Trump invites Putin to Washington despite U.S. uproar on Helsinki summit

[Brunolem]

2 minutes ago, Opl said:

FYI ( sorry I can't remove the red colour..)

" It's all nonsense, there are no Russian units, special forces or isnnntructors in the East of Ukraine Putin said"...Anyone could buy russian uniforms he said, weeks later he was paying tribute to those Russian troops"

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/vladimir-putin-admits-for-first-time-russian-troops-took-over-crimea-refuses-to-rule-out-intervention-in-donetsk

 

It's always good to know the other side of the story,

 

 

That's about the Donbass region in Eastern Ukraine, not about the Crimean peninsula.

 

It seems very likely that there is Russian support in the Donbass, but that's another story...

[tumama]

8 minutes ago, sirineou said:

 but you are not the jury! when and if there is a trial I am sure the prosecutor will make his/hers case supported by the available evidence/

I think it is a waste of both our time to discuss the merits of the number Twelve if  one of the party does not understand the meaning of the number One and or the number Two.  

 

And then we will see the so called evidence. So far we have seen none. Anyone who just takes their government's word for it, regardless of the country, is a sheep. 

[xylophone]

Well I am out of here.

 

But there is one thing we ALL know, because it is proven...…….that Trump is a liar, a cheat, a racist, a misogynist and a poor specimen of a human being who denigrated his own country in front of the whole world, whilst praising a hostile foreign country.

 

Who on earth would support his despicable POS...……….likeminded people perhaps?

[tumama]

9 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

That's about the Donbass region in Eastern Ukraine, not about the Crimean peninsula.

 

It seems very likely that there is Russian support in the Donbass, but that's another story...

 

 

[tumama]

2 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Well I am out of here.

 

But there is one thing we ALL know, because it is proven...…….that Trump is a liar, a cheat, a racist, a misogynist and a poor specimen of a human being who denigrated his own country in front of the whole world, whilst praising a hostile foreign country.

 

Who on earth would support his despicable POS...……….likeminded people perhaps?

 

I never said I support him. In fact, you should add war criminal to that list.

[Opl]

10 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

And then we will see the so called evidence. So far we have seen none. Anyone who just takes their government's word for it, regardless of the country, is a sheep. 

 

[tumama]

2 minutes ago, Opl said:

 

 

Never said I was a Trump supporter. Just because I think he's the lesser of two evils doesn't make me a supporter. 

 

And I'm not the one blindly believing what my government tells me, you are. So what does that make you?

[heybruce]

19 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

Same reason they lied about Iraq. A lot of rich people made a whole lot of money from that war. And they continue making a lot of money from getting NATO members to buy their arms. All you need is a perceived enemy.

 

The evidence is not convincing because there is none. You have consistently failed to bring up a single piece of evidence here. All you do is say there is evidence which we are not allowed to see. That is not evidence. That is just proof that people are sheep.

 

Yeah for sure it was political. They can lie under oath and get away with it. So why would they choose to tell the truth when they can just lie unimpeded? 

Paranoid conspiracy theory about Iraq, and you ignore the fact that the intelligence was correct, the manner the politicians interpreted it was flawed

 

Evidence in abundance which you refuse to read when it is put in front of you.  Once again, it's like arguing with a two year old.

[heybruce]

18 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

You kept insisting US doesn't meddle. Even when being confronted with evidence of it. Yet you say it's proven that Russia did meddle, without you showing any evidence of it. 

 

Then you proceeded to talk about Crimea, without admitting US bombed Belgrade so the rebels there could gain their independence.

 

I mean do you really want me to go on? 

As stated before, reference my exact words.  I will not argue with your blinkered interpretation of what you think I believe.  You can start by showing the post in which I stated anything about Crimea.

[tumama]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

Paranoid conspiracy theory about Iraq, and you ignore the fact that the intelligence was correct, the manner the politicians interpreted it was flawed

 

Evidence in abundance which you refuse to read when it is put in front of you.  Once again, it's like arguing with a two year old.

 

The head of the CIA testified in front of congress. He could have had the balls to tell the truth but didn't. So no, the "intelligence" was not correct. Plus the head of the NSA also lied under oath.

 

The "evidence in abundance" that you have still not shown us. Sure, call me a toddler. Actions speaks louder than words, show us the evidence. 

[sirineou]

18 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

And then we will see the so called evidence. So far we have seen none. Anyone who just takes their government's word for it, regardless of the country, is a sheep. 

 and until such time the US should not take any action to protect itself and the American people?

[tumama]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

As stated before, reference my exact words.  I will not argue with your blinkered interpretation of what you think I believe.  You can start by showing the post in which I stated anything about Crimea.

 

Here you go:

 

Then you keep ignoring the fact of Kosovo. Which I bring up many times after that. 

 

[heybruce]

25 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

You become a fanatic if you think that the law must be applied by the book, like others think that the religious texts must be followed to the letter.

 

No matter how the DNC hacking was a massive "crime", it would seem to a non-biased observer that this hacking in itself did much less to tilt the elections in favor of Trump, than the DNC shenanigans.

 

If the DNC actions were allowed, why the scandal and the resignation of the DNC chair?

When the servers of one of the two major political parties managing the campaign for a Presidential candidate are hacked, yes, I think the law must be applied.  Don't you?

 

A hack of Trump's finances would almost certainly have tilted the election to Clinton.  Wouldn't you agree that if one major candidate had all her secrets illegally revealed, then both major candidates should have their secrets revealed?

[tumama]

2 minutes ago, sirineou said:

 and until such time the US should not take any action to protect itself and the American people?

 

Sure they should. In fact they should have done that even before this whole mess started. They should have been prepared, but weren't. And they should have released info as soon as they had it. Which to this day they still haven't done. 

[tumama]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

When the servers of one of the two major political parties managing the campaign for a Presidential candidate are hacked, yes, I think the law must be applied.  Don't you?

 

A hack of Trump's finances would almost certainly have tilted the election to Clinton.  Wouldn't you agree that if one major candidate had all her secrets illegally revealed, then both major candidates should have their secrets revealed?

 

Yes if the RNC colluded to exclude Trump as the nominee, that should definitely have been brought up in the open. Hell, I would also like to see Trump's tax returns even if that's not a crime. 

[heybruce]

1 minute ago, tumama said:

 

Here you go:

 

Then you keep ignoring the fact of Kosovo. Which I bring up many times after that. 

 

My mistake, I was thinking of another of your off-topic deflections.  However there is nothing hypocritical about that post.

[heybruce]

7 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

The head of the CIA testified in front of congress. He could have had the balls to tell the truth but didn't. So no, the "intelligence" was not correct. Plus the head of the NSA also lied under oath.

 

The "evidence in abundance" that you have still not shown us. Sure, call me a toddler. Actions speaks louder than words, show us the evidence. 

Did these people lie about the Iraq intelligence?  Show a source.

 

I've provided links to a sampling of the evidence.  As I've already stated, I won't spoon feed it to you.  As you've already stated, you won't inform yourself.

[tumama]

Just now, heybruce said:

My mistake, I was thinking of another of your off-topic deflections.  However there is nothing hypocritical about that post.

 

No the hypocritical thing about it is when you don't acknowledge that Crimea had the right to self determination when Kosovo did.

 

Also, how you keep stating that Russia meddled, without showing any proof of that assertion, but you're totally OK with US doing the same thing.

 

[heybruce]

3 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

Yes if the RNC colluded to exclude Trump as the nominee, that should definitely have been brought up in the open. Hell, I would also like to see Trump's tax returns even if that's not a crime. 

Actually the RNC probably did, but weren't effective.  Since they weren't hacked we don't know.

[sirineou]

4 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

Sure they should. In fact they should have done that even before this whole mess started. They should have been prepared, but weren't. And they should have released info as soon as they had it. Which to this day they still haven't done. 

 and what form do you think these  actions should take? Punitive, Protective or both?

Remember this thread is "Trump invites Putin to Washington despite U.S. uproar on Helsinki summit" and not Tumama does not the government which incidentally I don't either, but trust some more than others.  

[heybruce]

1 minute ago, tumama said:

 

No the hypocritical thing about it is when you don't acknowledge that Crimea had the right to self determination when Kosovo did.

 

Also, how you keep stating that Russia meddled, without showing any proof of that assertion, but you're totally OK with US doing the same thing.

 

I have stated no opinion on Kosovo.  Prove me wrong, show the post in which I have.  Then show how that has anything to do with this topic.

 

We've covered your stubborn refusal to accept, or even read, evidence of Russian meddling presented to you.

 

Regarding my being "totally OK" with US election interference, you are once again making up BS.  Show the post in which I stated that.

[tumama]

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Did these people lie about the Iraq intelligence?  Show a source.

 

I've provided links to a sampling of the evidence.  As I've already stated, I won't spoon feed it to you.  As you've already stated, you won't inform yourself.

 

"We were wrong":

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/michael-morell-apologizes-colin-powell-about-cia-pre-iraq-war-wmd-evidence/

 

Of course you won't spoon feed me with it. Because you don't have it. You have nothing. It's painfully obvious. 

[sirineou]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

Actually the RNC probably did, but weren't effective.  Since they weren't hacked we don't know.

 First  the Russians were interested in spreading discourse and division. Remember Alexander's edict "divide and conquer" and what better way than to help elect Trump.

and secondly we don't know if they were   not hacked , there seems to be a prevailing opinion that  one probable explanation for Trump's behaviour is that the Russians have something on him. Unless of course  one wants to argue that he is stupid, simile, or acting out of personal financial interest.

[heybruce]

6 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

"We were wrong":

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/michael-morell-apologizes-colin-powell-about-cia-pre-iraq-war-wmd-evidence/

 

Of course you won't spoon feed me with it. Because you don't have it. You have nothing. It's painfully obvious. 

Ok, I was wrong, the CIA reached a mistaken conclusion, but it was not intentional.  It's also worth noting they were under a great deal of political pressure to make such a mistake.  There is no political pressure to conclude Russia interfered with the election, under Trump the pressure is the opposite.

 

Now, I read the link you provided.  What is your excuse for not reading any of the links others provide you?

[tumama]

10 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I have stated no opinion on Kosovo.  Prove me wrong, show the post in which I have.  Then show how that has anything to do with this topic.

 

We've covered your stubborn refusal to accept, or even read, evidence of Russian meddling presented to you.

 

Regarding my being "totally OK" with US election interference, you are once again making up BS.  Show the post in which I stated that.

 

No, that's my point. You can bring up Crimea as an example of how bad Russia is, but then when I counter with Kosovo, you completely ignore it. That's blatant hypocrisy. 

 

You still haven't provided a single piece of evidence. Although you keep claiming you have.

 

I don't think you said that either. But judging from how I just called you out for saying what you claimed you didn't say, I would be a little more careful how I would phrase things if I were you. What you consistently claimed was that US never meddled in the post cold war world. When I confronted you the evidence you denied it was true. Then you expect me to believe your assertions about Russian meddling with zero proof. 

[tumama]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Ok, I was wrong, the CIA reached a mistaken conclusion, but it was not intentional.

 

Now, I read the link you provided.  What is your excuse for not reading any of the links others provide you?

 

The difference is that I made an assertion, which was "we [CIA] were wrong". And I posted a source. You have made no assertion other than that your claim it's proven. When someone can't even be f-ed to make an assertion that usually means they have nothing. 

 

 

[heybruce]

3 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

No, that's my point. You can bring up Crimea as an example of how bad Russia is, but then when I counter with Kosovo, you completely ignore that blatant hypocrisy. 

 

You still haven't provided a single piece of evidence. Although you keep claiming you have.

 

I don't think you said that either. But judging from how I just called you out for saying what you claimed you didn't say, I would be a little more careful how I would phrase things if I were you. What you consistently claimed was that US never meddled in the post cold war world. When I confronted you the evidence you denied it was true. Then you expect me to believe your assertions about Russian meddling with zero proof. 

What I have stated is that publicly announced US aid is not election interference, neither is an official having an opinion on an election outcome.  That is the only "proof" of US election interference you have offered.

 

I haven't followed you down the Kosovo rabbit hole because it is wildly off-topic, and, for the record, I think the US should not have gotten involved other than to support any NATO members who wanted to take the lead on preventing the genocide.

[sirineou]

21 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Did these people lie about the Iraq intelligence?  Show a source.

 

I've provided links to a sampling of the evidence.  As I've already stated, I won't spoon feed it to you.  As you've already stated, you won't inform yourself.

 Hey Bruce dot take the bait, these people would rather talk about anything other than Trump, next they will mention something about hillary, or what about Obama and in the end you will get dizzy from chasing your tail.

Stay on point. This thread is about  "Trump invites Putin to Washington despite U.S. uproar on Helsinki summit "

I don't blame them for wanting to talk about the price of tea in China , How do you defend the indefensible? You deflect.  

[tumama]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

What I have stated is that publicly announced US aid is not election interference, neither is an official having an opinion on an election outcome.  That is the only "proof" of US election interference you have offered.

 

I haven't followed you down the Kosovo rabbit hole because it is wildly off-topic, and, for the record, I think the US should not have gotten involved other than to support any NATO members who wanted to take the lead on preventing the genocide.

 

6 billion of aid and then all the sudden they have a coup. If Russia did the same in Mexico you would have been outraged. That's the hypocrisy.

 

Yeah of course you didn't follow me down that hole because it proves your blatant hypocrisy. You are allowed to bring up Crimea, but I'm not allowed to bring up Kosovo. 

[Brunolem]

30 minutes ago, heybruce said:

When the servers of one of the two major political parties managing the campaign for a Presidential candidate are hacked, yes, I think the law must be applied.  Don't you?

 

A hack of Trump's finances would almost certainly have tilted the election to Clinton.  Wouldn't you agree that if one major candidate had all her secrets illegally revealed, then both major candidates should have their secrets revealed?

Actually it was the Democratic party secrets and not those of Hillary.

 

As far as the Republicans were concerned, it seems very unlikely that they had tilted the balance in favor of Trump...

 

And there was a lot of Trump dirt brought to the surface, if you remember...notably the "grab by the pussy" tape...yet this didn't seem to affect his ratings, hence his nickname of "Teflon Don".

 

In the end, the American voters had to chose between two very lousy candidates, and that's the real issue.

 

The Russians didn't eliminate the other 16 Republican candidates in the primaries, American voters did that...how come?