• 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

TU Curmudgeon said:
Equally, you cannot "prove" that the information that you get from an "operative" of a foreign government (especially when it does not concern the personnel or actions of that foreign government) is not true - at least you can't simply from the fact that you got it from an "operative" of a foreign government.

When (at least a part of) that information is confirmed through sources which are NOT "operatives" of the (hostile) foreign government, then the amount of faith that you can put in the proposition "All the information obtained from 'operatives' of a 'hostile' foreign government is false, because it was obtained from 'operatives' of a 'hostile' foreign government." gets much smaller.
Click to expand...

How much of the Steele Dossier do you believe to be verified?

A link, if available, would be appropriate.
 
Re: [W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

TU Curmudgeon said:
Actually we can be very sure that Mr. Trump AND the Russians DID NOT "collude/connive/conspire".

Why can we be sure about that?

Because the Russians are not stupid enough to ACTUALLY "collude/connive/conspire" with a person of the personality type of Mr. Trump.

That, of course, does not mean that the Russians - independently from "Team Trump" - were NOT doing whatever they thought was in Russia's best interests (regardless of what the laws of the United States of America are). And, if the Russians thought that it was in Russia's best interests for Ms. Clinton to be defeated, then they would have an incentive to do whatever they felt like doing (and which was practicable for them to do) to ensure that Ms. Clinton was defeated - even to the point of undertaking completely independent (from Mr. Trump and "Team Trump") actions that boosted Mr. Trump's chances of getting elected.



I think that it would be safe to say that we can be sure that Mr. Trump:


  1. is ignorant about what the laws of the United States of America are (in many areas); or
  2. simply doesn't care what the laws of the United States of America are (in many areas); or
  3. believes that the laws of the United States of America (in many areas) simply do not apply to him;


and that that should worry people.
Click to expand...

On a similar though not identical logical consideration, I've stated that the Russians' entire operation is so unsubtle that it's hard to believe it was directed at enlisting Trump as an asset, even unconsciously.
 
Re: [W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

Ouroboros said:
You've asserted that you can't believe the Dossier was in any way produced by Russian intelligence because you're married to the narrative that the Russian government wanted Trump in office no matter what. I've already given my reasons for disputing this opinion.

I see no reason to think that unverified info would make that much difference to American voters. I don't follow your questions re: some scenario in which the AG or someone else holds on to the Dossier. Are you talking about this happening within the scope of the Mueller Report's compilation, or what?

Similarly, I also don't follow your Obama scenario. What good would it do to declassify something that hasn't yet been verified?
Click to expand...

You see no reason that unverified information will make that much difference to the American voters?
If you follow elections, you can find countless examples of political opponents using such unverified info.
Why do you think they do it?
Why do you think Trump started talking nonsense about Ted Cruz's father?
Why do you think we have politician using "FAKE NEWS" even when they KNOW that the information is false?

Your belief that any politician would not think it was advantageous for his campaign to use unverified information makes no sense to me and is detached from political reality.

If you can answer to me why you think that Trump thought it was a good idea to claim unverified information or rumors about Cruz's father, then you wil answer your own question regarding why Hillary or Obama would think that they could gain a benefit from using an unverified information a few weeks before the elections. The real FACT that the FBI HAD information of a "possible" compromise of some members of the Trump administration would be a political problem for Trump even if such information was not verified.
 
Last edited:
pamak said:
Stop your BS excuses!

As I said, and you choose to ignore, Obama used the FBI input while Trump tries to keep things secret from his intelligence advisers! If you do not see any difference in that is because you exhibit the attitude of a subservient citizen who is reluctant to hold is president politically accountable for his conduct!
Click to expand...

While it seems to be a law that Presidents shouldn't take "free gifts" of foreign-produced info, I have yet to read about any laws requiring Presidents to share all intelligence with their intelligence agencies.
 
Athanasius68 said:
There is no false equivalency: Mr. Obama used foreign information to open up an investigation on the campaign of a political opponent. Period.
Click to expand...

And he did so by working WITH his intelligence agencies.

Which indicates that good things don't always happen when Presidents do coordinate with their agencies.
 
Ouroboros said:
While it seems to be a law that Presidents shouldn't take "free gifts" of foreign-produced info, I have yet to read about any laws requiring Presidents to share all intelligence with their intelligence agencies.
Click to expand...

I have already mentioned the issue that a political conduct should not be simply judged by if it is legal or not. If a legal conduct promotes corruption, it should not be tolerated. Lobbying is legal but supposedly Trump supporters were chanting 'drain the swamp". Backdoor deals in suspicious settings should receive political criticism, and it is very suspicious for a president to get info from foreigners without bringing the FBI on board to get the professionals' estimate regarding the profile and background of the foreigner.
 
Ouroboros said:
I don't think you can state with certainty that Obama never garnered intelligence that didn't come from his agencies.
Click to expand...

As I said, if the argument is that we cannot be certain, then this applies to Trump's collusion also. What I am saying that Obama had no reason to do anything illegal or jeopardize his reputation a few months before living the WH. it was not his election to accept gambles and start getting information outside of the official channels for the Trump Campaign.
 
pamak said:
The steele dossier was not used before the election. WE learned about it AFTER the elections. So, OBVIOUSLY, Clinton did not use Russian operatives to meddle with the election. Your theory just does not hold in anyway or form...
Click to expand...

The first application for the warrant on Carter Page was October 2016.

It's not making the Dossier public, but it's still making use of it for political purposes, particularly since the source of the Dossier was not clarified in the applications.
 
Re: [W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

pamak said:
which again does not change the fact that Trump INVITED the Russians to meddle with the election which is different from what I said which is that if a foreigner wants to give information, he can give that information to the press. The fact that a president cannot realistically prohibit any foreigner from giving information to the US press does not mean that any president or candidate should INVITE foreigners to do so and intervene in the US elections.
Click to expand...

What "invitation" was that?
 
j brown's body said:
Link

He is a vast, moral wasteland.
Click to expand...

Not only Trump, but Adam Schiff also jumps at the chance to gather opposition research, as evidenced by his arrangement to secretly meet two Russians who had told him they had naked pictures of Trump for him.
 
Ouroboros said:
Or it proves that he thinks his intelligence services are disloyal.
Click to expand...

But he picked all the directors he wanted. At some point, you have to decide which scenario makes more sense. Is it the scenario that Trump has reasons right now, after manning the FBI and the DOJ with all the people he wanted to believe that all agencies are out to get Trump in the 2020 election or is it that Trump simply wants to do something questionable during the 2020 election and for this reason does not want to have others participate in Trump's "intelligence gathering attempts"?
 
Ouroboros said:
The first application for the warrant on Carter Page was October 2016.

It's not making the Dossier public, but it's still making use of it for political purposes, particularly since the source of the Dossier was not clarified in the applications.
Click to expand...

The application comes from the FBI and was approved by judges, so why you think that this application is for political purposes and not for criminal investigation purposes? And what is the "political purpose" of doing things that are no revealed before the election?
 
Ouroboros said:
The first application for the warrant on Carter Page was October 2016.

It's not making the Dossier public, but it's still making use of it for political purposes, particularly since the source of the Dossier was not clarified in the applications.
Click to expand...

And something else which you may have missed

Page resigned from the Trump Campaign BEFORE the date of the warrant application you provide

Trump Campaign Adviser Steps Down While Disputing Claims Of Russia Ties | Talking Points Memo


September 26, 2016 3:59 pm

One of Donald Trump’s foreign policy advisers said Monday he was stepping down from the campaign, while pushing back on allegations that he had engaged in private communications with top Russian officials.

Carter Page said in an interview with Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin that the claims were “just complete garbage,” but nonetheless he had chosen to take a leave of absence from campaign become the accusations were causing a “distraction.”
 
Re: [W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

Ouroboros said:
What "invitation" was that?
Click to expand...

In 2016 it was his "Russia, if you are listening" speech
For 2020, we talk about the preparation of the ground for similar secret invitations by Trump's attempt to normalize the idea that it is okay for a president to get opposition research from foreigners without even informing the FBI.
 
Re: [W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

pamak said:
You see no reason that unverified information will make that much difference to the American voters?
If you follow elections, you can find countless examples of political opponents using such unverified info.
Why do you think they do it?
Why do you think Trump started talking nonsense about Ted Cruz's father?
Why do you think we have politician using "FAKE NEWS" even when they KNOW that the information is false?

Your belief that any politician would not think it was advantageous for his campaign to use unverified information makes no sense to me and is detached from political reality.

If you can answer to me why you think that Trump thought it was a good idea to claim unverified information or rumors about Cruz's father, then you wil answer your own question regarding why Hillary or Obama would think that they could gain a benefit from using an unverified information a few weeks before the elections. The real FACT that the FBI HAD information of a "possible" compromise of some members of the Trump administration would be a political problem for Trump even if such information was not verified.
Click to expand...

But the fact that the FBI dragged their heels on the Dossier indicates that they were not sanguine about releasing it prior to the election, even IF the Clinton campaign might have hoped the Dossier would prove some sort of November surprise.

It has remained unclear as to who exactly at the FBI was aware of Steele's report through July and August, and what was done with it, but they did not immediately request additional material until late August or early September, when the FBI asked Steele for "all information in his possession and for him to explain how the material had been gathered and to identify his sources. The former spy forwarded to the bureau several memos -- some of which referred to members of Trump’s inner circle. After that point, he continued to share information with the FBI."

According to Nancy LeTourneau, political writer for the Washington Monthly, the report "was languishing in the FBI's New York field office" for two months, and "was finally sent to the counterintelligence team investigating Russia at FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C.", in September 2016
Click to expand...

Politicians sometimes get desperate and try to smear their opponents, no question. But an accusation of collusion and treason is much more serious than talking trash about someone's father, or even raising the admittedly foolish "birther question." Maybe the Clinton campaign would've liked to release the Dossier prior to the election, we'll never know. But once the FBI was in charge of the Dossier, that wasn't an option.
 
pamak said:
I have already mentioned the issue that a political conduct should not be simply judged by if it is legal or not. If a legal conduct promotes corruption, it should not be tolerated. Lobbying is legal but supposedly Trump supporters were chanting 'drain the swamp". Backdoor deals in suspicious settings should receive political criticism, and it is very suspicious for a president to get info from foreigners without bringing the FBI on board to get the professionals' estimate regarding the profile and background of the foreigner.
Click to expand...

Then the legality of oppositional research being provided by foreign nationals, even if paid, does not affect whether or not the activity is moral.
 
pamak said:
As I said, if the argument is that we cannot be certain, then this applies to Trump's collusion also. What I am saying that Obama had no reason to do anything illegal or jeopardize his reputation a few months before living the WH. it was not his election to accept gambles and start getting information outside of the official channels for the Trump Campaign.
Click to expand...

Narrowing the question to "a few months before living in the WH" is inordinately specific.

The main question should be, did O garner his own intelligence at times, or not?
 
pamak said:
The application comes from the FBI and was approved by judges, so why you think that this application is for political purposes and not for criminal investigation purposes? And what is the "political purpose" of doing things that are no revealed before the election?
Click to expand...

The FBI cannot know, in advance of investigating Page, whether or not they will find something that will prove of political importance or not. Since Page was investigated but not charged, the logical conclusion is that the fishing expedition yielded no fish, nothing that could be used politically.
 
Ouroboros said:
And the intelligence services were already anti-Trump long before that. Again I say, why should Trump publicly validate everything they say when they've sided with the liberal media against him?
Click to expand...

LOL Intelligence services follow strict rules that prevent them from being political. They "side" with the truth by law.
 
pamak said:
And something else which you may have missed

Page resigned from the Trump Campaign BEFORE the date of the warrant application you provide

Trump Campaign Adviser Steps Down While Disputing Claims Of Russia Ties | Talking Points Memo


September 26, 2016 3:59 pm

One of Donald Trump’s foreign policy advisers said Monday he was stepping down from the campaign, while pushing back on allegations that he had engaged in private communications with top Russian officials.

Carter Page said in an interview with Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin that the claims were “just complete garbage,” but nonetheless he had chosen to take a leave of absence from campaign become the accusations were causing a “distraction.”
Click to expand...

Page's response to the accusations is irrelevant to my point, which was that the Dossier could be used for POTENTIAL political purposes whether the public knew about the Dossier or not.

If there had been strong evidence of collusion, probably Comey would have been just as unhesitant to release even semi-verified info as he was to announce the reopened investigation of the Hilary e-mails in October.
 
iguanaman said:
LOL Intelligence services follow strict rules that prevent them from being political. They "side" with the truth by law.
Click to expand...

That's the ideal, but maybe not the practice.
 
Re: [W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

Ouroboros said:
I can and do state that Steele could have been a dupe in this situation, given that the info fed him was unverified and therefore did nothing to expose specific Trump actions. The Dossier merely provided an excuse for further investigations, thus sowing more political chaos.
Click to expand...

Again you have no evidence of that. There is evidence of purge in the Kremlin following the release of the dossier though. Putin was clearly not happy with what the dossier revealed.

Russia embarked on a "purge" of suspected spies after the leak of the dossier that provided unsubstantiated claims of potential ties between President Donald Trump and the Russian government, according to the founder of the opposition research firm that produced the document.

The House Intelligence Committee published a transcript on Thursday of a behind-closed-doors interview with Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS, who shared his concerns that people had been picked off by the Russian government after the explosive claims of a Trump-Russia connection emerged.

When asked if one of his sources was killed, Simpson said, "That's not my information. I mean, there was a series of episodes where people were arrested or died mysteriously that came shortly after the disclosure of the existence of this information. And I do believe there was a bit of an old-fashioned purge."
Click to expand...

Russia Purged Suspected Spies After Trump Dossier Release: Fusion GPS
 
Re: [W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

Ouroboros said:
But the fact that the FBI dragged their heels on the Dossier indicates that they were not sanguine about releasing it prior to the election, even IF the Clinton campaign might have hoped the Dossier would prove some sort of November surprise.



Politicians sometimes get desperate and try to smear their opponents, no question. But an accusation of collusion and treason is much more serious than talking trash about someone's father, or even raising the admittedly foolish "birther question." Maybe the Clinton campaign would've liked to release the Dossier prior to the election, we'll never know. But once the FBI was in charge of the Dossier, that wasn't an option.
Click to expand...

Dragged the heels?

Based on what experience do you access that it was that easy to investigate the Steele information? The republicans and the FBI spent years trying to investigate much more simple cases such as Benghazi and Clinton's emails. Steele informed the Americans about the dossier a couple of months before the election! And the investigation of such claims required some type of infiltration in a foreign country. it makes no sense to believe that the FBI "dragged their heels"

If Obama was interested to declassify the fact that the FBI has information about a "possible" compromise of some Trump associates, and if Comey and the other intelligence services were on board with him, there is not any specific accusation against Trump. The facts of such revelations (existence of file) were true. And in the end, it makes no sens to argue that it was a problem to reveal the existence of the file before the election because it made a serious accusation but it was not a problem to reveal the file AFTER the election when in fact everybody (including Obama) knew that Trump was president elect and would soon control the DOJ and the FBI!
 
Ouroboros said:
Narrowing the question to "a few months before living in the WH" is inordinately specific.

The main question should be, did O garner his own intelligence at times, or not?
Click to expand...

But you need to show some motive to suspect a behavior!

The point that Obama was ready to exit the door is that he has no motive to do something controversial during the elections.
By contrast, Trump in 2020 has a STRONG motive to do something controversial (legal or not) to help his reelection
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom