I never said anything to the contrary to what you just posted.

In fact, having assets in Germany is of great importance to our mission in Afghanistan and Iraq. Without the bases in Germany operations would be far more complicated - or we'd be forced to put bases somewhere less convenient or strategic. I'm fully aware of what our government is committing to and wish would actually INCREASE what we're doing. If I have somehow given off a different impression I'm sorry but it couldn't be further from what I really believe.

trpmb6 wrote:

get a fighter jet for slightly less than they would have if they developed themselves.

They have a lower number on the invoice, but a domestically developed fighter creates technology, good jobs throughout the supply line domestically. Domestic vs. foreign development should give you something like 50% discount on the tag price, so pure purchasing would need to cost less than half to be attractive.

If that system would work out, weapons purchases would be a two way street, but US sourcing abroad is somewhat lacking, even if you get a domestic FAL. So i guess on your side of the Atlantik you guys have figured out that it ain´t a win win.

The NATO Basic Military Requirement 1 (NBMR-1) winner was in the end only purchased by Germany and its homeland Italy. Win-Win didn´t win......

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

seahawk wrote:

otherwise they won´t be selling any more BMWs in the USA.

so he tells a US company they can´t sell cars in the US? Well, that is a way to make direct foreign investments stop .... the ones that create US jobs and pay US taxes...

best regards
Thomas

BMW already has a factory in the USA, which pays taxes and creates jobs. They build their X-5 and maybe some other crossovers there. And this trade war means that European built sedans will be dutied by the USA, but so will be American-built BMW crossovers in Europe.

To give you a vague idea, the USA presently spends about 7oo Billlion $. Trumos 4% is wrong, as usual. it is about 3,5% of the GNP, so 1,2% would be roughly 230 Billion..

In Germany, the USA has about 35000 soldiers and staff. They are spread over 3 main Locations, the Army European HQ in Wiesbaden with the Erbenheim AAF, Ramstein and Spangdahlem AFB plus a couple minor Locations. The 2 AFBs have fighter squadrons which protect the bases. None of These are employed with the protection of Germany. We simply have no immediate neighbours that threaten us. Poland and the Baltic states have and Germany conributes, amonst other functions, regular air policing by stationing jets in a Baltic Country.

Fact is, 2 main AFBs that serve as an important logistic Support to the US global Military Network. You guys are welcomed here to use These bases and the Army HQ. Although the Trump blabla nerves. There is no Fulda gap to protect anymore and the reason for that is successful politics. There are no 250K tropps like the Old Ironsides near Mainz. They fought in Afghanistan before leaving their Support base going back home.

What really bothers me more is, that Trump destroys a relation between Germany and the USA that has grown over more than 7 decades. Fact is, we will increase our Military spending by 0,1% of the GNP annually, which is about 3 to 4 Billion p.a.. But not to Keep the POTUS happy, it is simple over die after 2 decades of down sizing.

VTKillarney wrote:

PanHAM wrote:

There is no bill and no promise to pay.

At the 2006 NATO summit in Latvia you agreed to spend 2% of your GDP on defense spending.

You are spending 1.2%.

Join Greece, Estonia, the United Kingdom, Romania, and Poland. Pay your bills.

Well, this is a funny question. Let’s say Europe does boost up their defense spending. First - they will invest these funds into their own arms manufactures and not only will not be ordering American-built arms, but also compete with American manufacturers world-wide. Second, they will not need the USA to defend them, and might as well decide to kick USA out of the continent, saying “thank you very much”. Thus the USA will lose its political influence over Europe. Not exactly sure if it’s in American interests.

Common misconception Mortyman. The NATO agreements are for defense spending by each member state on whatever they see fit. No member state is required to contribute 2% to NATO.

I'm not really sure there is a way to track what each country actually spends in support of NATO operations. I am quite willing to bet on the US being the biggest contributor though.

seahawk wrote:

The Putin trump meet will be success and Trump will surely enjoy meeting a true leader after the NATO summit.

I don’t think it’ll be more than some friendly blah-blah. I’ll be really surprised if they even agree to mutual increase in diplomats quotas after they each kicked out hundreds of diplomats. More like recent NK “denuclearization” - a lot of noise, but nothing as the result. Pompeo was basically kicked out of Pyongyang recently, and Kim didn’t want to meet him this time.

anrec80 wrote:

Well, this is a funny question. Let’s say Europe does boost up their defense spending. First - they will invest these funds into their own arms manufactures and not only will not be ordering American-built arms, but also compete with American manufacturers world-wide.

Well, they aren't doing it now so you are going to need a little more evidence than just a suspicion.

anrec80 wrote:

Second, they will not need the USA to defend them, and might as well decide to kick USA out of the continent, saying “thank you very much”. Thus the USA will lose its political influence over Europe. Not exactly sure if it’s in American interests.

They might. But they won't.

That said, I am okay with some scaling back of the United States' military muscle. We've got some muscle to spare.

trpmb6 wrote:

Common misconception Mortyman. The NATO agreements are for defense spending by each member state on whatever they see fit. No member state is required to contribute 2% to NATO.

I'm not really sure there is a way to track what each country actually spends in support of NATO operations.

Then we agree. I think you missunderstood me here ...

Quite possible. It's hard to read between lines in forums sometimes. That's why I try not to be hostile. (I'll admit i fail at that at times)

Dutchy wrote:

Exactly, this is a geopolitical pipeline, not a commercial one. Thanks for clarifying that.

I know geopolitics is the first thing you see everywhere - but where do you see it here?

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Exactly, this is a geopolitical pipeline, not a commercial one. Thanks for clarifying that.

I know geopolitics is the first thing you see everywhere - but where do you see it here?

Nice frame, well done.

Here it is quite obvious: get rid of the dependence of Ukraine as Putin's Russia is dependent on oil/gas money from the west and Putin invaded Ukraine, annexed part of it and made damn sure there was a civil war started, like in other regions. Unless you are blind for geopolitics, this is the first one on top of everyone's mind.

VTKillarney wrote:

Well, they aren't doing it now so you are going to need a little more evidence than just a suspicion.

Domestic defense spending that includes orders from domestic arms manufacturers have very high multiplier - i.e. each euro of such spending spurs more economic activity, say, adds 1.5-1.8 euros of GDP. If the manufacturing chains are largely domestic of course (which is not a likely case in Europe). So they can organize it if they see that they can - a pretty profitable thing; the government will take most of this investment back in taxes if done right. Similar story with US food stamps - they have high multiplier as well.

The reason they aren’t doing it - it takes a lot of work, arrangements, risks of sanction standoffs, and a lot more to make it work. And the main - current position is known to them and works for them.

VTKillarney wrote:

They might. But they won't.

That said, I am okay with some scaling back of the United States' military muscle. We've got some muscle to spare.

If they are in a position and have ability - why would they? They pay for their security with part of their sovereignty, having to look back to the US in their major political decisions. If they see they are forced to provide their security anyway and pay for it with their own taxes in full - why would they ask USA, say, to build this Nord Stream 2 or even Nord Stream 3?

They can just tell US like Russians - “none of your business”. Say “sanctions”? Well - there will be counter-sanctions, but nothing else. And yes - your military has to get out in 30 days. Project will still be on schedule. Same comes with business with Iran.

Speaking of the US “muscle” - it needs to be scaled back 2-3 times. Though during these economic boom times budget deficits isn’t a trendy topic, they are still there and didn’t go anywhere. USA still can’t afford it.

Dutchy wrote:

Nice frame, well done.

Here it is quite obvious: get rid of the dependence of Ukraine as Putin's Russia is dependent on oil/gas money from the west and Putin invaded Ukraine, annexed part of it and made damn sure there was a civil war started, like in other regions. Unless you are blind for geopolitics, this is the first one on top of everyone's mind.

Isn’t that what any business does? Looking to save costs, constantly re-evaluating suppliers, cutting middlemen? These are all normal things. Plus, Ukraine showed to be an unreliable supplier since mid-2000s (under the previous “democratic leadership”), was siphoning off gas they didn’t pay for, refused to transfer, etc. This is how the first Nord Stream emerged.

For example Amazon legally is busy building out their own delivery network for parcels. Nobody says they are doing it because Jeff Bezos doesn’t like facial expression of UPS CEO - it’s because this way they can save $$$ on delivery, earn more for their shareholders and pass savings to their customers.

Same here - Gazprom and their German customers can split the savings of transferring gas via this pipeline over Ukrainian transit. Hence Ukraine needs to provide better terms. That’s all.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Nice frame, well done.

Here it is quite obvious: get rid of the dependence of Ukraine as Putin's Russia is dependent on oil/gas money from the west and Putin invaded Ukraine, annexed part of it and made damn sure there was a civil war started, like in other regions. Unless you are blind for geopolitics, this is the first one on top of everyone's mind.

Isn’t that what any business does? Looking to save costs, constantly re-evaluating suppliers, cutting middlemen? These are all normal things. For example Amazon legally is busy building out their own delivery network for parcels. Nobody says they are doing it because Jeff Bezos doesn’t like facial expression of UPS CEO - it’s because this way they can save $$$ on delivery, earn more for their shareholders and pass savings to their customers.

Same here - Gazprom and their German customers can split the savings of transferring gas via this pipeline over Ukrainian transit. Hence Ukraine needs to provide better terms. That’s all.

My only question is, do you actually believe this mascarade or is your love for Putin too blinding? Big business in Russia = the Kremlin = Putin = politics. And you want to compare a normal firm like Amazon with Gazprom, that is a well-known propaganda method.

Dutchy wrote:

My only question is, do you actually believe this mascarade or is your love for Putin too blinding? Big business in Russia = the Kremlin = Putin = politics. And you want to compare a normal firm like Amazon with Gazprom, that is a well-known propaganda method.

Where do you see masquerade here? And what’s wrong with Gazprom? Just like any other public company, Gazprom has its shareholders, public accounting, etc. And it’s accountable to shareholders. Russian state controls it - yes, they control 50% plus one share, and out of those state directly owns less than 40%. The remaining half - other investors. Bank of New York owns a considerable stake.

Anyone on the West (including you) can buy some shares, just as any other public company. I have a friend in the USA who bought them via an American brokerage and owns some. He made some $$$ when Gazprom shut down Ukraine for non-payment and shares went up as the result. Nothing wrong with Gazprom as the company as you can see. They do what any other company would.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

My only question is, do you actually believe this mascarade or is your love for Putin too blinding? Big business in Russia = the Kremlin = Putin = politics. And you want to compare a normal firm like Amazon with Gazprom, that is a well-known propaganda method.

Where do you see masquerade here? And what’s wrong with Gazprom? Just like any other public company, Gazprom has its shareholders, public accounting, etc. And it’s accountable to shareholders. Russian state controls it - yes, they control 50% plus one share, and out of those state directly owns less than 40%. The remaining half - other investors. Bank of New York owns a considerable stake.

Anyone on the West (including you) can buy some shares, just as any other public company. I have a friend in the USA who bought them via an American brokerage and owns some. He made some $$$ when Gazprom shut down Ukraine for non-payment and shares went up as the result. Nothing wrong with Gazprom as the company as you can see. They do what any other company would.

Oh good, I guess I just have to take your word for that then.......

The DOJ just indicted 12 Russion GRU Intelligence officers

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... rosenstein

"A dozen Russians were criminally charged on Friday with hacking and leaking the emails of senior Democrats during the 2016 presidential election campaign."

And now the Lying racist coward Trump will go to suck up and thank Putin for it all. I haven't seen a negative tweet towards Putin yet, while all Trump does is blast our allies on this recent trip.

Good, glad to see some more announcements about this. Sadly it won't actually result in anything. It's not like Russia is going to extradite anyone to the US.

trpmb6 wrote:

Good, glad to see some more announcements about this. Sadly it won't actually result in anything. It's not like Russia is going to extradite anyone to the US.

Why do think Russia was so focused on helping Trump win?

2122M wrote:

trpmb6 wrote:

Good, glad to see some more announcements about this. Sadly it won't actually result in anything. It's not like Russia is going to extradite anyone to the US.

Why do think Russia was so focused on helping Trump win?

Were they?

FBI's Comey: Republicans also hacked by Russia

I think the general consensus in the intelligence community is that Russia was trying to disrupt our electoral process. Not necessarily picking a winner or loser.

Edit: Ok that article i linked disputes my last assertion. Not sure where I got that in my head. I'll dig further.

Russia wins by having us bickering at each other constantly. They want a divided America. I doubt they care that much about who is really at top.

I'm reading the indictment released by the DOJ now. It amazes me how inept people are with computer security. There was really only one sophisticated attack that they performed that I would say was pretty clever; creating a fake email address that was one character off from the actual one. This helps demonstrate the importance of using secured email servers and not personal email services like gmail and the like. I admonish anyone that uses a personal email for government business - it's just asking for trouble and honestly only makes you look dirty as if you were trying to skirt FOIA. This includes the Trump administration. They better knock that crap off.

trpmb6 wrote:

2122M wrote:

trpmb6 wrote:

Good, glad to see some more announcements about this. Sadly it won't actually result in anything. It's not like Russia is going to extradite anyone to the US.

Why do think Russia was so focused on helping Trump win?

Were they?

FBI's Comey: Republicans also hacked by Russia

I think the general consensus in the intelligence community is that Russia was trying to disrupt our electoral process. Not necessarily picking a winner or loser.

Edit: Ok that article i linked disputes my last assertion. Not sure where I got that in my head. I'll dig further.

Russia wins by having us bickering at each other constantly. They want a divided America. I doubt they care that much about who is really at top.

From your link:

]Top intelligence officials indicated on Tuesday that the GOP was also a Russian hacking target but that none of the information obtained was leaked.

trpmb6 wrote:

I'm reading the indictment released by the DOJ now. It amazes me how inept people are with computer security. There was really only one sophisticated attack that they performed that I would say was pretty clever; creating a fake email address that was one character off from the actual one. This helps demonstrate the importance of using secured email servers and not personal email services like gmail and the like. I admonish anyone that uses a personal email for government business - it's just asking for trouble and honestly only makes you look dirty as if you were trying to skirt FOIA. This includes the Trump administration. They better knock that crap off.

Point of agreement for us. Its lazy on both sides and just asking for trouble.

Yes, and unfortunately we'll never know why it wasn't leaked. Or why they weren't as successful at getting more information or getting deeper into the RNC's computer systems. Could be they didn't get anything of value. Perhaps the RNC was better prepared for such hacking attempts? Perhaps the folks who work at the RNC aren't as easily duped by phishing attempts?

We don't know.

We do know the RNC was targeted.

2122M wrote:

Point of agreement for us. Its lazy on both sides and just asking for trouble.

hear hear!

Ok I should probably get some work done today....

einsteinboricua wrote:

Tell the same group of Israel supporters in the US that applying the same logic elsewhere means the US should also give back its western half (which belonged to Mexico and Native American tribes) and they'll laugh in your face.

Rather obviously the historic Israelites were squatters/conquerors of the land they settled on
back when and that the current representatives of Israel now claim as their historic heritage.

it all traces back to "our god gave us this land".

Ok I kept reading more of the indictment they released. Bottom of page 13, top of page 14:

The Conspirators also released documents they had stolen in other spearphishing operations, including those they had conducted in 2015 that collected emails from individuals affiliated with the Republican Party.

2122M wrote:

trpmb6 wrote:

2122M wrote:

Why do think Russia was so focused on helping Trump win?

Were they?

FBI's Comey: Republicans also hacked by Russia

I think the general consensus in the intelligence community is that Russia was trying to disrupt our electoral process. Not necessarily picking a winner or loser.

Edit: Ok that article i linked disputes my last assertion. Not sure where I got that in my head. I'll dig further.

Russia wins by having us bickering at each other constantly. They want a divided America. I doubt they care that much about who is really at top.

From your link:

]Top intelligence officials indicated on Tuesday that the GOP was also a Russian hacking target but that none of the information obtained was leaked.

They simply got themselves both sets of e-mails. They analysed, decided which data set is just embarrassing and hence only to be used to influence the election result, and which one contains more proof of criminal activities that can then be used to blackmail the party they helped win.

In foreign policy terms GOP and Dems are pretty much the same in the long run, so from a Russian perspective either party would have been fine. The wanted a winner they can control, Trump was willing and easy to sent to prison should the need arise, they just need to prevent his impeachment. That is where the emails come in.

The US got just lucky because most GOP members of congress seem to be clean enough to be patriots, but someone like Devin Nunes with the full support of the Russian troll army...... probably not so much.

Russian intelligence activities in the US have been back to cold war level since ~2007, it finally pays off.

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

2122M wrote:

trpmb6 wrote:

The US got just lucky because most GOP members of congress seem to be clean enough to be patriots, but someone like Devin Nunes with the full support of the Russian troll army...... probably not so much.

Russian intelligence activities in the US have been back to cold war level since ~2007, it finally pays off.

Best regards
Thomas

Dont' be so certain about that, it appears they also hedge their bets with Jill Stein, but nowhere near the amount they invested in Traitor Trump.

On a side note, are you aware of Russian attempts to lure Dem Candidate Adlai Stevenson 3x 1952, 1956 and 1960. Upping the stakes at each cycle, Stevenson reported the attempted
'assistance' each time. They've attempted to pull it off probably with every election. But by blue printing from the Gerasoimov Doctrine, the GRU was successful with cash-greedy Traitor Trump.

BN747

There are so many threads this can be posted in

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/07/13/ ... -oligarch/

Maryland voting machines linked to a Russian oligarch. What was so wrong with hand counting paper ballots?

seb146 wrote:

There are so many threads this can be posted in

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/07/13/ ... -oligarch/

Maryland voting machines linked to a Russian oligarch. What was so wrong with hand counting paper ballots?

I think we need mail ballots. It'd probably increase the number of voters anyway.

I'd prefer to vote that way.

Berevoff wrote:

seb146 wrote:

There are so many threads this can be posted in

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/07/13/ ... -oligarch/

Maryland voting machines linked to a Russian oligarch. What was so wrong with hand counting paper ballots?

I think we need mail ballots. It'd probably increase the number of voters anyway.

I'd prefer to vote that way.

Oregon has had vote by mail for years. California has started doing it, too. Now, if people were allowed to canvass neighborhoods to get people registered would help and, also, getting money out of the entire election system.

President Trump has arrived in Helsinki, president Putin arrives tomorrow. I think this is a brilliant idea:

Finland's biggest daily paper Helsingin Sanomat wants to remind the both guests of the importance of free press. 300 billboards on the routes from the airport to the summit are filled with news headlines regarding presidents’ attitude towards the press freedom, both in English and Russian.

https://twitter.com/KaiusNiemi/status/1 ... 6698175489

I don't think that President Trump is going to waste time over e-mail hacking done from Russia. We'd do it to them, if we could. Or maybe we already are!!!

The Ted Kennedy 1984 quid pro quo offer to Russia:

https://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/ted-k ... ec984e359a

And then there's this US meddlin' from the 90's:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

I don't think that President Trump is going to waste time over e-mail hacking done from Russia. We'd do it to them, if we could. Or maybe we already are!!!

The Ted Kennedy 1984 quid pro quo offer to Russia:

https://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/ted-k ... ec984e359a

And then there's this US meddlin' from the 90's:

This can be said not only about Yeltsin and Russia in 1990s. Ukraine’s ex-President Yanukovich also was using services of American “consultants”. Which did not help him of course. Jus as it did not help the consultants (e.g. Manafort).

anrec80 wrote:

Jus as it did not help the consultants (e.g. Manafort).

Did Manafort claim he was a Ukrainian Citizen while being hired for money w/o US government orders or approval?

No? So that is just a false equivalency......

It is funny to the point of hilarious that Russian mercenaries in Syria are in absolutely no way related to the Russian government, which is obvious nonsense, and the same people then go and claim claim Manafort falls into the same category than an expensive, sustained campaign by the Russian government.....

best regards
Thomas

The "Russia attacked this country" rhetoric only makes sense if you equate John Podesta's gmail account with "this country."

I'm still not sold on the idea that sending phony "change your password" links to Democratic operatives constitutes an act of war.

Honestly all I get out of the email and server hacking stuff is this: People are inept at computer security and the democrats are mainly mad that their dirty laundry got aired out.

I mean honestly, how could emails being released be harmful to your candidate if they are a knight in shining armor? If they're pure and clean then why would you be upset with your emails being released? Oh that's right. Because you find out things like Donna brazille giving your candidate questions before a debate/town hall. Or the mere fact that you were so easily dupped makes you look bad. (it also makes you look human though - in the eyes of most of the computer inept general public)

It was made even worse when the DNC/DCCC didn't allow the FBI to examine their servers. How's that transparency working for you? Why wouldn't you want a non-partisan law enforcement agency to help you find out what happened to your data? Were you afraid there might be some bad actors in the FBI that might leak additional data that wasn't flattering to your candidates or might transmit data to the GOP that could help them? (But lets remember they're a non-partisan unit!) Perhaps you had data on there that you didn't want the FBI to discover for legal reasons.

I had already decided who I was voting for long before the hacking (is it really hacking if they just use phishing methods to get your passwords?), but the emails and other memos that were released were really not that big of a deal. The thing that bothered me the most was the fact they wouldn't let the FBI see their servers. That gave the impression of impropriety as if they were trying to hide other things.

Actions speak much louder than words to me.

The Trump administration has shipped weaponry to the Ukrainians, bombed Russian-backed Syrian airbases, killed hundreds of Russian mercenaries in Syria, and placed harsher sanctions on Russia than the Obama administration.

seb146 wrote:

There are so many threads this can be posted in

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/07/13/ ... -oligarch/

Maryland voting machines linked to a Russian oligarch. What was so wrong with hand counting paper ballots?

Did you actually read the article?

That's like saying that after careful research and scientific studies under scanning electron microscopes, it was discovered that ~75k absentee ballots from the primaries were filled out with pens created in the Guangxi region of China, using ink that was produced by a parent company whose majority share-holder CEO had a maid whose mother-in-law was born in the mountains of the Kamchatka Peninsula, and that Russian collusion is again suspected, and the entire election is now in question.

Seriously?

In this day and age, everything is connected to everything else if you dig deep enough. Before 2016, it would have been seen as a good thing - a sign of a truly global economy and a connected world.

I mean if a white house staff member stayed at a hotel who stocked Mamont vodka in the mini bar, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a sensationalist headline reading "BREAKING: POTUS staff members sought-out pro-Russian hotel chains in latest visit to Paris."

That's like me calling everyone out for supporting communism because you bought an iPhone charging cord on amazon made in China.

estorilm wrote:

seb146 wrote:

There are so many threads this can be posted in

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/07/13/ ... -oligarch/

Maryland voting machines linked to a Russian oligarch. What was so wrong with hand counting paper ballots?

Did you actually read the article?

That's like saying that after careful research and scientific studies under scanning electron microscopes, it was discovered that ~75k absentee ballots from the primaries were filled out with pens created in the Guangxi region of China, using ink that was produced by a parent company whose majority share-holder CEO had a maid whose mother-in-law was born in the mountains of the Kamchatka Peninsula, and that Russian collusion is again suspected, and the entire election is now in question.

Seriously?

In this day and age, everything is connected to everything else if you dig deep enough. Before 2016, it would have been seen as a good thing - a sign of a truly global economy and a connected world.

I mean if a white house staff member stayed at a hotel who stocked Mamont vodka in the mini bar, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a sensationalist headline reading "BREAKING: POTUS staff members sought-out pro-Russian hotel chains in latest visit to Paris."

That's like me calling everyone out for supporting communism because you bought an iPhone charging cord on amazon made in China.

Two things I see in your post:

1. You don't care that Russia is still trying to select our leaders
2. You are more concerned with who owns what ink company and think that is a major story.

tRump does not see any reason why Russia hacked our elections.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics ... index.html

The hookers Putie sent over must have some really good stuff on tRump!

Is it me or did the Mods wipe out 3 hours of posts here?

casinterest wrote:

Is it me or did the Mods wipe out 3 hours of posts here?

Not saying it's impossible but its possible you're thinking about a lot of the cross over talk in the success of trump thread. A lot of putin talk over there too.

Well a recap.
Trump is a traitor

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-pu ... ing-2018-7

"Standing next to Russian President Vladimir Putin at a press conference on Monday, US President Donald Trump indicated that he believes Russia over the US intelligence community when it comes to the Kremlin's meddling in the 2016 election."

"He added: "With that being said, all I can do is ask the question. My people came to me … they said they think it's Russia. I have President Putin, he just said it's not Russia."

"I will say this," Trump said. "I don't see any reason why it would be."

Trump's comments flew in the face of the US intelligence community's findings in January 2017 that the Russian government mounted an elaborate, multi-faceted campaign aimed at elevating Trump to the presidency.

Trump has long been reluctant to accept that conclusion because he reportedly believes it undermines his 2016 election victory."





https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-polit ... rump-again

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics ... index.html


Trump threw the US intelligence Agencies and military under a bus in favor of the former head of the Russian Intelligence service.

Not sure many Trump supporters will realize he just threw our National Honor to the ground and burned it.

My take on this is that President Trump seems to be under the mis-impression that because he knows he didn’t collude with the Russian government during the 2016 election, the Russians are innocent victims of a rabid press and a misguided Mueller investigation.

This is wrong. Trump appears to be trying to soothe his own ego. Just because Trump did not collude (and so far there is zero evidence that he has), does not mean that the Russians did not attempt to interfere with the election. While there is no evidence that the Russians changed the overall result, it is a valid security interest to keep our elections free from improper foreign interference - even if we do it all of the time.

Does this make Trump a traitor? No. He is the executive in chief and, therefore, has wide latitude in what he can do and say.

casinterest wrote:

Not sure many Trump supporters will realize he just threw our National Honor to the ground and burned it.

I'm not Mueller, so I don't have the evidence to back this up, but he has got to be in Putin's pocket somehow. I can't think of any other reason why he would completely disregard his own intelligence community and instead just take the word of the accused. I can't think of any other reason why he will insult literally anyone else in the world, be it friend or foe or neither, but he hasn't said anything about Crimea, MH17, etc...

Sure he tossed s few diplomats out and has maintained the status quo with sanctions. But he is really walking on eggshells around Putin, and walking on eggshells is the least Trumpian thing I can think of. He mocks political correctness, and he's never waited on evidence in the past before shouting out accusations at others.

To all his defenders out there, can you please tell me why you think he is giving Putin such special treatment?!?

2122M wrote:

I'm not Mueller, so I don't have the evidence to back this up, but he has got to be in Putin's pocket somehow.

I am someone who expects evidence before passing judgment. This attitude has served me well in life.

Let's not forget that Trump's administration has shipped deadly weaponry to the Ukrainians, repeatedly bombed Russian-backed Syrian airbases, killed hundreds of Russian mercenaries in Syria, and placed harsher sanctions on Russia than the Obama administration.

We shall see how the evidence develops.

casinterest wrote:

Remember the Gas pipeline to Germany?

You mean when he was trying to put the screws to Russia?

Yeah, I remember that.