Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

1…195196197198200

Comments

  • #9952
    Jack1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,506 ✭✭✭Jack1985


    CNN now leading that Intel about Russian bounty on US Troops was in the West Wing PDB in early March.


  • #9953
    gormdubhgorm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,994 ✭✭✭✭gormdubhgorm


    stinkypinky wrote: »
    Just to add to this, Putin was stationed in Dresden East Germany when the Soviet Union collapsed. The KGB office he was in was met with angry demonstrators wanting to attack and ransack it. Putin bluffed in Deutsch that the building was filled with armed KGB officials and any attempt to attack it would be met with gunfire, he was the only KGB official there. Sounds like a folk tale or Russian Propaganda but it's backed up by multiple Western sources.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32066222

    I would well believe it Plus Putin seems like he can adapt to any situation when required. Such as acting as translator for a German fella on Russian tv show.

    Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.



  • #9954
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    Well I think there's some thing to it. I say that because even tonight the press secretary said that the New York Times is wrong in that the president was briefed about this. They have in no way tried to say the substance of the report is wrong which I'm sure they'd do if it was. They are saying the president wasn't briefed but honestly something as serious would surely be in his Daily briefing which I'm sure congress could clear up by issuing a subpoena for his daily briefings for early march. If it's not in there then trumps claim of not being briefed holds up. If it's there then trump is in serious trouble, especially as he's recently spoke at a West Point graduation and if he had intelligence about these bounties and did nothing, the Lincoln project have their next ad.

    Even if, for the sake of argument, McEnaney's claim that Trump wasn't briefed was true (and long experience tells us that such a denial should be dismissed) that still wouldn't explain how Trump has offered no pushback at all against Russia at all in the 72 hours since the story went public.

    The Lincoln Project have already gone to town on him.


  • #9955
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,425 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    sid waddell wrote: »
    Even if, for the sake of argument, McEnaney's claim that Trump wasn't briefed was true (and long experience tells us that such a denial should be dismissed) that still wouldn't explain how Trump has offered no pushback at all against Russia at all in the 72 hours since the story went public.

    The Lincoln Project have already gone to town on him.

    That's why he held a House Republican only briefing a little earlier.

    The Democrats aren't getting a briefing until tomorrow...The GOP need to get the story straight..

    They are now shifting to "We didn't tell the President because we were still investigating it , but now that the Fake News Media broke the story , we can no longer investigate , so it's all the New York Times fault , there's blood on their hands"

    https://twitter.com/RepJimBanks/status/1277686655776784386

    Just so far beyond parody at this stage..


  • #9956
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    I believe over 100 newspapers called for Bill Clinton to resign during his impeachment trial.

    How many newspapers have called for Trump to resign?

    I can't think of many, if any, even.

    Why aren't newspapers and television networks uniformly calling on Trump to resign? Why are the Democrats not doing so?

    Wouldn't standing idly by and doing nothing except rewarding Russia when you know Russia is offering and paying prize money to the Taliban for killing US soldiers normally be a resigning matter, and then some?

    I'd have thought that shouldn't even be a debate - it's brazenly selling your country out to a hostile foreign power.


  • #9957
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    That's why he held a House Republican only briefing a little earlier.

    The Democrats aren't getting a briefing until tomorrow...The GOP need to get the story straight..

    They are now shifting to "We didn't tell the President because we were still investigating it , but now that the Fake News Media broke the story , we can no longer investigate , so it's all the New York Times fault , there's blood on their hands"

    https://twitter.com/RepJimBanks/status/1277686655776784386

    Just so far beyond parody at this stage..
    Lying for Putin, in other words.

    The US President and his party are circling the wagons to make up a lie so as to not offend Putin, the kleptocratic, imperialist dictator of Russia.

    You could not make this up.

    Which begs the question, why are Trump and the Republican party furiously circling the wagons to make up a lie so as not to offend Putin?

    What's the reason?


  • #9958
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,441 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    sid waddell wrote: »
    Even if, for the sake of argument, McEnaney's claim that Trump wasn't briefed was true (and long experience tells us that such a denial should be dismissed) that still wouldn't explain how Trump has offered no pushback at all against Russia at all in the 72 hours since the story went public.

    The Lincoln Project have already gone to town on him.

    Sorry I assumed when you said Russia you were talking anout this most recent Russia issue and not the broader Russia issue. I mean I think why he's not pushed back because as we have seen he thinks anything Russia related is a hoax of some kind. The fact he hasn't though will raise question as to whether he is comprimised in some way by the Russians.


  • #9959
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,441 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    That's why he held a House Republican only briefing a little earlier.

    The Democrats aren't getting a briefing until tomorrow...The GOP need to get the story straight..

    They are now shifting to "We didn't tell the President because we were still investigating it , but now that the Fake News Media broke the story , we can no longer investigate , so it's all the New York Times fault , there's blood on their hands"

    https://twitter.com/RepJimBanks/status/1277686655776784386

    Just so far beyond parody at this stage..

    Why was Mark meadows briefing people on something that trump said meadows wasn't briefed on when the story broke ? Imagine at any time in the past a president of the United States getting this info and not doing condemning Russia. The GOP would be up in arms about this and rightly so, but trump went and played golf.


  • #9960
    duploelabs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,911 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    https://twitter.com/jpaceDC/status/1277792243055804417?s=19

    Looks like it was as far back as 2019


  • Advertisement
  • #9961
    farmerval
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 687 ✭✭✭farmerval


    How in the name of all that's holy is this not a way bigger issue in the States???

    Has Trump completely neutered the Republican party? This should be an impeachable act, yet there's barely a whimper about it. The Republican's obsession with the military, their ever increasing military budgets and this is barely getting a mention? I am more flabbergasted than ever.

    The WH response has been farcical, no mention of what they would do if the intel was credible, just sticking their fingers in their ears and going NA NA NA. Brutal.

    If the American people stand for this it's all over in the States. Not just now, but imagine what someone smarter than Trump, but with similarly lacking in oral standards could do if in office.

    All the talk of the separation of powers, etc. One buffoon can almost bring the country to it's knees in four years.


  • #9962
    PropJoe10
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,344 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    farmerval wrote: »
    How in the name of all that's holy is this not a way bigger issue in the States???

    Has Trump completely neutered the Republican party? This should be an impeachable act, yet there's barely a whimper about it. The Republican's obsession with the military, their ever increasing military budgets and this is barely getting a mention? I am more flabbergasted than ever.

    The WH response has been farcical, no mention of what they would do if the intel was credible, just sticking their fingers in their ears and going NA NA NA. Brutal.

    If the American people stand for this it's all over in the States. Not just now, but imagine what someone smarter than Trump, but with similarly lacking in oral standards could do if in office.

    All the talk of the separation of powers, etc. One buffoon can almost bring the country to it's knees in four years.

    They won't go against him because of his supposed popularity with Republican voters and they're afraid of being destroyed on Twitter, like Justin Amash and Jeff Flake were. That's the extent of their interest in their country - they're more interested in keeping their jobs and staying out of the news than doing the right thing.

    It's a national disgrace.


  • #9963
    Stallingrad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,210 ✭✭✭Stallingrad


    The Democratic strategy of doing nothing seems to be working for now. Let Trump torpedo himself, The Lincoln Project and others are doing amazing work for them and keep Biden in the basement. The polls are pretty horrific for the Reps at the moment.

    As promising as all this looks, will it be enough to beat the gerrymandering, voter purging, postal ballot bans and inevitable foreign interference?


  • #9964
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,425 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    PropJoe10 wrote: »
    They won't go against him because of his supposed popularity with Republican voters and they're afraid of being destroyed on Twitter, like Justin Amash and Jeff Flake were. That's the extent of their interest in their country - they're more interested in keeping their jobs and staying out of the news than doing the right thing.

    It's a national disgrace.

    Exactly, as has been said before the GOP have no interest in Governing , their only interest is Power and they do not care what it takes to keep it.

    As long as Trump retains high levels of support with GOP voters no one in the GOP will speak out against him , no matter what he does.

    John McCain once said it - He was asked "What would it take for the GOP to turn on Trump?" , he replied "When he starts polling consistently in the 30's"

    Not - If he did or didn't do X or Y , but ONLY if his polling numbers dropped.

    Power is all that matters to them , nothing else.


  • #9965
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    Sorry I assumed when you said Russia you were talking anout this most recent Russia issue and not the broader Russia issue. I mean I think why he's not pushed back because as we have seen he thinks anything Russia related is a hoax of some kind. The fact he hasn't though will raise question as to whether he is comprimised in some way by the Russians.

    I'm talking about anything and everything to do with Trump's alleged links to Russia.

    I don't think they can be compartmentalised.

    I don't think the reason Trump hasn't pushed back on Russia as regards the bounty money is because he thinks anything Russia-related is a hoax.

    I don't think that's the reason at all.


  • #9966
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    duploelabs wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/jpaceDC/status/1277792243055804417?s=19

    Looks like it was as far back as 2019

    Wow.

    I wonder whether many people who shout "I'm pro-Trump and pro-troops!" have developed even a trace of cognitive dissonance by this stage.

    Probably not, I'd say.


  • Advertisement
  • #9967
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Stallingrad wrote: »
    The Democratic strategy of doing nothing seems to be working for now. Let Trump torpedo himself, The Lincoln Project and others are doing amazing work for them and keep Biden in the basement. The polls are pretty horrific for the Reps at the moment.

    As promising as all this looks, will it be enough to beat the gerrymandering, voter purging, postal ballot bans and inevitable foreign interference?

    To the best of my knowledge, all Trump likely needs is a 269-269 tie.

    That would mean that Biden could win Pennsylvania and Michigan and still not get to 270.

    Trump just needs to voter suppress on an industrial scale in the other states, which absolutely will happen, and probably falsify a small percentage of votes to give him a narrow victory in those states.

    It's amazing how that was the exact thing that happened in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin last time.


  • #9968
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Given we've seen Trump supporters - albeit a statistically questionable two people - wear t-shirts crowing "I'd rather be Russian than vote Democrat", the base and hardcore simply don't care. It's the Sunk Cost fallacy at this stage writ large. Though this item that Trump knowingly ignored American troops being attacked via Russia interference may stretch the conscience of even the most die hard support.

    Or not. This damn presidency is such a curious mutant it's hard to be sure about anything: his attack on the Khans, his sneering of McCain's time as a POW would have sunk 99% of other candidates - yet here we are. Tho shalt not insult the troops, while attacking families regardless of context is a consistent no-no, yet no political norm seems to stick to Trump's rise. This is the country that giggled and wrote off Michael Dukakis for posing in a tank, yet Trump gets carte blanche to demean the military. It's weird.

    So maybe, maybe knowing Russia was attacking US troops by proxy, and Trump sat on the information, could damage him. I kinda presumed the Khans didn't hurt too much because a) they were used by the Democrats as an election tool, and b) they were Muslim. This could be different in that there's a clear line of red yarn between Trump, Russia and a knowing endangerment of US troops.


  • #9969
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,740 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Given we've seen Trump supporters - albeit a statistically questionable two people - wear t-shirts crowing "I'd rather be Russian than vote Democrat", the base and hardcore simply don't care. It's the Sunk Cost fallacy at this stage writ large. Though this item that Trump knowingly ignored American troops being attacked via Russia interference may stretch the conscience of even the most die hard support.

    Or not. This damn presidency is such a curious mutant it's hard to be sure about anything: his attack on the Khans, his sneering of McCain's time as a POW would have sunk 99% of other candidates - yet here we are. Tho shalt not insult the troops, while attacking families regardless of context is a consistent no-no, yet no political norm seems to stick to Trump's rise. This is the country that giggled and wrote off Michael Dukakis for posing in a tank, yet Trump gets carte blanche to demean the military. It's weird.

    So maybe, maybe knowing Russia was attacking US troops by proxy, and Trump sat on the information, could damage him. I kinda presumed the Khans didn't hurt too much because a) they were used by the Democrats as an election tool, and b) they were Muslim. This could be different in that there's a clear line of red yarn between Trump, Russia and a knowing endangerment of US troops.

    Even take for example the whole kneeling during the anthem, when athletes did that he screamed about how it was "unpatriotic" and disrespectful to the military and people lapped it up.


  • #9970
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,441 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    sid waddell wrote: »
    I'm talking about anything and everything to do with Trump's alleged links to Russia.

    I don't think they can be compartmentalised.

    I don't think the reason Trump hasn't pushed back on Russia as regards the bounty money is because he thinks anything Russia-related is a hoax.

    I don't think that's the reason at all.

    Well because of the mueller report and it's evidence that Russia did in fact interfere in the 2016 election on his behalf it's clear he can't stand his election win in some way being less than legitimate in the eyes of the American people. So, I do believe that this issue, even far removed from the 2016 election is linked to it.

    I do think his refusal to push back on Putin in any way and like in Helsinki side with is because we know that trump likes strongmen type leaders like putin.

    It will be interesting to see how this story plays with the military voters because that's voters he needs.


  • #9971
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,702 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    Sorry I assumed when you said Russia you were talking anout this most recent Russia issue and not the broader Russia issue. I mean I think why he's not pushed back because as we have seen he thinks anything Russia related is a hoax of some kind. The fact he hasn't though will raise question as to whether he is comprimised in some way by the Russians.

    I used to think that the whole Moscow Hotel/golden shower thing was the stuff of conspiracy theory. But then I saw a good doc on Putins rise to power from his KGB days in Germany and the use of kompromat is a normal tool for him. The doc also said Putin had been tracking Trump for years before the 2016 election in the hope he would one day run for President and become a useful asset for Russia.

    I dont even think that the theory of Trump secretly recorded on tape with four prostitutes needs to be true to compromise him. It was his Miss Universe contest being hosted in Moscow so lots of girls 18-21 were about, even him having sex with one of them and Putin having a tape of that is more than enough to politically compromise him. Were that tape to emerge it would turn the stomachs of the American people, a 70 year old man with an impressionable teenage girl, its as bad as Harvery Weinstein. We already know that Trump likes to go backstage at these beauty pagents when all the girls are naked and leer at them, its not a big leap to make that he wants to get them into his bed, its what he does. And its definitely not beyond Putins capacity to have his hotel room bugged, its what he does.

    The only other rational explanation I can think of that explains how soft he has been on Russia is that privately he recognises Russian interference in the 2016 election was what got him over the line against Clinton. Russian bots literally targeted voters in swing states on social media with constant clips of Hillary and the emails or her briefly stumbling. It was relentless in the lead up to the election and they were a factor in helping Trump. Maybe Trump recognises that Putin wants him in the White House and he rightfully thinks Putins bot army will go to battle again for this election so why speak out against someone who is an electoral asset.


  • Advertisement
  • #9972
    duploelabs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,911 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    I used to think that the whole Moscow Hotel/golden shower thing was the stuff of conspiracy theory. But then I saw a good doc on Putins rise to power from his KGB days in Germany and the use of kompromat is a normal tool for him. The doc also said Putin had been tracking Trump for years before the 2016 election in the hope he would one day run for President and become a useful asset for Russia.

    I dont even think that the theory of Trump secretly recorded on tape with four prostitutes needs to be true to compromise him. It was his Miss Universe contest being hosted in Moscow so lots of girls 18-21 were about, even him having sex with one of them and Putin having a tape of that is more than enough to politically compromise him. Were that tape to emerge it would turn the stomachs of the American people, a 70 year old man with an impressionable teenage girl, its as bad as Harvery Weinstein. We already know that Trump likes to go backstage at these beauty pagents when all the girls are naked and leer at them, its not a big leap to make that he wants to get them into his bed, its what he does. And its definitely not beyond Putins capacity to have his hotel room bugged, its what he does.

    The only other rational explanation I can think of that explains how soft he has been on Russia is that privately he recognises Russian interference in the 2016 election was what got him over the line against Clinton. Russian bots literally targeted voters in swing states on social media with constant clips of Hillary and the emails or her briefly stumbling. It was relentless in the lead up to the election and they were a factor in helping Trump. Maybe Trump recognises that Putin wants him in the White House and he rightfully thinks Putins bot army will go to battle again for this election so why speak out against someone who is an electoral asset.

    You're missing the substantial financial allegations surrounding Trump laundering Russian mafia money, as they say in The Wire 'follow the money'.
    There's a whole episode outlining it in the Netflix series, 'Dirty Money' https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7909174/


  • #9973
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,425 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    duploelabs wrote: »
    You're missing the substantial financial allegations surrounding Trump laundering Russian mafia money, as they say in The Wire 'follow the money'.
    There's a whole episode outlining it in the Netflix series, 'Dirty Money' https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7909174/

    And given that most if not all of the Oligarchs owe their wealth and status to Putin the line between the two isn't exactly thin.


  • #9974
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,702 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Yeah the money laundering allegations are there too but they are not as salacious or politically damaging as the potential for a sex tape to emerge. Just the very threat of it would be enough for Trump to realise that Putin has got him by the balls and could finish his poltical career at any given time of his choosing.

    Then the whole thing of Trump having private meetings with him without interpreters present, serious questions over that because it is him throwing protocol for these one on one meetings right out the window. I dont think Trump has done that with any other world leader, only Putin.


  • #9975
    duploelabs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,911 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    Yeah that as well but its not as salacious or politically damaging as the potential for a sex tape to emerge. Just the very threat of it would be enough for Trump to realise that Putin has got him by the balls and could finish his poltical career at any given time of his choosing.

    Then the whole thing of Trump having private meetings with him without interpreters present, serious questions over that because it is him throwing protocol for these one on one meetings right out the window. I dont think Trump has done that with any other world leader, only Putin.

    You've read the witness statement that was lodged against Trump but subsequently retracted due to intimidation?
    https://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Johnson_TrumpEpstein_Lawsuit.pdf

    If that doesn't count, then how much gravitas would an encounter with a Russian hooker produce?


  • #9976
    Inquitus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,762 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Trump's White Power! retweet

    https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1276965068048158720


  • #9977
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,425 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Inquitus wrote: »
    Trump's White Power! retweet

    https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1276965068048158720

    Is it a message of some kind that on the desktop version of the site , the above was the 1st post on page 666 of the thread?


  • #9978
    aloyisious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,298 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Jennifer Horne, the former chair of New Hampshire Republican Party, member of the Log Cabin Republicans and a co-founder of the Lincoln Project was on CNN explaining how she wanted to rid the GOP of Trumpism and all the GOP Senators bar one, even if it means the Democrats win the election. Re the Russians paying bounties for the deaths of US soldiers in Afghanistan ISSUE, she said Trump is a traitor to the US and its constitution. The Lincoln Project Ad of US service members coming home in flag-draped coffins was played during that segment of the interview.


  • #9979
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,702 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    duploelabs wrote: »
    You've read the witness statement that was lodged against Trump but subsequently retracted due to intimidation?
    https://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Johnson_TrumpEpstein_Lawsuit.pdf

    If that doesn't count, then how much gravitas would an encounter with a Russian hooker produce?

    Allegations of money laundering just arent sexy whereas sex tapes are. The Panana Papers should have been a global story for weeks given the gravity of what they found but after two days the public at large had tuned out of it. A sex tape of Trump with a teenager would be a whole different kettle of fish, Twitter would blow up and networks would be running it on a repeating loop. In any case if it does exist then Putin wont be leaking it until such time as Trump is of no use to him. Putin wants Trump to stay in the White House, he is much more preferable than dealing with Biden.


  • #9980
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    Allegations of money laundering just arent sexy whereas sex tapes are. The Panana Papers should have been a global story for weeks given the gravity of what they found but after two days the public at large had tuned out of it. A sex tape of Trump with a teenager would be a whole different kettle of fish, Twitter would blow up and networks would be running it on a repeating loop. In any case if it does exist then Putin wont be leaking it until such time as Trump is of no use to him. Putin wants Trump to stay in the White House, he is much more preferable than dealing with Biden.

    I think this is part of the problem with US media. Who knows if the alleged sex tape is real, it may or may not be, but even if it is, it would not be a terribly important thing in the grand scheme of things unless it showed sexual assault or rape taking place, and I think it's very unlikely that such a tape exists. But it is soap opera and tabloid titillation, and the biggest failing of most of the US media in creating narrative around Trump is in falling hook, line and sinker for the soap opera shenanigans while missing or ignoring the bigger stuff.

    How much the US media is actually cowed by Trump and his cronies into avoiding reporting the real dirt is another matter, but I would guess the intimidation factor is very significant. Intimidation has been one of Trump's main modus operandi throughout his life.

    Also, the Epstein story was under the noses of the US media for over a decade before Julie K. Brown of the Miami Herald doggedly pursued it and turned it into a world story. So the US media has form in missing the elephant in the room.

    Before Trump was ever in bed with the Russian mafia, he had links to the New York Italian mafia. The Russian mafia/money laundering links are extremely important as they likely go a long way towards explaining why Trump has been behaving the way he has been towards Russia for many years.

    Everything seems to flow from this.

    Presumably the Epstein ties were kompromat of a different nature. Knowing what we do about Epstein and his ties to the Maxwells, it seems probable that Epstein was working for Israeli secret services.

    It seems highly implausible to me at this stage that Trump is not a Russian asset. There are far too many bizarre links and coincidences for anything else to be plausible.

    His life going back as far as the 1970s is littered with them, never mind his candidacy and presidency.

    I think foreign secret services saw Trump as somebody who was highly connected within US elites, and had such a monstrous ego that it was very possible he would enter politics at some stage. But he was also, at best, a highly erratic businessman who got himself into all sorts of financial trouble. He was "an easy mark", and foreign secret services could scarcely have dreamed of somebody so high profile and so compromisable.

    Obviously none of this is confined to Trump himself. He looks to be part of what strongly appears to be a wide-ranging international kleptocratic conspiracy encompassing several countries and non-state actors such as Deutsche Bank , and yes, I do hate using the c word, but what else can you use?

    Robert Mueller's 2011 speech (when he was head of the FBI) is quite instructive as to the nature of the threat the US government is likely currently in the grip of.

    But Mueller himself failed to deal properly with that threat, either as head of the FBI or in his 2017-2019 investigation.

    https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/speeches/the-evolving-organized-crime-threat


  • #9981
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,702 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Yeah Trump has always had links with the mafia going right back to the 1970s. Back then his personal lawyer was Roy Cohn who was known as a New York bruiser in the style of Trump himself. Cohn was a lawyer for many mafia figures and the FBI had a huge file on him amounting to 750 pages which they released last year. Cohn was tied up with Jimmy Hoffa and mafia boss Anthony Salerno as well as a host of mafia involved in Las Vegas casinos. And Trump too, both of them socialised a lot together.

    Roy Cohn was disbarred as a lawyer in the 1980s while working for Trump, he got caught defrauding a client out of millions. He is not to be confused with Trumps other personal lawyer Michael Cohen who was also disbarred for trying to cover up Trumps secret payment of hush money to Stormy Daniels. It seems a bit of a pattern for Trumps personal lawyers that they end up getting disbarred, its odds on that Rudy Guiliani is next for that fate over him conducting Trumps secret foreign policy in Ukraine to get dirt on Biden.


  • Advertisement
  • #9982
    Gbear
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    Roy Cohn was disbarred as a lawyer in the 1980s while working for Trump, he got caught defrauding a client out of millions. He is not to be confused with Trumps other personal lawyer Michael Cohen who was also disbarred for trying to cover up Trumps secret payment of hush money to Stormy Daniels. It seems a bit of a pattern for Trumps personal lawyers that they end up getting disbarred, its odds on that Rudy Guiliani is next for that fate over him conducting Trumps secret foreign policy in Ukraine to get dirt on Biden.


    Also Barr, although he's only Trump's lawyer in practice.


  • #9983
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    duploelabs wrote: »
    "Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent the following letter today to the Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency Gina Haspel requesting an interagency briefing for all House Members regarding disturbing press reports that Russia placed bounties on U.S. Troops in Afghanistan and President Trump’s inexplicable behavior towards Russia in light of these reports.

    In the letter, the Speaker wrote “The questions that arise are: was the President briefed, and if not, why not, and why was Congress not briefed.”

    https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/62920-0

    Why is this such big news. The Russians supplied weapons to many groups in Syria to kill American soldiers, the same as America did to kill Russian soldiers.

    Exactly the same way the US government supplied missiles to the Taliban in the 80's to kill as many Russian soldiers as possible.

    Exactly the same way the US government supplied weapons to Ukraine only a few years ago to kill as many Russian soldiers as possible.

    Are us troops in foreign countries untouchable now ? I expect this is no surprise to the USA military.


  • #9984
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    The democratic party and the democratic Mayors and governors are Trumps biggest ally. In the past 2 months they have scored a massive own goal, middle America will vote for security over anarchy, police over looting. In January Trump was guaranteed to be well beaten, not so much now. The quiet voters who are afraid to voice their opinions in public(at risk of media and Antifa physical/social bullying) will come out for Trump.


  • #9985
    moon2
    Registered Users Posts: 732 ✭✭✭moon2


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    The democratic party and the democratic Mayors and governors are Trumps biggest ally. In the past 2 months they have scored a massive own goal, middle America will vote for security over anarchy. In January Trump was guaranteed to be well beaten, not so much now. The quiet voters who are afraid to voice their opinions in public(at risk of media and Antifa physical/social bullying) will come out for Trump.

    You're saying that Trump was well beaten when the economy was still going strong, and the continual farce which is the US response to covid-19 hadn't even begun to happen?

    Reality disagrees with you, fortunately. By every metric Trump is losing support. While it's possible this can be turned around, it doesn't seem likely.


  • #9986
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    moon2 wrote: »
    You're saying that Trump was well beaten when the economy was still going strong, and the continual farce which is the US response to covid-19 hadn't even begun to happen?

    Reality disagrees with you, fortunately. By every metric Trump is losing support. While it's possible this can be turned around, it doesn't seem likely.
    In January he had done nothing for his support base. Farmers were losing out due to China, the rust belt was continuing to lose jobs, oil was at a record low.
    Now his base have a reason to vote. They are under attack by the democrats, media and antifa, cities are been burned, statues destroyed and the flag stamped on, anarchy reigns.

    They don't care about the response to Covid.

    You may not see it that way, but they do. Now they have a massive incentive to come out and vote even if Trumps economic policies have failed. Way to go Nancy..

    Before the last election, Hillary had a 94% chance of winning.


  • #9987
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Why is this such big news. The Russians supplied weapons to many groups in Syria to kill American soldiers, the same as America did to kill Russian soldiers.

    Exactly the same way the US government supplied missiles to the Taliban in the 80's to kill as many Russian soldiers as possible.

    Exactly the same way the US government supplied weapons to Ukraine only a few years ago to kill as many Russian soldiers as possible.

    Are us troops in foreign countries untouchable now ? I expect this is no surprise to the USA military.

    You see you've completely missed the point there.

    You don't have to agree with the war in Afghanistan, I never did.

    One of the most basic tasks for the leader of any country is to do everything they can to protect their armed forces.

    If, say, Turkey was offering prize money for the killing of Russian soldiers in Syria, and Putin not just refused to in any way criticise Erdogan and Turkey for such, but meekly rewarded them for it in a geopolitical sense, how do you think that would go down in Russia?

    The point is that Donald Trump knows US troops are targets of Russian sponsored slaughter, is happy to take no action at all in response, is happy to say nothing in the way of criticism, and is happy to openly reward the sponsors of that slaughter - with no strings attached.

    That is tantamount to supporting the targeting and slaughter of US troops.


  • #9988
    Cody montana
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,446 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    In January he had done nothing for his support base. Farmers were losing out due to China, the rust belt was continuing to lose jobs, oil was at a record low.
    Now his base have a reason to vote. They are under attack by the democrats, media and antifa, cities are been burned, statues destroyed and the flag stamped on, anarchy reigns.

    They don't care about the response to Covid.

    You may not see it that way, but they do. Now they have a massive incentive to come out and vote even if Trumps economic policies have failed. Way to go Nancy..

    Before the last election, Hillary had a 94% chance of winning.

    Is trump now running on statues not being destroyed?
    Ohh please let this be true.


  • #9989
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Cody montana wrote: »
    Is trump now running on statues not being destroyed?
    Ohh please let this be true.
    You think that doesn't incentivise some of his supporters ?


  • #9990
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    Yeah Trump has always had links with the mafia going right back to the 1970s. Back then his personal lawyer was Roy Cohn who was known as a New York bruiser in the style of Trump himself. Cohn was a lawyer for many mafia figures and the FBI had a huge file on him amounting to 750 pages which they released last year. Cohn was tied up with Jimmy Hoffa and mafia boss Anthony Salerno as well as a host of mafia involved in Las Vegas casinos. And Trump too, both of them socialised a lot together.

    Roy Cohn was disbarred as a lawyer in the 1980s while working for Trump, he got caught defrauding a client out of millions. He is not to be confused with Trumps other personal lawyer Michael Cohen who was also disbarred for trying to cover up Trumps secret payment of hush money to Stormy Daniels. It seems a bit of a pattern for Trumps personal lawyers that they end up getting disbarred, its odds on that Rudy Guiliani is next for that fate over him conducting Trumps secret foreign policy in Ukraine to get dirt on Biden.

    Cohn was basically a bouncer for Trump. He would intimidate and threaten the hell out of anybody who dug into Trump's affairs. He was a thug, but Trump's closest confidante.

    That didn't stop Trump completely washing his hands of him when Cohn was dying from AIDS, mind.

    To Trump, everybody, bar perhaps Ivanka, has always been dispensable.


  • Advertisement
  • #9991
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    You think that doesn't incentivise some of his supporters ?

    That isn't likely to cover all the demographics he's leaking like a sieve.


  • #9992
    moon2
    Registered Users Posts: 732 ✭✭✭moon2


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    In January he had done nothing for his support base. Farmers were losing out due to China, the rust belt was continuing to lose jobs, oil was at a record low.
    Now his base have a reason to vote. They are under attack by the democrats, media and antifa, cities are been burned, statues destroyed and the flag stamped on, anarchy reigns.

    They don't care about the response to Covid.

    You may not see it that way, but they do. Now they have a massive incentive to come out and vote even if Trumps economic policies have failed. Way to go Nancy..

    Before the last election, Hillary had a 94% chance of winning.

    No point in rehashing the Hillary aspect, other than to say she did win more votes and, if I remember correctly, all swing states fell within the expected margin of error. As such, the predictions were correct.

    I appreciate you feel quite strongly about what's happening in America at the moment. However the way it's currently playing out is the opposite of what you perceive. Support for Trump is clearly dropping across the board. The farmers which you claim were suffering still *are* suffering.

    I think you're right that there's a perception that people don't care about covid. I suspect that's partially because it had yet to hit some states. thanks to premature reopening and a lack of any form of coordinated response this is now changing. The US is once again the worst region in the world for new infections, this time across the states which were less affected in March/April/May. If history is any prediction this is where the highest mortality will be seen in the coming weeks.

    The likely outcome of this will not be an overwhelming show of support for Trump.


  • #9993
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    sid waddell wrote: »
    The point is that Donald Trump knows US troops are targets of Russian sponsored slaughter, is happy to take no action at all in response, is happy to say nothing in the way of criticism, and is happy to openly reward the sponsors of that slaughter - with no strings attached.

    That is tantamount to supporting the targeting and slaughter of US troops.
    I expect Russian sponsored slaughter like America sponsored slaughter is expected and acknowledged in these locations.

    The supply of high grade weaponry to elements of ISIS(FSA & other groups)
    by the USA to kill Russian soldiers would count as a response in my eyes.

    You do not hear Putin crticising the USA for sending weaponry to the middle east to kill Russians, even though that's what a lot of it will be used for one way or another.

    Criticising it is acknowledging it, i can't imagine either side want to be shown as been so vulnerable.


  • #9994
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    House Democrats have tabled a resolution to impeach Barr.

    This is long overdue.

    Barr is a very dangerous man.


  • #9995
    Cody montana
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,446 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    You think that doesn't incentivise some of his supporters ?

    I suppose if you take into account the millions unemployed, the 125 thousand dead, the economy in tatters, only 3 miles of new wall built, Hillary free, no new infrastructure plan, Obamacare not repealed, coal jobs not brought back, deficit not reduced, a trade war that bankrupt farmers, taxes not released, America a laughing stock, getting impeached, the 20 thousand lies he’s told, all the criminal he’s employed.......then yes, I could see how statues would be a priority in a presidential election.


  • #9996
    StringerBell
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,260 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    You think that doesn't incentivise some of his supporters ?

    His entire base, every single last one of them. They can't win him re-election so to borrow and paraphrase from yourself, what difference does it make?

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Advertisement
  • #9997
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I expect Russian sponsored slaughter like America sponsored slaughter is expected and acknowledged in these locations.

    The supply of high grade weaponry to elements of ISIS(FSA & other groups)
    by the USA to kill Russian soldiers would count as a response in my eyes.

    You do not hear Putin crticising the USA for sending weaponry to the middle east to kill Russians, even though that's what a lot of it will be used for one way or another.

    Criticising it is acknowledging it, i can't imagine either side want to be shown as been so vulnerable.
    This post makes no sense.

    The US under Trump has given in to all of Russia's demands in the Middle East. That's bad enough.

    But you don't seem to understand that what Trump is doing is tantamount to supporting the slaughter of what are supposed to be his own troops.

    That is unconscionable and utterly treacherous and traitorous.


  • #9998
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    StringerBell wrote: »
    His entire base, every single last one of them. They can't win him re-election so to borrow and paraphrase from yourself, what difference does it make?
    I think it will be closer than many expect, and a lot closer than it needed to be.


  • #9999
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Cody montana wrote: »
    I suppose if you take into account the millions unemployed, the 125 thousand dead, the economy in tatters, only 3 miles of new wall built, Hillary free, no new infrastructure plan, Obamacare not repealed, coal jobs not brought back, deficit not reduced, a trade war that bankrupt farmers, taxes not released, America a laughing stock, getting impeached, the 20 thousand lies he’s told, all the criminal he’s employed.......then yes, I could see how statues would be a priority in a presidential election.

    Trump has nothing except whipping up a far right race/culture war in which white Christians are ordered to fantasise that they are the victims of "oppression" merely for being white Christians - "oppression" perpetrated by ethnic minorities and "snowflake lib'ruls".

    That's what Hitler did.

    It is a poisonous ideology which has no vision of a positive future, only chaos and bloodshed, and is tragically gaining huge currency around the world, egged on by poisonous politicians and right-wing media grifters.


  • #10000
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    sid waddell wrote: »
    This post makes no sense.

    The US under Trump has given in to all of Russia's demands in the Middle East. That's bad enough.

    But you don't seem to understand that what Trump is doing is tantamount to supporting the slaughter of what are supposed to be his own troops.

    That is unconscionable and utterly treacherous and traitorous.

    Russians sponsored the killing of American troops(happening since the end of WW2). What do you want Trump to do about it ?

    America sponsored the killing of Russian troops(happening since the end of WW2). How to you expect Putin to respond to further American aggression ?

    Nearly every battle since WW2 has had the USA and Russian in the background using proxies with assets on the ground. This is not something new.


  • #10001
    Cody montana
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,446 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    sid waddell wrote: »
    Trump has nothing except whipping up a far right race/culture war in which white Christians are ordered to fantasise that they are the victims of "oppression" merely for being white Christians - "oppression" perpetrated by ethnic minorities and "snowflake lib'ruls".

    That's what Hitler did.

    It is a poisonous ideology which has no vision of a positive future, only chaos and bloodshed, and is tragically gaining huge currency around the world, egged on by poisonous politicians and right-wing media grifters.

    Indeed.
    Trump is trying to run on hate and fear.
    He doesn’t want to unite the USA.

    He needs to be called out on what he promised and on what he achieved.
    A total bluffer.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement