In her November 2019 impeachment testimony, former National Security Council official Fiona Hill revealed that Russian officials had informally proposed a "very strange swap arrangement" during Donald Trump’s first term. 

The details of the proposal included:

Russia signalled a willingness to reduce or end its support for Nicolás Maduro’s regime in Venezuela if the United States would in turn grant Moscow a "free hand" or end its support for Ukraine

• Hill testified that Russian officials, including then-Ambassador Anatoly Antonov, framed this through the lens of the Monroe Doctrine. They essentially argued that if the U.S. wanted Russia out of its "backyard" in the Western Hemisphere (Venezuela), the U.S. should reciprocate by staying out of Russia's "backyard" in Europe (Ukraine).

  The overtures were informal—described by Hill as a "hint-hint, nudge-nudge" approach—communicated through media articles, public statements, and conversations rather than a formal diplomatic offer. Hill stated she was personally sent to Moscow in April 2019 to reject the notion, clarifying that the situations in Ukraine and Venezuela were not linked. 

former trump aide fiona hill told impeachment hearings in congress that during trump’s first term in office, russia had proposed “a very strange swap arrangement”. - Google Search

But did Donald really reject the offer? His constant appeasement of Putin suggests perhaps not.

According to Fiona Hill, Harry Sargeant III, a 68-year old Texan oilman, currently working overtime to try to secure lucrative contracts for his Global Oil Management Group in Venezuela, was promoting the idea, and was seeking business opportunities in both the Ukrainian and Venezuelan oil industries.

The murky links of Trump’s oil barons could backfire on the White House

Fiona Hill is a Trump deranged shill for Ukraine. No wonder you picked her as a source.

7 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Fiona Hill is a Trump deranged shill for Ukraine. No wonder you picked her as a source.

But is it true?

19 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Fiona Hill is a Trump deranged shill for Ukraine. No wonder you picked her as a source.

Such a typical MAGA response. Disparage the source because she doesn't sniff Trump's vapors.

Fiona Hill is infinitely more intelligent and infinitely more well connected than you. Plus, everything Trump has said and done fits Hill's scenario perfectly. Such a "swap" would be so Trumpian in its immorality and recklessness, gaining next to nothing for the US (but likely much for Trump personally) all while endangering allies like Poland and the Baltics.

Trolling meme removed @BLMFem

5 hours ago, bannork said:

In her November 2019 impeachment testimony, former National Security Council official Fiona Hill revealed that Russian officials had informally proposed a "very strange swap arrangement" during Donald Trump’s first term. 

The details of the proposal included:

Russia signalled a willingness to reduce or end its support for Nicolás Maduro’s regime in Venezuela if the United States would in turn grant Moscow a "free hand" or end its support for Ukraine

• Hill testified that Russian officials, including then-Ambassador Anatoly Antonov, framed this through the lens of the Monroe Doctrine. They essentially argued that if the U.S. wanted Russia out of its "backyard" in the Western Hemisphere (Venezuela), the U.S. should reciprocate by staying out of Russia's "backyard" in Europe (Ukraine).

  The overtures were informal—described by Hill as a "hint-hint, nudge-nudge" approach—communicated through media articles, public statements, and conversations rather than a formal diplomatic offer. Hill stated she was personally sent to Moscow in April 2019 to reject the notion, clarifying that the situations in Ukraine and Venezuela were not linked. 

former trump aide fiona hill told impeachment hearings in congress that during trump’s first term in office, russia had proposed “a very strange swap arrangement”. - Google Search

But did Donald really reject the offer? His constant appeasement of Putin suggests perhaps not.

According to Fiona Hill, Harry Sargeant III, a 68-year old Texan oilman, currently working overtime to try to secure lucrative contracts for his Global Oil Management Group in Venezuela, was promoting the idea, and was seeking business opportunities in both the Ukrainian and Venezuelan oil industries.

The murky links of Trump’s oil barons could backfire on the White House

Surely this cant be the same Fiona Hill that made a complete fool of herself(and all the lawfaring lefties) with her fantasy BS during the first hoax Trump impeachment? Could anybody be so daft as to listen to a word this deluded and deranged swamp creature utters?

Seems so!!🤣

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-extraordinary-impeachment-testimony-of-fiona-hill

29 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Surely this cant be the same Fiona Hill that made a complete fool of herself(and all the lawfaring lefties) with her fantasy BS during the first hoax Trump impeachment? Could anybody be so daft as to listen to a word this deluded and deranged swamp creature utters?

Seems so!!🤣

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-extraordinary-impeachment-testimony-of-fiona-hill

She’s the same Fiona Hill who provided testimony in November 2019 that explains Trump’s and Putin’s actions in 2026

5 hours ago, Wingate said:

Disparage the source because she doesn't sniff Trump's vapors.

Thats rich coming from someone like you who consistantly throws out vile name calling and insults.

Because tonight we're going to party like its 1988.

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She’s the same Fiona Hill who provided testimony in November 2019 that explains Trump’s and Putin’s actions in 2026

It was a hoax as you are well aware. Putin wanted Clinton to win not Trump. Maybe he wanted more uranium?🤣

It is high time the forum left stopped pretending the Steele dossier(paid for and conjured up by Hillary - theres a pattern developing , can you see it?) Is real. It was a steaming pile of poop as was the impeachment hoax it kicked off. Btw 2nd impeachment was also total bs, as we know Biden was benter than a 9 bob note, not the cleanest guy in politics as you lot used to falsely claim.

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

It was a hoax as you are well aware. Putin wanted Clinton to win not Trump. Maybe he wanted more uranium?🤣

It is high time the forum left stopped pretending the Steele dossier(paid for and conjured up by Hillary - theres a pattern developing , can you see it?) Is real. It was a steaming pile of poop as was the impeachment hoax it kicked off. Btw 2nd impeachment was also total bs, as we know Biden was benter than a 9 bob note, not the cleanest guy in politics as you lot used to falsely claim.

Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted Donald Trump to win the 2016 U.S. presidential election. 

Key Evidence and Reasons

• Direct Admission: During a 2018 summit in Helsinki, when asked if he wanted Trump to win, Putin responded, "Yes, I did". He stated this was because Trump "talked about bringing the U.S.-Russia relationship back to normal".

• Official Assessments: The U.S. Intelligence Community concluded with high confidence in 2017 that Putin ordered an influence campaign to help Trump and denigrate Hillary Clinton. These findings were subsequently supported by a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report in 2020.

• Grudge Against Clinton: Putin reportedly held a personal grudge against Hillary Clinton, blaming her for inciting mass protests against his rule in Russia in 2011 and 2012 when she was Secretary of State.

• Strategic Interests: Russian leadership believed Trump’s business background and policy statements made him more likely to deal favorably with Russia, potentially leading to the lifting of sanctions. 

Russian Actions

To support this preference, Russia engaged in a multi-faceted operation that included: 

• Cyberattacks: Hacking the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and releasing stolen emails through intermediaries like WikiLeaks.

• Influence Campaigns: Using state-funded media and social media "trolls" to spread misinformation and sow discord within the U.S..

who did putin want to win the 2016 presidential election? - Google Search

1 hour ago, bannork said:

Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted Donald Trump to win the 2016 U.S. presidential election. 

Key Evidence and Reasons

• Direct Admission: During a 2018 summit in Helsinki, when asked if he wanted Trump to win, Putin responded, "Yes, I did". He stated this was because Trump "talked about bringing the U.S.-Russia relationship back to normal".

• Official Assessments: The U.S. Intelligence Community concluded with high confidence in 2017 that Putin ordered an influence campaign to help Trump and denigrate Hillary Clinton. These findings were subsequently supported by a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report in 2020.

• Grudge Against Clinton: Putin reportedly held a personal grudge against Hillary Clinton, blaming her for inciting mass protests against his rule in Russia in 2011 and 2012 when she was Secretary of State.

• Strategic Interests: Russian leadership believed Trump’s business background and policy statements made him more likely to deal favorably with Russia, potentially leading to the lifting of sanctions. 

Russian Actions

To support this preference, Russia engaged in a multi-faceted operation that included: 

• Cyberattacks: Hacking the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and releasing stolen emails through intermediaries like WikiLeaks.

• Influence Campaigns: Using state-funded media and social media "trolls" to spread misinformation and sow discord within the U.S..

who did putin want to win the 2016 presidential election? - Google Search

Whats with this trend now of replying with only AI.

So weak. Speak for yourself.

4 hours ago, blaze master said:

Whats with this trend now of replying with only AI.

So weak. Speak for yoursel

4 hours ago, blaze master said:

Whats with this trend now of replying with only AI.

So weak. Speak for yourself.

Putin clearly wanted Trump to win in 2016, three factors clearly demonstrate this:

In Helsinki in 2018 Putin admitted he wanted Trump to win because Trump had said he wanted to normalise the US- Russian relationship. The Kremlin was convinced that Trump's business background, coupled with his avowed policies, could result in a lifting of sanctions against Russia.

In addition, in 2017 US intelligence were convinced that Putin conducted a covert operation to assist Trump whilst at the same time disparaging Clinton. A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee came to the same conclusion in 2020.

Finally, Putin harboured long standing grievances against Clinton as he believed that she, as Secretary of State, had helped instigate mass protests in 2011 and 2012 against his regime.

Further evidence of Putin's preference for Trump included the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and the release of stolen emails via such channels as WikiLeaks. In addition Putin used state supported media and trolls to spread lies causing conflict in the US.

same same but different

 

• Cyberattacks: Hacking the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and releasing stolen emails through intermediaries like WikiLeaks.

• Influence Campaigns: Using state-funded media and social media "trolls" to spread misinformation and sow discord within the U.S..

7 minutes ago, bannork said:

Putin clearly wanted Trump to win in 2016, three factors clearly demonstrate this:

In Helsinki in 2018 Putin admitted he wanted Trump to win because Trump had said he wanted to normalise the US- Russian relationship. The Kremlin was convinced that Trump's business background, coupled with his avowed policies, could result in a lifting of sanctions against Russia.

In addition, in 2017 US intelligence were convinced that Putin conducted a covert operation to assist Trump whilst at the same time disparaging Clinton. A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee came to the same conclusion in 2020.

Finally, Putin harboured long standing grievances against Clinton as he believed that she, as Secretary of State, had helped instigate mass protests in 2011 and 2012 against his regime.

Further evidence of Putin's preference for Trump included the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and the release of stolen emails via such channels as WikiLeaks. In addition Putin used state supported media and trolls to spread lies causing conflict in the US.

same same but different

 

• Cyberattacks: Hacking the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and releasing stolen emails through intermediaries like WikiLeaks.

• Influence Campaigns: Using state-funded media and social media "trolls" to spread misinformation and sow discord within the U.S..

Oh dear.

4 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Oh dear.

So do you think Putin wanted Clinton to win, as SIB says?

5 hours ago, blaze master said:

Whats with this trend now of replying with only AI.

So weak. Speak for yourself.

It’s a consequence of Brandolini’s law.

Sunnyinbangkok posts some utter nonsense devoid of any facts that takes him moments to regurgitate.

Bannork replies with the facts of the matter.

Use of AI to combat the BS Asymmetry Principle is a smart use of time and effort.

7 minutes ago, bannork said:

So do you think Putin wanted Clinton to win, as SIB says?

It doesn't matter. You're missing the point.

1 minute ago, blaze master said:

It doesn't matter. You're missing the point.

You have a point?

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s a consequence of Brandolini’s law.

Sunnyinbangkok posts some utter fact nonsense void of any facts that takes him moments to regurgitate.

Bannork replies with the facts of the matter.

Use of AI to combat the BS Asymmetry Principle is a smart use of time and effort.

https://modelthinkers.com/mental-model/bull<deleted>-asymmetry-principle

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

You have a point?

Not for you i don't.

9 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

It’s my understand that’s what we do in discussion forums.

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s my understand that’s what we do in discussion forums.

You catch on quick.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s my understand that’s what we do in discussion forums.

Sharing opinions, yes. Sharing AI....not so much.

12 minutes ago, blaze master said:

It doesn't matter. You're missing the point.

Come on BM, don't avoid the question.

The topic is are Trump and Putin colluding regarding dividing up their 'spheres of influence'?

SIB claimed it was <deleted>, one reason being Putin actually wanted Clinton to win the election. Do you agree with him?

2 minutes ago, bannork said:

Come on BM, don't avoid the question.

The topic is are Trump and Putin colluding regarding dividing up their 'spheres of influence'?

SIB claimed it was <deleted>, one reason being Putin actually wanted Clinton to win the election. Do you agree with him?

No I dont agree with him. Now what ?

18 minutes ago, blaze master said:

No I dont agree with him. Now what ?

As you know, many people are speculating as to why Trump rarely criticises Putin and indeed frequently takes his side against Zelensky, whilst even a blind bat can see Putin invaded Ukraine and is targeting its citizens daily.

So why does Trump cut Putin so much slack, even though he claims Russia is a threat to Greenland?

Putin can blackmail him, possessing videos or photos of Donald indulging in embarrassing behaviour.

Trump admires authoritarian figures, plus he holds a grudge against Zelensky for not playing ball regarding secrets concerning Hunter Biden.

Trump and Putin have agreed to let each other carve up their respective hemispheres without the other interfering.

1 minute ago, bannork said:

Trump and Putin have agreed to let each other carve up their respective hemispheres without the other interfering.

Russia isn't the main concern.

32 minutes ago, blaze master said:

No I dont agree with him. Now what ?

Now that wasn't so difficult, was it.

Just now, stevenl said:

Now that wasn't so difficult, was it.

Point ?

23 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Russia isn't the main concern.

26 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Russia isn't the main concern.

So do you discount the possibility of a secret non-interference pact between Trump and Putin?

2 minutes ago, bannork said:

So do you discount the possibility of a secret non-interference pact between Trump and Putin?

Rich people don't care about countries or any of that silly stuff.