Jump to content

Trump: Nothing wrong with accepting dirt from foreign governments on opponents


Recommended Posts

Posted

I think Trump is talking about what people really do. Whether it is right or wrong is a separate issue. How many people or governments would not at least listen to get information if they were comfortable with the source, for example an elected or appointed official or intelligence agent (domestic or foreign). The bigger issue is in deciding if the information is credible and what do do with it. As of now, the collusion thing is dead in the water unless more facts come up.  What about that dossier on Trump from the British intelligence officer - fact or fantasy??????

 

I disagree with Trump 98% of the time but he does posess a spontaneity rare in most politicians. However he cannot place issues in a solid political or historical context and this makes him look like a buffoon. He seems to apply a handful of superlatives to anything he talks about ofen repeating a sentence or phrase for emphasis or perhaps it is lack of rhetorical skills.

 

Posted
4 minutes ago, jingjai9 said:

I think Trump is talking about what people really do. Whether it is right or wrong is a separate issue. How many people or governments would not at least listen to get information if they were comfortable with the source, for example an elected or appointed official or intelligence agent (domestic or foreign). The bigger issue is in deciding if the information is credible and what do do with it. As of now, the collusion thing is dead in the water unless more facts come up.  What about that dossier on Trump from the British intelligence officer - fact or fantasy??????

 

I disagree with Trump 98% of the time but he does posess a spontaneity rare in most politicians. However he cannot place issues in a solid political or historical context and this makes him look like a buffoon. He seems to apply a handful of superlatives to anything he talks about ofen repeating a sentence or phrase for emphasis or perhaps it is lack of rhetorical skills.

 

The bigger issue is deciding if you accept the interference of a foreign power in your own domestic democratic process.

 

 

Doh!

 

 

  • Like 2
Posted
21 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I doubt very much TopDeadSener ever attended a single civics class, let alone ever read the Constitution. 

 

His ignorance on these matters is manifest. 

 

 

 

Typical of the Trump followers

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Chomper Higgot. I am sorry but I think you miss the point of my post. I am attempting to discriminate between listening to the information and using it for dirty purposes. I am not endorsing foreign interference. Trump thinks people would listen and not call the FBI every time. 

 

I think there are more than two sides to issues. I also question how democratic the process is when third party candidates like Ralph Nader are kept out of the presidentail debates or the fact that it is a corporation that controls the debates. The parties are run like corporations and it seems as though super delegates were added by the Dems after the 1972 election so they did not get another McGovern. Super delegates seem to thwart democracy. There are some social critics who argue that the Supreme court elected George Bush in 2000. Is the Electoral College Democratic???? Maybe so but I am not so sure.

  • Thanks 1
Posted

And this from the man who says no collusion. No obstruction. BS. He basically admitted he would collude again. I think in some nations what he is suggesting would be considered treason. But Mr. Treachery would know nothing about that. 

 

This man does not get how dumb he is. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Posted
10 hours ago, webfact said:

FBI Director Christopher Wray, who told Congress last month that political campaigns should contact the agency about any suspicious communications from a foreign government.

 

well it seems the current protocol is to accept a dodgy dossier from a foreign source and pass it to the fbi (fib) who then go about using that spurious material to acquire unwarranted surveillance warrants and carry out an attack campaign against your political rivals...it's all going to come out in the wash. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

China will run one candidate, Russia, the other. 

And while the American people will vote and decide the winner, whoever wins will not be working for the American people.

  • Sad 1
Posted

PMSL - at all the anti-Trumpers here.

 

He's baiting you. Where do you think the Steele dossier came from? LA?

 

He's calling you out on your hypocrisy!

  • Like 2
  • Sad 2
Posted
3 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

"Norway, if you're listening".

 

Weird that he derides the STeele Dossier in one tweet, then says he'd accept something similar.

 

The takeaway here is that Don Jr. took the Fifth during Grand Jury testimony - and we all know what Dad thinks about wiseguys who take the fifth, hint: they're guilty - and trump knows this will come out so he's burning the ground to make junior's crimes seem well, less criminal.

 

 

This.

With Don Jr’s enthusiastic email evidence agreeing to a meeting with Russians promising dirt on Hillary, and witnesses to the fact that Trump helped draft Jr’s bogus response to the revelation of that meeting—what other reply could Trump possibly give?

  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 hour ago, jingjai9 said:

Chomper Higgot. I am sorry but I think you miss the point of my post. I am attempting to discriminate between listening to the information and using it for dirty purposes. I am not endorsing foreign interference. Trump thinks people would listen and not call the FBI every time. 

 

I think there are more than two sides to issues. I also question how democratic the process is when third party candidates like Ralph Nader are kept out of the presidentail debates or the fact that it is a corporation that controls the debates. The parties are run like corporations and it seems as though super delegates were added by the Dems after the 1972 election so they did not get another McGovern. Super delegates seem to thwart democracy. There are some social critics who argue that the Supreme court elected George Bush in 2000. Is the Electoral College Democratic???? Maybe so but I am not so sure.

I agree with much of that, but right now the topic is Trump declaring there is nothing wrong with accepting dirt from foreign governments on political operants, apart from all else, it is a clear signal to foreign governments to trade dirt for favours with Trump.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

So then - in that case, if the Democrats were able to convince Putin to release the bedroom urine tape - Trump would be OK about that, would he?

 

THAT would be the ultimate in 'dirt' on your opponent, eh?

  • Haha 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...