• 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!

This John Brennan quote on Russia just made Donald Trump's life much harder

Beaudreaux said:
From the quoted passage: "... It raised questions in my mind about whether Russia was able to gain the cooperation of those individuals." There's nothing really new here. We knew there was contact. We knew there was concern of potential collusion - that's what the fuss is about. We did not know whether or not there was actual collusion, and still don't, based off of this quote.
Click to expand...
It is indeed progress that we have established that there was indeed contact between Russian officials and members of the Trump campaign.

We know that Paul Manafort, with Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, all of these people around the president who had extensive contacts with Russia. Now, do you think that the two sides just wanted to discuss baseball or the weather -- or something more serious?

What makes this seem that there is far more here is how Trump is trying to silence Comey and other intelligence officers. If Trump has nothing to hide, he wouldn't be trying to stop the investigation.
 
Chomsky said:
I agree with all the comments above.

But at the least, it adds to the volume of evidence showing the investigation is indeed legit and deserved.
Click to expand...

It adds another to the volume of assertions. Thus far, if ever, there is no volume of evidence.
 
poweRob said:
It raised questions in my mind about whether Russia was able to gain the cooperation of those individuals."​
Click to expand...

Seriously???

That's laughable.

Tell him to stop back when he has something other than just "questions."

He's a grand example of political paranoia.........the other side absolutely MUST be guilty of evildoing.

Baloney. It's all politics.

:ind:
 
poweRob said:
Well Trumpettes have been saying for months that there was no proof of contact. If we can just get that over the bar then at least there is movement of some sort. It seems that they've settled on that there was contact and the deflection is now... "SO?????!!!!!???!?!?!!!" and "But... but.. but... was there collusion?"

As if an investigation this size will dump all that this early. Based on what I've read thus far I have my suspicions but we'll have to wait out the investigation.
Click to expand...

Ah, gotcha. That makes sense then. Well, like I said, we knew there was contact, we just don't have proof of collusion... yet. Anyone that tries to say there was no contact is lying to themselves.
 
Fletch said:
No one is saying there weren't contacts. And what Brennan said was that the Russians try to recruit people and those people don't often know they are being recruited. I don't doubt that the Russians were trying to snuggle up to certain Trump people. in fact its likely they do this sort of thing all the time. The question is whether or not there was actual collusion ny Trump, not whether or not the Russians tried to infiltrate the campaign. And there are certain suspicious characters--Flynn, Manafort and Page. I also suspect that if there were contacts and the Cia was aware of them, the CIA was listening in and know what was being discussed.
Click to expand...
Actually, the President and his administration are saying there has been no contact!

USA Today: Trump team issued at least 20 denials of contacts with Russia
 
azgreg said:
I am more than willing to say that the saying 'where there's smoke there's fire' isn't always true, but there sure appears to be a hell of a lot of smoke here.
Click to expand...

I saw a political cartoon a day or so ago--have looked but can't find it now--about this, and the punchline is, basically, that sometimes where there's a lot of smoke, this means nobody could get a fire going.
 
Chomsky said:
I agree with everything here.

Including the first line, which is absolutely correct. Congress impeaches, then they can ask for, or receive unasked, civilian charges from the Federal Attorney or any other States Attorney.
Click to expand...

Carter Page might also go down but I don't really know much about his story thus far. Roger Stone might get wrapped up in it all too. We'll see. Then he can get a tattoo of Trump on his back kissing his Nixon tattoo which is already there.
 
Napoleon said:
But what is "actual collusion" in the context of everything he said? There isn't really any doubt that the Trump campaign was colluding with those people, but it would seem that "actual collusion" to his mind requires knowing exactly who it is you're colluding with, i.e. did they know they were Russian operatives? As he also said, "Frequently, people who go along a treasonous path do not know they are on a treasonous path until it is too late."
Click to expand...

Show me the collusion and I'll write the letter to the DOJ.
 
MTAtech said:
It is indeed progress that we have established that there was indeed contact between Russian officials and members of the Trump campaign.

We know that Paul Manafort, with Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, all of these people around the president who had extensive contacts with Russia. Now, do you think that the two sides just wanted to discuss baseball or the weather -- or something more serious?

What makes this seem that there is far more here is how Trump is trying to silence Comey and other intelligence officers. If Trump has nothing to hide, he wouldn't be trying to stop the investigation.
Click to expand...

We knew there was contact. This is not new. Collusion to interfere with the election is still the question that needs to be answered.
 
jimbo said:
It adds another to the volume of assertions. Thus far, if ever, there is no volume of evidence.
Click to expand...
No, this is not assertion.

This is evidence. Evidence of contact.
 
poweRob said:
This John Brennan quote on Russia just made Donald Trump's life much harder

Former CIA chief John Brennan offered a frank assessment of Russia's aggressive approach to meddling in the 2016 election and, in the process, complicated President Donald Trump's attempts to cast the whole thing as fake news.

This Brennan quote, in particular, is damning:

"I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and US persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals. It raised questions in my mind about whether Russia was able to gain the cooperation of those individuals."​



Contrast that with what the Trump admin has been telling us:




Time for the trumpettes to move the goal posts in 5...4...3...2...
Click to expand...

Has there been any disagreement that Russia made an effort to influence the election? What in any of this is new?

Same old same old no evidence dog and pony show. Lucy takes the football away again.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/32/dc/ab/32dcab27d6b9edc3894a773284edab78.jpg


The success the russians experienced in 2008 by a combined economic attack effort with china wiping out Mccains lead effectively installing obama and the influence and uranium they gathered by contributing 100 million plus to the Clinton foundation guaranteed their continuing efforts to interfere in US elections.

"did you have evidence of a connection between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors?

BRENNAN: As I said Mr. Gowdy, I don't do evidence... "

Yeah...so no change at all.

And besides all this ....so what?

Various US political and investigative factions have gone all over the globe involving foreign intelligence services, buying dossiers, utilizing foreign agencies to get what they want.
Publicly acknowledged practices.

It's called opposition research.
 
akyron said:
Has there been any disagreement that Russia made an effort to influence the election? What in any of this is new?
Click to expand...

Trump campaign and the trumpettes in here have in the past, flat out denied Russia interfered with the election. Then they finally conceded after denying for so long and went to denying that there was any contact between the trump campaign and russia. Now that's been proven the goal posts are moving to "there's no evidence of collusion."

akyron said:
Same old same old no evidence dog and pony show. Lucy takes the football away again.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/32/dc/ab/32dcab27d6b9edc3894a773284edab78.jpg
Click to expand...

There is evidence. You guys are just moving the goal posts and asking for evidence of different things all the time and demanding them immediately during a long drawn-out investigation.

akyron said:
The success the russians experienced in 2008 by a combined economic attack effort with china wiping out Mccains lead effectively installing obama and the influence and uranium they gathered by contributing 100 million plus to the Clinton foundation guaranteed their continuing efforts to interfere in US elections.

"did you have evidence of a connection between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors?

BRENNAN: As I said Mr. Gowdy, I don't do evidence... "

And besides all this ....so what?

Various US political and investigative factions have gone all over the globe involving foreign intelligence services, buying dossiers, utilizing foreign agencies to get what they want.
Publicly acknowledged practices.

It's called opposition research.
Click to expand...

Denial by ignoring what's happening. Third time I'll say this in this one post... you are moving the goal posts.
 
All I have to contribute to this thread is the following video that gives all questions Trey Gowdy, engaged with former CIA director, Brenan.




Knowing that Brenan was once Obama's national security adviser before he became the CIA director and that he was the one to turn over to the FBI "his concerns" of those in Trump's campaign "possibly colluding" with Russians, (cough) it is important to keep things in perspective.

Gowdy has a wonderful way of causing worms to wither and shrink in sunlight.
 
Chomsky said:
I agree with everything here.

Including the first line, which is absolutely correct. Congress impeaches, then they can ask for, or receive unasked, civilian charges from the Federal Attorney or any other States Attorney.
Click to expand...

GOPs will have to lose the house before trump is impeached. We're now inside 18 months before the 2018s with plenty of special and off year elections before.

Democrats in flyover, rural, mod/con America better start focusing on the disastrous budget from trump and the disastrous legislation from McConnell/Ryan.

The real prizes next year and in 2020 are the state legislatures, which normally only flip in wave elections .
 
vesper said:
All I have to contribute to this thread is the following video that gives all questions Trey Gowdy, engaged with former CIA director, Brenan.




Knowing that Brenan was once Obama's national security adviser before he became the CIA director and that he was the one to turn over to the FBI "his concerns" of those in Trump's campaign "possibly colluding" with Russians, (cough) it is important to keep things in perspective.

Gowdy has a wonderful way of causing worms to wither and shrink in sunlight.
Click to expand...


OMG what a perspective. Brennan did not do any politicization of his answers. As far as Gowdy and all his sunlight powers... he was clearly trying hard to cover trump by attempting to get Brennan to say that "there was no evidence of collusion" by the way he worded his question so specifically.. he was trying to phrase it as a yes/no question. Brennan didn't bite and now Gowdy didn't get the cover for his savior, Trump the way he clearly intended to.
 
vesper said:
Gowdy has a wonderful way of causing worms to wither and shrink in sunlight.
Click to expand...

No, he just has a wonderful way of making it appear that way by asking questions he already knows the answers to and cannot be answered in a public hearing.
 
Last edited:
Chomsky said:
No, this is not assertion.

This is evidence. Evidence of contact.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with the trumprotectors in the house prolonging the agony and covering up for trump.

Meanwhile, the magnifying lens will shift to trump's budget, which disproportionately screws trump's own voters the worst.

As well as to whatever McConnell and Ryan try to sneak out on trumpcare and voodoo economics .
 
poweRob said:
All those politicians you were talking about who communicate with Russia all the time.
Click to expand...

Yeah. They do talk a lot.

Here's a List of Democrats Who Also Met With The Russian Ambassador


1. Senior Obama advisor John Holdren

2. Senator Claire McCaskill

3. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse

4. Former Senator Mary Landrieu

5.Senator Amy Klobuchar

6. Senator Dianne Feinstein

7. Senator Jack Reed

8. Senator Bob Casey

9. Senator Maria Cantwell

10. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi

11. Etc.

Earlier this week, Kislyak sat with Democrats during President Trump's first address to a joint session of Congress.


According to official visitor logs, Kislyak visited the White House 22 times during President Obama's tenure.

https://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/kat...also-met-with-the-russian-ambassador-n2293775


https://mobile.twitter.com/realDona...86816.ampproject.net/1494957764037/frame.html

I won't bother with the 30 democrats meeting with russia and china to sell us out sending pallets of cash to Iran.
 
akyron said:
Yeah. They do talk a lot.

Here's a List of Democrats Who Also Met With The Russian Ambassador


1. Senior Obama advisor John Holdren

2. Senator Claire McCaskill

3. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse

4. Former Senator Mary Landrieu

5.Senator Amy Klobuchar

6. Senator Dianne Feinstein

7. Senator Jack Reed

8. Senator Bob Casey

9. Senator Maria Cantwell

10. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi

11. Etc.

Earlier this week, Kislyak sat with Democrats during President Trump's first address to a joint session of Congress.


According to official visitor logs, Kislyak visited the White House 22 times during President Obama's tenure.

https://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/kat...also-met-with-the-russian-ambassador-n2293775


https://mobile.twitter.com/realDona...86816.ampproject.net/1494957764037/frame.html
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? He said politicians talk to the russians all the time. I said yes... but they don't usually lie about it.

akyron said:
I won't bother with the 30 democrats meeting with russia and china to sell us out sending pallets of cash to Iran.
Click to expand...

And thanks for sparing us all your loony conspiracy theories. If you want to talk about it, start a thread in the conspiracy forum so I can more easily avoid that nonsense please.
 
akyron said:
Yeah. They do talk a lot.

Here's a List of Democrats Who Also Met With The Russian Ambassador


1. Senior Obama advisor John Holdren

2. Senator Claire McCaskill

3. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse

4. Former Senator Mary Landrieu

5.Senator Amy Klobuchar

6. Senator Dianne Feinstein

7. Senator Jack Reed

8. Senator Bob Casey

9. Senator Maria Cantwell

10. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi

11. Etc.

Earlier this week, Kislyak sat with Democrats during President Trump's first address to a joint session of Congress.


According to official visitor logs, Kislyak visited the White House 22 times during President Obama's tenure.

https://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/kat...also-met-with-the-russian-ambassador-n2293775


https://mobile.twitter.com/realDona...86816.ampproject.net/1494957764037/frame.html

I won't bother with the 30 democrats meeting with russia and china to sell us out sending pallets of cash to Iran.
Click to expand...
Conspicuously absent from your Townhall article was context.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom