Trump Is Right To*Investigate | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

The number of illegals is likely around 20M. Going with 1M as illegal / improper voters is pretty sound. If you disagree, what number would you ascribe?

As for the inauguration, meh. Obama, a young, black, liberal, and first black president of the US, drew a huge crowd in black, young, starry-eyed DC. Trump had big crowds watching remotely. Surely, you would not disagree that his inauguration was watched world wide? If nothing else, millions tuned in to see if he would be shot.

Now, back to the topic:

Whose vote was actually swayed by the l33t Russian HaX0rs?

Why is Flynn taking to the Russian ambassador, and even being asked about sanctions, a bad thing?
 
Last edited:
TigerJez said:
In and of itself, is there anything illegal (or immoral) in the December 2016 phone call between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyek? Even if it talked of sanctions?

I mean, correct me if wrong, but at the time it happened, Obama had just kicked out several long-standing Russian diplomats. It doesn't seem odd that one of them would ask an acquaintance with potential influence coming in, 'Hey, what's gonna be up with the new administration? Please let my folks back in the global sandbox!'



I get there is a palpable desperation for any explanation of the 2016 election other than "Middle America voted for Trump, and with the Electoral College's distribution of votes to expressly safeguard against pure majority (mob) rule, Trump won." But who did this sway? Grandma Moses in Nebraska was not swayed by Putin, and that's who won the election.

Also, when did "hacking" the DNC - a private organization - become worth this much drama? Russian middle schoolers probably have such l33t haX0r skillz that they can get into all kinds of poorly secured cyber-cites. The DNC got caught with its pants down, and had their embarrassing dirty laundry exposed, at least vis a vis Bernie and Hillary, but who in Hell's half acre thinks that really swayed anyone?

So, seriously, who did it sway?

The 1M illegal voters still voted for Hillary, and mostly on the coasts, which, AGAIN, was not enough to overcome the checks and balances against mob rule of the Electoral College.



That's a lot for Trump to do in less than 1 month in office, yeah?

But honestly, what would you have Trump do?



I don't think those articles do anything other than show that, in making a is for Leader of the Free World, he sought international contacts. That's actually an asset. Isn't it?

Here is a good timeline for the Russian (non) scandal. It is a shame that Flynn resigned but better to jettison him with the true hysteria crazy that has swept a large part of the nation.
Michael Flynn: A Timeline of His Rise and Fall and the Russia Call - NBC News
Click to expand...

The NSA has the recordings of all his calls to the Russian Embassy. How do you know what they have? We do know he is fired and his security clearance has been revoked. You think that is over nothing?
The lack of concern for our national security is very disconcerting. This is not a time for talk of Hillary and partisanship.
Flynn and Trump need to come clean about their relationships with the Russian spys they were talking to. It is plain that he won't do this voluntarily as he has already lied about it.
 
Last edited:
Jetboogieman said:
Many people are missing the why in this whole equation.

The Obama era US and EU sanctions are working on Russia in conjunction with the slump in oil prices, Russia's economy is in the ****ter and Russia is going to run out of money... They have been using a rainy day fund for times of low oil prices which they will deplete this year and if very desperate may have to tap into the welfare fund, I.E. The ones pensions are drawn from which has $70 billion in it.

It is of paramount importance to the Russian government and economy that US and EU sanctions are either lifted or eased or it could have serious consequences for Russia.

With all this in mind, is it that hard to see what is going on here?
Click to expand...

Its impossible to see when one refuses to open their eyes.
 
TigerJez said:
With such erstwhile flame-out, you are familiar with the Washington Times article and its studies. Other examples can be found in the calls for voter fraud investigation. For example:

Illegals Did Vote In November, And Trump Is Right To*Investigate | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

The number of illegals is likely around 20M. Going with 1M as illegal / improper voters is pretty sound. If you disagree, what number would you ascribe?

As for the inauguration, meh. Obama, a young, black, liberal, and first black president of the US, drew a huge crowd in black, young, starry-eyed DC. Trump had big crowds watching remotely. Surely, you would not disagree that his inauguration was watched world wide? If nothing else, millions tuned in to see if he would be shot.

Now, back to the topic:

Whose vote was actually swayed by the l33t Russian HaX0rs?

Why is Flynn taking to the Russian ambassador, and even being asked about sanctions, a bad thing?
Click to expand...

Nice article EXCEPT that nothing in that article supports your assertion that 1 million illegal people voted for Hillary. The strongest line in the article in favor of your assertion is:

"...This week, John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky, who have both tracked voter fraud extensively, detailed multiple specific examples of noncitizens casting ballots in U.S. elections. Among them:...."

It is a list of a bunch of anecdotes. It does not say nor infer that its a huge number and certainly not 1 million. The article is about the plausibility of people voting that should not be voting because the election rolls do not catch people that die and move out of the voting district. That is an indictment of record keeping, not voter fraud. So, sorry, but you must that the 1 million notion off the table and out of your vocabulary as it is simply an untruth You can not have an argument on untruths.

Let's discuss that lack of logic behind illegals voting: Why would they? Why would they risk deportation or jail time to register a vote that did not matter in New York or California, a place that was assuredly going to vote for Clinton. If the Latin community was that motivated, they would have turned out in record numbers and Clinton would have won. The community, as a whole, did not care, so it makes zero sense that the illegals were motivated to risk it all for a vote that did not matter. Sorry, the idea that 1 million people voted not only lacks foundation, it is illogical. Its a silly myth. People that state that as some type of fact are generally dismissed on this board. Don't be that person.

As to the Russian/Wikileaks issue, Trump, who lost the popular vote by 3 million votes, won the general by 85,000 votes over three states. I submit that the idea that the drip, drip, drip release by Wikileaks of information that appears to be obtained from Russian hacks either flipped 42,500 votes or encouraged 85,000 Hillary voters to get annoyed with her and stay home. That is somewhere north of plausible to flirting with likely. It is very possible that Russia flipped the election and far more plausible than 1 million (or in the Donald's case, 3 to 5 million, illegals votes cast, all for Hillary). So, if you want to deal in what is plausible, I think 42,000 changed votes is far, far more likely than 1 to 5 million illegal votes.
 
Last edited:
RAMOSS said:
Yet, isn't it funny that the scandals are revolving around the people named in the dossier?? Fascinating.
Click to expand...

I just told you what was in your link.

Here's another from your link ... "The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation."

So I'm really not sure what your innuendo is.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Many people are missing the why in this whole equation.

The Obama era US and EU sanctions are working on Russia in conjunction with the slump in oil prices, Russia's economy is in the ****ter and Russia is going to run out of money... They have been using a rainy day fund for times of low oil prices which they will deplete this year and if very desperate may have to tap into the welfare fund, I.E. The ones pensions are drawn from which has $70 billion in it.

It is of paramount importance to the Russian government and economy that US and EU sanctions are either lifted or eased or it could have serious consequences for Russia.

With all this in mind, is it that hard to see what is going on here?
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is arguing that Russia shouldn't be sanctioned back to the stoneage. However, whether, or not sanctions are justified is irrelevant.

What is relevant, is that General Flynn was illegally surveiled and the information was illegally leaked. The latter is a violation of the Espionage Act.
 
apdst said:
I don't think anyone is arguing that Russia shouldn't be sanctioned back to the stoneage. However, whether, or not sanctions are justified is irrelevant.

What is relevant, is that General Flynn was illegally surveiled and the information was illegally leaked. The latter is a violation of the Espionage Act.
Click to expand...


Rather, what is relevant is the fact that a man with 30+ years in the military and the intelligence community failed to think about the possibility that the representative of a foreign government was under surveillance. Flynn was caught NOT because he was being watched but because HE called a person being watched.

Do you believe, no thinking allowed, that the US intelligence agency should have turned off their devices when they heard the American speaking to the Russian?

Was the information about the DNC emails "illegally leaked"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom