• 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!

[W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

I have said from the beginning that it is oversimplification for anybody to believe that Trump would be just a Russian puppet. Nor does it makes sense to have the Russians expect that they could get control of Trump's actions. Still, they had reasonable expectations that Trump would be a MUCH better choice for them than Hillary for all the reasons I mentioned before.
Were they just tired of giving HRC so much money?
 
Beholding? Look matey...don't you ever get tired of publicly posting suppositions for which you have absolutely no proof?
Is there any tangible thought going on in there at all?

It's called a conflict of interest. People and organizations with integrity make sure it doesn't happen.

Which is why Trump and many of his supporters demonstrably don't give a damn about it. Just read the posts on this thread. In fact, they defend this unethical behavior. Says a lot about them, don't you think?
 
Last edited:
Trump set the media up imo


In July 2016, the Obama administration accepted unsolicited information from Alexander Downer, an Australian diplomat who just happened to have helped arrange a $25 million government donation to the Clinton Foundation years before. Downer said that he had witnessed a Trump campaign aide, George Papadopoulos, bragging about some dirt that the Russians supposedly had on Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.

Though Downer's claim was reported two-plus months after the alleged event, and was only hearsay gathered at a London tavern, the Obama administration gave it to the FBI which, in turn, thought it was weighty enough to justify opening a counterintelligence case against the lawfully elected Republican nominee for president.

In other words, the Democratic administration accepted dirt from a foreign friendly and used it to justify investigating its GOP rival.

In October 2016, less than three weeks from Election Day, the Obama Justice Department approved a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to spy on the Trump campaign through its former adviser, Carter Page. The primary evidence supporting the warrant? A dossier written by a foreign friendly named Christopher Steele, a retired MI6 intelligence agent from Great Britain. Of course, the Justice Department and the FBI forgot to tell the courts that Steele actually was working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, but that's a small detail for the purpose of this column.

For the second time in three months, the Obama administration took dirt on Trump from a foreign ally - this time, from one in Europe - and weaponized it for a criminal investigation.


Aren't delirious Democrats now accusing Team Obama of treason? | TheHill
 
Link

He is a vast, moral wasteland.

At least he is being honest about it. I am sure other political candidates regardless of party affiliation would also accept dirt on an opponent from a foreign entity and use it. This whining over trump saying he would take dirt on his opponents is nothing more than fake outrage by butt hurt sore losers of the 2016 election. If the situation was reverse and a democrat said what Trump said then every democrat would be justifying what that democrat said and I am sure republicans would be saying how dare he. Politicians tend to be do as we say not what we do. They will piss,bitch and moan about the opposing side doing something and years later do the same thing they complained about the opposing side doing.
 
Last edited:
If the situation was reverse and a democrat said what Trump said then every democrat would be justifying what that democrat said and I am sure republicans would be saying how dare he.

Except only Trump is dumb enough to do this, all-but-admit he did it and say he'd do it again on national television. That's where the what-ifs fall flat.
 
Beholding? Look matey...don't you ever get tired of publicly posting suppositions for which you have absolutely no proof?
Is there any tangible thought going on in there at all?

There is a load of evidence that Trump is beholding to Putin. It is not my fault if you are too blind to see it. It started right after the Trump Tower meeting with Trump praising Putin and calling him a better leader than our President. Trump is a traitor to his country.

The Moscow Project
 
At least he is being honest about it. I am sure other political candidates regardless of party affiliation would also accept dirt on an opponent from a foreign entity and use it. This whining over trump saying he would take dirt on his opponents is nothing more than fake outrage by butt hurt sore losers of the 2016 election. If the situation was reverse and a democrat said what Trump said then every democrat would be justifying what that democrat said and I am sure republicans would be saying how dare he. Politicians tend to be do as we say not what we do. They will piss,bitch and moan about the opposing side doing something and years later do the same thing they complained about the opposing side doing.

So now you have taken whataboutism to a new level. The fact is that no American politician has sold out his country like Trump and no a patriotic American would not take dirt from an adversary. No it is not alright and no Democrat would "justify" this behavior. Give it up. Trump is a traitor and has no place in the Whitehouse.
 
Re: [W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

Because the Forefathers did not intend a "Ruling Class" of people whos only occupation was to be a politician. They wanted citizen politicians that did their public service and returned home to their jobs or businesses. We have had other Presidents that have owned business. Trump's business is being run by his sons who do not work for the government.

Are you suggesting that countries and individuals didn't donate money to the Clinton Foundation to gain favor with HRC? Then why are HRC lost did the donation trickle off to nothing?

The Forefathers did not intend to see Blacks vote...And something else, the forefathers surely intended the ruling economic class to also control politics.

And by the way, who said anything here about a politician NOT being able to have a business. The issue we were discussing was about the transparency and not if a politician should have a business or not...
And you cannot escape the fact that his daughter runs a business and has also security clearance!

Also, I said very well that I am one of those who see corruption in politics as a real issue, which included Clinton too. But here we are talking about the magnitude and opportunity of corruption. It is hypocritical to sho such concern for potential corruption when you talk about donations given to Hillary's husband NON profit Foundation and for which we had a pretty good ability to monitor t the situation today where we know nothing about Trump's for profit and much bigger business all over the world managed by his children and when Trum bypasses the advice f agencies to give security clearances to members of his family.
 
Last edited:
So now you have taken whataboutism to a new level. The fact is that no American politician has sold out his country like Trump and no a patriotic American would not take dirt from an adversary. No it is not alright and no Democrat would "justify" this behavior. Give it up. Trump is a traitor and has no place in the Whitehouse.

Accepting dirt on a political opponent is not selling out the country regardless of where that dirt comes from. So quit with your TDSer motivated hyperbole. Any politician running for office would take dirt on an opponent regardless of where that dirt comes from. So quit with the feigned outrage.
 
Accepting dirt on a political opponent is not selling out the country regardless of where that dirt comes from. So quit with your TDSer motivated hyperbole. Any politician running for office would take dirt on an opponent regardless of where that dirt comes from. So quit with the feigned outrage.

LOL It certainly is when the help comes from a foreign power and the illegal collusion gives that power leverage over the candidate. This is what has happened to us with Trump. He is no longer working for us but must do the bidding of a foreign adversary or they will use their leverage to discredit him. This is something our founders were quite clear on and no we will NEVER let it go. Our sovereignty is at stake. That is what those Russians are laughing at with Trump.

C_e-jHjWAAAsQ57.jpg:large
 
Last edited:
First, nobody except you says that the ONLY Russian objective was to sow misinformation. I explained that it is very easy to help Trump and sow misinformation that does not harm Trump's prospects to win. You can also spread misinformation to harm TRump's image AFTER he wins an election. You treat Russian policy makers like they are some crude idiots which is totally unrealistic.

You also greatly oversimplify my argument! I never said that the Russians liked Trump just because he said nice thing about them.

It was the nice things Trump said about Russia and the political positions he was promoting with respect to the EU and USA's role in NATO and Europe when he was berating the Europeans at a time when Russians

1 had annexed Crimea and suffered economic sanctions

2 intervened in Ukraine

3 saw EU flirting with Ukraine

4 saw the US anti-ballistic defense establishing bases in countries near Russia.

It was pretty clear than when a potential president says the things he said about Russia, EU and NATO that he was the best candidate by far Russians could hope for to have as a POTUS.

I didn't say that your only argument regarding Russian motivation was that of Trump's favorable remarks. But to the extent that you've said those remarks mattered at all in how the Russians made intelligence decisions, I completely disagree with you.

Any theory about what candidate MAY have been more popular with Russia boils down to the same old collusion accusation wrapped in a new package.

Since the Russians could not absolutely know who would win the election, it's probable that they worked out all sorts of advance scenarios as to how to get around either Trump or Hillary.

The fact that Trump did win, and that Russia tried to suborn him, does not reflect on Trump at all, any more than any counter-measures used against Hillary would reflect on her.
 
Back to the OT...

The President of the United States just admitted he'd take election campaign help from foreign agents.

More specifically, he said that he would listen and then decide.
 
It was not the Russian government which sent fake info to Steele.
I have explained numerous times in this thread that it was Russian citizens who were NOT acting on behalf of the Russian government. An individual informer can have many reasons to give false information. It may be a product of a honest mistake. A product of rumor one heard! It may be a deliberate lie in an attempt to boost his importance and get some cash reward. It can be anything!

I do not understand the question of " So how come that [FBI] obligation doesn't exist in 2020"?

And for the nth time: Russians are not simpletons. They can very well combine helping Trump to win the elections and sow chaos and political instability. Do you think we have a political stable environment now with Trump as POTUS?

If we don't know who Steele's informants were, how do we know they were not transmitting disinformation, either willfully or by governmental misdirection?
 
I have said from the beginning that it is oversimplification for anybody to believe that Trump would be just a Russian puppet. Nor does it makes sense to have the Russians expect that they could get control of Trump's actions. Still, they had reasonable expectations that Trump would be a MUCH better choice for them than Hillary for all the reasons I mentioned before.
They already knew Hillary could be bought.
 
I explained the reasoning!

First, it does not make sense (for all the reasons I explained before) to have the Russian government both trying to help Trump win the election and spread misinformation before the election to harm him, and second we have the FBI getting the information from Steele and directors from two different administrations did not find anything to suggest that Russian government was trying to undermine Trump by misinformation given to Steele. In fact, even AFTER the appointment of new directors DURING the Trump administration, their assessment remained the same. And that assessment (with HIGH confidence) was that the Russian government intervened during the elections to help Trump.

But if the misinformation cannot be verified, it still serves the purpose of making the DNC avid to track down collusion.

That's purely to the end of sowing discord, since in the long run it does not really help Trump, only Russian interests.
 
So in a heartbeat, Trump has taken his supporters from "no collusion" to "pro collusion".

He is truly a master of manipulation.
 
Except only Trump is dumb enough to do this, all-but-admit he did it and say he'd do it again on national television. That's where the what-ifs fall flat.
Adam Shift was spoofed by two comedians who said they were Russians and had naked pictures of Trump. He was more than happy to accept anything he thought they had. They have the tape of the phone call to Shift. So spare me. :roll:
 
There is a load of evidence that Trump is beholding to Putin. It is not my fault if you are too blind to see it. It started right after the Trump Tower meeting with Trump praising Putin and calling him a better leader than our President. Trump is a traitor to his country.

The Moscow Project
So you try to support your conspiracy theory with a conspiracy theory from the internet. :lamo:lamo:lamo
 
Adam Shift was spoofed by two comedians who said they were Russians and had naked pictures of Trump. He was more than happy to accept anything he thought they had. They have the tape of the phone call to Shift. So spare me. :roll:

No I will not 'spare anyone': Even as he was being pranked, Schiff stated his intention was to hand any info over to the FBI. Moreover it was about potential information handed over to a House committee as evidence, not to a political campaign as 'dirt' on opponents. there is no law stating the House Intel committee cannot handle foreign intel. There is a law against accepting foreign intelligence help in a campaign.

Trump stated he would take any information he was offered for campaign purposes. More or less as he intended to last time.
 
Last edited:
But if the misinformation cannot be verified, it still serves the purpose of making the DNC avid to track down collusion.

That's purely to the end of sowing discord, since in the long run it does not really help Trump, only Russian interests.

Just as electing Trump in the first place served their interests, by giving the US a weak and ineffective leader. They're not in the business of keeping him afloat any more than is useful: they've always been in it for themselves.

But no mistake, in Nov 2016, their interests were aligned with his.
 
So you try to support your conspiracy theory with a conspiracy theory from the internet. :lamo:lamo:lamo

Conspiracy theories are not based on evidence. Anyone sane who saw Trump kowtowing in Helsinki knows he is compromised. You saw it with your own eyes and still don't believe it?
 
It's called a conflict of interest. People and organizations with integrity make sure it doesn't happen.

Which is why Trump and many of his supporters demonstrably don't give a damn about it. Just read the posts on this thread. In fact, they defend this unethical behavior. Says a lot about them, don't you think?

Yes. I think it says they accept the results of the 2016 election. That they are not hypocrites who accuse the sitting POTUS of all the things their own 2016 candidate actually did. That they like the outstanding results this POTUS has produced. And, of course, that they are not whiney little bitches who think they can attack and destroy anyone who dare have an opposing opinion to them.
 
There is a load of evidence that Trump is beholding to Putin. It is not my fault if you are too blind to see it. It started right after the Trump Tower meeting with Trump praising Putin and calling him a better leader than our President. Trump is a traitor to his country.

The Moscow Project

Another waste of band width whining and making baseless accusations. OH GOODIE! :roll:
 
Re: Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

Like I said, Trump did not receive information about Clinton from Russians.
It continues to be true that Mrs. Clinton received information about Trump from Russians.

Trump's team conspired to solicit something of value from known agents of the Russian government, who explicitly said it was part of the Putin regime's efforts to get Trump elected. That was a crime, whether or not they actually succeeded in getting that valuable information. The wording of the campaign law refers to soliciting, not to receipt. In the same sense, when someone solicits the services of a prostitute, the crime is committed right then -- you don't have to wait until they've actually had sex to make the arrest.

As for Clinton, there's no evidence she committed any crime, despite a 25-year-long obsessive search for evidence by right-wingers. Obviously, her paying for opposition research was not a crime, as much as conservatives would like us all to pretend it was.
 
Back
Top Bottom