10 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I'm sure you were serious. The question is whether or not your sources are, in fact, laughable.

And the evidence you have produced in no way corresponds to the meaning of "complicit".

I think that was appropriate , considering how   that administration intentional neglect on this Russian Meddling("Stand Down")  destroyed  my countries democracy, "Complicit" 

3 minutes ago, riclag said:

I think that was appropriate , considering how   that administration intentional neglect on this Russian Meddling(Stand Down)  destroyed  my countries democracy, Complicit 

Let’s find out who conspired with the Russians in that meddling before we pay any attention to your attempts at deflection.

 

 

Your recognition that Trump won office by means of a ‘destroyed democracy’ are a welcome improvement.

4 minutes ago, riclag said:

I think that was appropriate , considering how   that administration intentional neglect on this Russian Meddling(Stand Down)  destroyed  my countries democracy, Complicit 

So, you believe that the Russians destroyed your country's democracy. If that country is the USA, I guess that means you doubt the legitimacy of Trump's election. Lots of people agree with you there.

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let’s find out who conspired with the Russians in that meddling before we pay any attention to your attempts at deflection.

The horse before the cart ! The Russian Meddeling investigation was put on the "back burner". The Obama  admin instructed their Cyberheadsecurity to "Stand Down".Now the  haters club want to blame the current POTUS.

 

Only in Trump's twisted, fake reality world can he blame a former U.S. president for a deliberate, organized, far-reaching campaign by the Russian government to interfere with the 2016 presidential election -- instead of blaming the Russians themselves and holding them to account for what they did.

 

But instead, Trump is doing grip and grin photo shoots with Putin, the man who probably ordered and certainly approved of the Russian hacking campaign.  But then again, why wouldn't Trump be friendly with Putin, considering that Putin was probably responsible in some part, large or small, for Trump getting elected.

 

19 minutes ago, riclag said:

I think that was appropriate , considering how   that administration intentional neglect on this Russian Meddling("Stand Down")  destroyed  my countries democracy, "Complicit" 

You mean the way Kennedy destroyed the US during the Cuban Missile Crisis by telling the military to stand down?

 

Obama had more than one option available in dealing with Russian hacking.  He chose the option that wouldn't lead to full-blown cyber-war, after Mitch McConnell made it clear Obama would not have bipartisan support if he took aggressive action.  We can criticize that choice in hindsight, but it does not mean Obama was complicit.

 

Whether Trump is complicit by attempting to discredit and end the investigation of Russian interference is much more apparent.

3 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Only in Trump's twisted, fake reality world can he blame a former U.S. president for a deliberate, organized, far-reaching campaign by the Russian government to interfere with the 2016 presidential election -- instead of blaming the Russians themselves and holding them to account for what they did.

 

But instead, Trump is doing grip and grin photo shoots with Putin, the man who probably ordered and certainly approved of the Russian hacking campaign.  But then again, why wouldn't Trump be friendly with Putin, considering that Putin was probably responsible in some part, large or small, for Trump getting elected.

 

My country is divided  and was told to "stand down" to "R M". It's very disturbing to know this could of been prevented before PT came into office

Just now, riclag said:

My country is divided  and was told to "stand down" to "R M". It's very disturbing to know this could of been prevented before PT came into office

It's disturbing to know that Trump is trying to shutdown the investigation into Russian meddling.

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You mean the way Kennedy destroyed the US during the Cuban Missile Crisis by telling the military to stand down?

 

Obama had more than one option available in dealing with Russian hacking.  He chose the option that wouldn't lead to full-blown cyber-war.  We can criticize that choice in hindsight, but it does not mean Obama was complicit.

 

Whether Trump is complicit by attempting to discredit and end the investigation of Russian interference is much more apparent.

"Stand Down" is not hindsight. The haters club are putting the cart before the horse.It was known of Russian Election Meddling  in the Obama Admin ,PT inherited a mess ,And He Is Getting Blamed For It. 

7 minutes ago, riclag said:

The horse before the cart ! The Russian Meddeling investigation was put on the "back burner". The Obama  admin instructed their Cyberheadsecurity to "Stand Down".Now the  haters club want to blame the current POTUS.

 

 

You need to bring some context to this subject. Some in the Obama administration, rightly or wrongly, were fearful about getting involved in things in the runup to the election, for fear of being perceived as trying to use their incumbent status to influence the outcome.  Anyone can Monday Morning Quarterback whether their ultimate approach was the right one or not. But it certainly wasn't about obstructing justice or wanting to give the Russians a free hand or about neglect of their duties.

 

Trump and Co., on the other hand, have done nothing but try to obstruct justice ever since he got elected by repeatedly trying to shut down the Russia investigation and turn public opinion against Mueller's work. There's also at least circumstantial evidence that those around Trump may have been colluding with Russians during the campaign.  The only way the American public MAY ever find out whether there's any truth to that is if the Special Counsel is allowed to complete its investigation.

 

But any way you cut it, the U.S. --and the U.S. president now -- should be holding Russia responsible for their interfering and tampering with the 2016 presidential election. And Trump is NOT doing that and thus failing in his responsibility as president and failing in his responsibilities to the American people. And that is a far more serious offense than any wrong decisions made by Obama's people pre-election.

 

30 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let’s find out who conspired with the Russians in that meddling before we pay any attention to your attempts at deflection.

 

 

Your recognition that Trump won office by means of a ‘destroyed democracy’ are a welcome improvement.

 

31 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let’s find out who conspired with the Russians in that meddling before we pay any attention to your attempts at deflection.

 

 

Your recognition that Trump won office by means of a ‘destroyed democracy’ are a welcome improvement.

"I think that was appropriate , considering how   that administration intentional neglect on this Russian Meddling(Stand Down)  destroyed  my countries democracy, Complicit" 

 

I made no mention of winning a office in my statement!

 

11 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

You need to bring some context to this subject. Some in the Obama administration, rightly or wrongly, were fearful about getting involved in things in the runup to the election, for fear of being perceived as trying to use their incumbent status to influence the outcome.  Anyone can Monday Morning Quarterback whether their ultimate approach was the right one or not. But it certainly wasn't about obstructing justice or wanting to give the Russians a free hand or about neglect of their duties.

 

Trump and Co., on the other hand, have done nothing but try to obstruct justice ever since he got elected by repeatedly trying to shut down the Russia investigation and turn public opinion against Mueller's work. There's also at least circumstantial evidence that those around Trump may have been colluding with Russians during the campaign.  The only way the American public MAY ever find out whether there's any truth to that is if the Special Counsel is allowed to complete its investigation.

 

But any way you cut it, the U.S. --and the U.S. president now -- should be holding Russia responsible for their interfering and tampering with the 2016 presidential election. And Trump is NOT doing that and thus failing in his responsibility as president and failing in his responsibilities to the American people. And that is a far more serious offense than any wrong decisions made by Obama's people pre-election.

 

How do you know what PT is doing or not doing! Are you CIA or something! Do you have access to classified documents and intel! He more than likely is doing the same response as Obama  did,but you won't know that because  most of the time he' is quiet about it, just like Obama .  

"And Trump is NOT doing that and thus failing in his responsibility as president and failing in his responsibilities to the American people".

The other thing any sane, non-deluded person would have to consider would be this:

 

If Trump is right and there was no collusion between his campaign and the Russians leading up to the election, then why since day 1 has he been so obsessed with firing the FBI director whose prior Clinton actions helped him get elected and then shutting down and discrediting the subsequent Special Counsel investigation?

 

And, if everyone in Trump's campaign is clean with the Russians, then is it just a conicidence or something more that, one by one, so many people around Trump are being prosecuted for improper dealing in other foreign entanglements and lying about those issues. His former campaign chairman, his former national security advisor, several campaign advisors, and now lately his personal attorney, the latter on other issues.

 

For people who are supposed to be clean, they seem to end up being very dirty. And on top of that, they were all working for a guy who's basically a congenital public liar. So who deserves to be believed here? All of the above SCREAMS... the Special Counsel investigation needs to be allowed to run its course.

 

 

24 minutes ago, riclag said:

"Stand Down" is not hindsight. The haters club are putting the cart before the horse.It was known of Russian Election Meddling  in the Obama Admin ,PT inherited a mess ,And He Is Getting Blamed For It. 

What he is getting blamed for is his frequent denials that it even happened and his refusal to in any way point a finger at Vladimir Putin

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

What he is getting blamed for is his frequent denials that it even happened and his refusal to in any way point a finger at Vladimir Putin

read my last post.You don't know what he knows

22 minutes ago, riclag said:

"Stand Down" is not hindsight. The haters club are putting the cart before the horse.It was known of Russian Election Meddling  in the Obama Admin ,PT inherited a mess ,And He Is Getting Blamed For It. 

You are judging his actions a year and a half later, and ignoring the fact that he attempted to get bipartisan support for a response and was rejected before he chose a less provocative response.

 

That is definitely hindsight, and an obvious attempt to deflect attention from Trump's attempt to discredit and end the investigation.  Trump, and you, are more complicit than Obama.

13 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

I think everyone would do well to remember here:

Amazingly, Trump and his Republican allies are making Nixon look pale by comparison in their continuing, and escalating efforts to obstruct justice, prevent criminal acts from being prosecuted and punished, and to whitewash their potential complicity in what does amount to an act of war against the United States by Russia -- which succeeded in stealing away the U.S. presidency.

Your memory of the '16 Presidential election and how it was won, or lost, is not unaffected by bias.  Mr. Trump was lawfully and legally elected to the Office. He is the Commander in Chief. Nothing needed to be stolen because it was given away. Details in full can be obtained in the book titled 'shattered'. I'm including three links to publications who posted reviews if the compelling autopsy of the Clinton campaign.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/17/books/shattered-charts-hillary-clintons-course-into-the-iceberg.html

 

http://time.com/4747256/hillary-clinton-shattered-book/

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/yikes-new-behind-the-scenes-book-brutalizes-the-clinton-campaign-123303/

 

You'll note that none of the 3 publications listed have a history of a right wing or conservative outlook. The need to steal wasn't necessary. The inferences opined haven't remotely been proven except by leap of faith by those who made up their minds long ago. 

5 minutes ago, riclag said:

read my last post.You don't know what he knows

I’m sure we’re going to find out exactly what he knows, when he learned of it and from whom.

Just now, heybruce said:

You are judging his actions a year and a half later, and ignoring the fact that he attempted to get bipartisan support for a response and was rejected before he chose a less provocative response.

 

That is definitely hindsight, and an obvious attempt to deflect attention from Trump's attempt to discredit and end the investigation.  Trump, and you, are more complicit than Obama.

Ok! When PT says I told Vlad to "cut it out",while all the other deterrence the POTUS uses behind the scenes are secretly put in action, you and I can stand down,right  

4 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

Your memory of the '16 Presidential election and how it was won, or lost, is not unaffected by bias.  Mr. Trump was lawfully and legally elected to the Office. He is the Commander in Chief. Nothing needed to be stolen because it was given away. Details in full can be obtained in the book titled 'shattered'. I'm including three links to magazines who posted reviews if the compelling autopsy of the Clinton campaign.

Lawfully and legally?  Some of the things being investigated are campaign finance violations.  If shown to be true, he conducted his campaign in an illegal manner. 

 

Also, it is now acknowledged that there were illegal efforts by Russia to hurt the Clinton campaign and help Trump, which throws some shade on the "lawful" part of your claim.

 

Unfortunately the only constitutional means to remove an unlawfully and illegally elected President is through impeachment, and the Republicans have made it very clear they will put party and power ahead of country.

Just now, riclag said:

Ok! When PT says I told Vlad to "cut it out",while all the other deterrence the POTUS uses behind the scenes are secretly put in action, you and I can stand down,right  

So to justify what Trump has said about whatever the Russians have been up to, you tell us that secretly behind the scenes he is doing just the opposite. And your evidence for this is? 

So, in other words, you really can't criticize any President for what he says. You just have to trust them to do the right thing.

11 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

Your memory of the '16 Presidential election and how it was won, or lost, is not unaffected by bias.  Mr. Trump was lawfully and legally elected to the Office. He is the Commander in Chief. Nothing needed to be stolen because it was given away. Details in full can be obtained in the book titled 'shattered'. I'm including three links to magazines who posted reviews if the compelling autopsy of the Clinton campaign.

Is that Shania Twain,Avitar

3 minutes ago, riclag said:

Ok! When PT says I told Vlad to "cut it out",while all the other deterrence the POTUS uses behind the scenes are secretly put in action, you and I can stand down,right  

You think calling the investigation a witch hunt is deterrence?  You think telling Vlad "to cut it out" (if it happens) is deterrence?

 

Any actions taken will have to be secret, if Trump learns about them he will shut them down.  Fortunately these things can be made secret by putting them in writing and including them in his daily intelligence briefing.  We know he won't read it.

7 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Lawfully and legally?  Some of the things being investigated are campaign finance violations.  If shown to be true, he conducted his campaign in an illegal manner. 

 

Also, it is now acknowledged that there were illegal efforts by Russia to hurt the Clinton campaign and help Trump, which throws some shade on the "lawful" part of your claim.

 

Unfortunately the only constitutional means to remove an unlawfully and illegally elected President is through impeachment, and the Republicans have made it very clear they will put party and power ahead of country.

Yes. He holds the office lawfully and legally. The Russians tried to influence the outcome but they failed in the attempt.  Democrats too put party and power ahead of country.  It's naïve to think anything else.

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Lawfully and legally?  Some of the things being investigated are campaign finance violations.  If shown to be true, he conducted his campaign in an illegal manner. 

 

Also, it is now acknowledged that there were illegal efforts by Russia to hurt the Clinton campaign and help Trump, which throws some shade on the "lawful" part of your claim.

 

Unfortunately the only constitutional means to remove an unlawfully and illegally elected President is through impeachment, and the Republicans have made it very clear they will put party and power ahead of country.

It's clear the what Riclag believes is that Donald Trump's secret identity is Putinfighter and all the nice things he's saying to the world about Putin and all the nasty things he is saying to the Europeans  are really designed to throw us all of the track. In fact at this very moment he is looking for a phone booth large enough to serve as his changing room.

1 hour ago, riclag said:

I think that was appropriate , considering how   that administration intentional neglect on this Russian Meddling("Stand Down")  destroyed  my countries democracy, "Complicit" 

Since you agree the Russian attack on the 2017 has destroyed democracy in the US, do you also agree the Mueller investigation must proceed to uncover and prosecute all those who took part in that attack or aided the Russians?

15 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

Your memory of the '16 Presidential election and how it was won, or lost, is not unaffected by bias.  Mr. Trump was lawfully and legally elected to the Office. He is the Commander in Chief. Nothing needed to be stolen because it was given away. Details in full can be obtained in the book titled 'shattered'. I'm including three links to publications who posted reviews if the compelling autopsy of the Clinton campaign.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/17/books/shattered-charts-hillary-clintons-course-into-the-iceberg.html

 

http://time.com/4747256/hillary-clinton-shattered-book/

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/yikes-new-behind-the-scenes-book-brutalizes-the-clinton-campaign-123303/

 

You'll note that nine of the 3 publications listed have a history of a right wing or conservative outlook. The need to steal wasn't necessary. The inferences opined haven't remotely been proven except by leap of faith by those who made up their minds long ago. 

"nine of the 3 publications"?

 

There is no way to quantify the impact of Russian interference in the election, and so no way to prove or disprove if it changed the outcome.  All that is know is that Trump lost the popular vote by a margin of three million, and a shift of a percentage or two in a few states would have changed the outcome.

3 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

Yes. He holds the office lawfully and legally. The Russians tried to influence the outcome but they failed in the attempt.  Democrats too put party and power ahead of country.  It's naïve to think anything else.

Campaign finance violations are illegal.  I explained this to you.

 

There is no way to determine how much Russians influenced the election.  Stop trying to rewrite history.

Typo....   corrected nine to none....  Lighten up please.  Have a nice day.

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You think calling the investigation a witch hunt is deterrence?  You think telling Vlad "to cut it out" (if it happens) is deterrence?

 

Any actions taken will have to be secret, if Trump learns about them he will shut them down.  Fortunately these things can be made secret by putting them in writing and including them in his daily intelligence briefing.  We know he won't read it.

Don't say we