35 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

You mean that if someone is engaged in dubious dealings intelligence and law enforcement shouldn't target them because they are in a political campaign. Just because they were part of the campaign, doesn't mean that the campaign was being targeted. If you hire ethically dubious people, this kind of thing is likely to happen. The ridiculous article you cite presents ridiculously weak evidence that the Obama administration was targeting the Trump campaign. Mostly it's an exercise in gaslighting about other misdeeds of the intelligence and investigative agencies and trying to tie those to the Trump campaign. If this is all you've got, you've got nothing.

Your comment was noted,I  was commenting with another chap

Edited July 21, 20187 yr by riclag

On ‎7‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 6:52 PM, Jingthing said:

I'm usually not nearly as interested such numbers as some members, but that's not my post number which is actually 88,331 right now. 

 

As far as what "trump" would do in Finland, well I called that big time, didn't I? Of course, that wasn't hard to do. 

Wow , these are telephone numbers !

Wow , these are telephone numbers !

Something to aspire to I suppose. Or not.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

He keeps chanting "no collusion" and saying Russia didn't meddle.

Well, if they didn't meddle there is nothing to collude with in the first place, right?

 

Then he asks "why didn't Obama do something about it?" while from the other side of his mouth he claims Obama planted "an FBI spy" in his campaign. 

 

Does this guy ever listen to himself?

 

 

Edited July 21, 20187 yr by bendejo

20 minutes ago, bendejo said:

He keeps chanting "no collusion" and saying Russia didn't meddle.

Well, if they didn't meddle there is nothing to collude with in the first place, right?

 

Then he asks "why didn't Obama do something about it?" while from the other side of his mouth he claims Obama planted "an FBI spy" in his campaign. 

 

Does this guy ever listen to himself?

He's accustomed to people believing, or pretending to believe, anything he says.

 

He's also spewing out so much BS that it overwhelms the ability of reporters to fact-check and report.  It's similar to how Russia covered its responsibility for the downing of Malaysia flight 17--throw out all kinds of false information and conspiracy theories.  Don't worry about factual consistency, the objective is to bury real facts under a mountain of BS.  This provides cover for people who want to believe Russia is blameless, or that the Mueller probe is a "witch hunt".

On ‎7‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 11:40 PM, Opl said:

actually spends these hours in his residence watching television, making phone calls and tweeting.

Some of us are able to watch tv and do other things at the same time. I guess some people can only do one thing at a time.

11 hours ago, heybruce said:

He's accustomed to people believing, or pretending to believe, anything he says.

 

He's also spewing out so much BS that it overwhelms the ability of reporters to fact-check and report.  It's similar to how Russia covered its responsibility for the downing of Malaysia flight 17--throw out all kinds of false information and conspiracy theories.  Don't worry about factual consistency, the objective is to bury real facts under a mountain of BS.  This provides cover for people who want to believe Russia is blameless, or that the Mueller probe is a "witch hunt".

I don't believe Russia is "blameless", but I also don't believe that there is any "there" there for Mueller to find, which is why all his indictments so far have been nothing to do with Trump collusion.

17 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't believe Russia is "blameless", but I also don't believe that there is any "there" there for Mueller to find, which is why all his indictments so far have been nothing to do with Trump collusion.

Mueller is tasked with investigating Russian interference.  Trump's repeatedly describing it as an investigation of collusion between Russia and him is a deflection.  Only Trumpies are buying it.

23 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Some of us are able to watch tv and do other things at the same time. I guess some people can only do one thing at a time.

Really?  Can you watch television while going over intelligence briefings about North Korea's nuclear program, the options and difficulties of making denuclearization verifiable and irreversible, and North Korea's history of bad faith negotiation and cheating on past deals.

 

Trump can't, and he didn't.

35 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Some of us are able to watch tv and do other things at the same time. I guess some people can only do one thing at a time.

 

Yes Trump tweets a lot while watching Fox News

" Many of the president’s most vicious tweets, which often baffle observers because they seem to come out of nowhere, make more sense when you realize that they are actually his responses to Fox’s programming"

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/05/trump-media-feedback-loop-216248

Edited July 22, 20187 yr by Opl

On 7/15/2018 at 2:15 PM, Jingthing said:

Yes, he is the legal president.

That does NOT mean we have to support him or respect him.

He does not deserve any support or respect. That needs to be earned.

He was elected by a MINORITY vote and instead of working hard to unite the nation, he worked hard to DIVIDE it more, focusing ONLY on his rabid white nationalist base.

He threatens our American democracy. He does not believe in democracy. He admires the most disgusting DICTATORS and insults our natural democratic traditional ALLIES.

If he isn't literally compromised by enemy Russian dictator Putin, then he certainly  ACTS like he is constantly, earning him the brand PUTIN'S POODLE (shorthand P.P.). 

Yes, the OFFICE of the president should be respected. But, guess what, that gross demagogic CON MAN has dragged that great office deep down into the TOILET. 

The DAMAGE he is doing may indeed be permanent, and the longer that CLOWN stays in office, the more long term damage he does. 

If you don't think that's a problem too bad. Not your country, is it? 

It's just an outpouring of insults. There is a presidential election in two years. I suggested you calm down, and consider who might oppossae him effectively. 

 The reason why Obama's minions did not act on claims of meddling is summed up here.

"The Obama administration chose to look at the Trump campaign as a likely co-conspirator of Russia — either because Obama officials inflated the flimsy evidence, or because they thought it could be an effective political attack on the opposition party’s likely candidate".

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/trump-russia-investigation-obama-administration-origins/

 

 

Edited July 22, 20187 yr by riclag

14 minutes ago, riclag said:

 The reason why Obama's minions did not act on claims of meddling is summed up here.

"The Obama administration chose to look at the Trump campaign as a likely co-conspirator of Russia — either because Obama officials inflated the flimsy evidence, or because they thought it could be an effective political attack on the opposition party’s likely candidate".

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/trump-russia-investigation-obama-administration-origins/

 

 

"an effective political attack on the opposition party's likely candidate" but they neglected to use it.  BS.

 

Effective political attack ,isn't crazy but true

"Why didn’t President Obama do something about the so-called Russian Meddling when he was told about it by the FBI before the Election? Because he thought Crooked Hillary was going to win, and he didn’t want to upset the apple cart! He was in charge, not me, and did nothing".

1:32 PM - May 27, 2018

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/05/28/trumps-craziest-claim-about-russia/?utm_term=.35d11b136f65

32 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"an effective political attack on the opposition party's likely candidate" but they neglected to use it.  BS.

They did use a effective political attack(This nonsense that Trump colluded with Russia ),but you dismiss it,because it sheds light on why Obama Admin did very little to discourage the meddleing

7 minutes ago, riclag said:

 

Effective political attack ,isn't crazy but true

"Why didn’t President Obama do something about the so-called Russian Meddling when he was told about it by the FBI before the Election? Because he thought Crooked Hillary was going to win, and he didn’t want to upset the apple cart! He was in charge, not me, and did nothing".

1:32 PM - May 27, 2018

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/05/28/trumps-craziest-claim-about-russia/?utm_term=.35d11b136f65

That's Trump's deflection on the topic. 

 

It ignores what Obama tried to do about Russian interference.  It ignores the fact that we know a lot more about this interference now. 

 

Most of all, it ignores the fact that he is in charge now, and instead of taking action to prevent future interference, he is undermining the investigation into this interference.

 

We have no evidence of Trump colluding with Russia yet.  But this is not how an innocent man acts.

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

That's Trump's deflection on the topic. 

 

It ignores what Obama tried to do about Russian interference.  It ignores the fact that we know a lot more about this interference now. 

 

Most of all, it ignores the fact that he is in charge now, and instead of taking action to prevent future interference, he is undermining the investigation into this interference.

 

We have no evidence of Trump colluding with Russia yet.  But this is not how an innocent man acts.

How do you know what goes on behind the scenes,to prevent future interference ,besides your own opinion

10 minutes ago, riclag said:

They did use a effective political attack(This nonsense that Trump colluded with Russia ),but you dismiss it,because it sheds light on why Obama Admin did very little to discourage the meddleing

When did Obama or Hillary claim that Trump was colluding with Russia during the election?

 

Don't make up BS and post it, even if you want to believe it.

1 minute ago, riclag said:

How do you know what goes on behind the scenes,to prevent future interference ,besides your own opinion

Undermining the Mueller investigation undermines efforts to prevent future interference.  This has been explained to you before.

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

When did Obama or Hillary claim that Trump was colluding with Russia during the election?

 

Don't make up BS and post it, even if you want to believe it.

 

 

11 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Undermining the Mueller investigation undermines efforts to prevent future interference.  This has been explained to you before.

I never said Obama and HC  claimed . I did say Obama Admin didn't act on RM,because it goes hand to hand, Obama admin to Dem's,they didn't want to blow their FBI investigation cover  into  a opponents  presidential campaign,so the Dem's are using it now as a political tool Trump campaign Russian interference/collusion  

 

22 minutes ago, riclag said:

 

 

I never said Obama and HC  claimed . I did say Obama Admin didn't act on RM,because it goes hand to hand, Obama admin to Dem's,they didn't want to blow their FBI investigation cover  into  a opponents  presidential campaign,so the Dem's are using it now as a political tool Trump campaign Russian interference/collusion  

Could you try rewording that in a coherent manner, one which supports your earlier post "They did use a effective political attack(This nonsense that Trump colluded with Russia )" 

 

I assumed by "They" you meant Obama and/or Clinton.  Who did you mean?

Baiting, bickering posts and replies removed.  

" Moscow looks to bring just enough force to splinter its opponents, without so much aggression that it triggers a backlash. Hacking the Democratic Party’s emails in 2016 hit that sweet spot. Many Republicans concluded that “they” were hacked, not “we.” If Russia were to carry out the cyber equivalent of Pearl Harbor against U.S. institutions, it would probably unite Americans in resistance.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/07/russia-strength-in-weakness/565787/

2 hours ago, Opl said:

" Moscow looks to bring just enough force to splinter its opponents, without so much aggression that it triggers a backlash. Hacking the Democratic Party’s emails in 2016 hit that sweet spot. Many Republicans concluded that “they” were hacked, not “we.” If Russia were to carry out the cyber equivalent of Pearl Harbor against U.S. institutions, it would probably unite Americans in resistance.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/07/russia-strength-in-weakness/565787/

To put this another way, a hostile foreign power successfully committed crimes to undermine democracy in the US, and Trumpies are ok with this because they don't like Hillary.

 

"Screw rule of law. the constitution and democracy, all that matters is my guy won!"

Pretty good speech by Obama and a pretty good article by some conservative guy who mostly agrees with him:

 

http://www.latimes.com/ct-perspec-goldberg-obama-mandela-hypocrisy-identity-politics-0723-20180720-story.html

On ‎7‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 2:22 PM, heybruce said:

Really?  Can you watch television while going over intelligence briefings about North Korea's nuclear program, the options and difficulties of making denuclearization verifiable and irreversible, and North Korea's history of bad faith negotiation and cheating on past deals.

 

Trump can't, and he didn't.

I wasn't aware that you are psychic to know what Trump can or can't do.

On ‎7‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 3:39 PM, heybruce said:

"an effective political attack on the opposition party's likely candidate" but they neglected to use it.  BS.

Because they believed the polling that said she would win. They never considered that she would actually lose, ergo no need to use it.

28 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Because they believed the polling that said she would win. They never considered that she would actually lose, ergo no need to use it.

So you maintain Obama did nothing about Russian election meddling (he actually did something, but he didn't take strong action because McConnell refused a bipartisan response) because he wanted to use it against Trump even though he thought Trump would lose so he didn't use it.

 

In other words, Obama didn't take action because he wanted to use the issue against Trump but he thought Trump would lose so Obama didn't use the issue against Trump and therefore had no reason not to take action. 

 

I know you really want to demonize Obama, but that is really lame.

36 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I wasn't aware that you are psychic to know what Trump can or can't do.

You don't need to be psychic to see what Trump is obviously incapable of doing.

 

Regarding preparations for the North Korea summit, the lack of results for the US and the big win for North Korea speaks for itself.

On ‎7‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 1:40 AM, heybruce said:

So you maintain Obama did nothing about Russian election meddling (he actually did something, but he didn't take strong action because McConnell refused a bipartisan response) because he wanted to use it against Trump even though he thought Trump would lose so he didn't use it.

 

In other words, Obama didn't take action because he wanted to use the issue against Trump but he thought Trump would lose so Obama didn't use the issue against Trump and therefore had no reason not to take action. 

 

I know you really want to demonize Obama, but that is really lame.

 

Obama did nothing because he thought she would win and he didn't have to do anything to get the "correct" result. Why would he want to "use it against Trump" if he thought he would lose?

Had she won, nothing of all the present information about FBI wrong doing would have come out.