The anti-Trump resistance takes shape: 'Government's supposed to fear us'

[Andaman Al]

5 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

I didn't know losing money was part of MAGA. LOL Great work, Donald!

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexandratalty/2017/03/30/mexicans-choosing-canada-over-the-us-for-vacations/#42caf0854d0d

 

U.S. To Lose $1.6B As Mexican Vacationers Choose Canada

From one source, a Mexican on discussing being in Canada said:

 

Quote

“I can freely say that I am from Mexico and people are welcoming and people here say great things about my culture and my country,” said Pepe Barajas, who immigrated from Mexico eight years ago and owns restaurants and a cleaning service in Whistler. “I wouldn’t be able to say that in the United States. They look down at you and you don’t feel welcome.”

Let Trump build his wall all the way around, I will even chip in 10 USD myself, I guess if Trump tried crowd funding, provided he agreed to build the wall around the entire USA he would have his money in the next few weeks. Trump has shot the US in the foot and it could take decades to recover. In fact the only way to recover and to 'blame Trump and his Administration for souring the Mexican relationship and trying to reclaim ground is to put Trump and his cronies where they belong - in jail.

Edited April 5, 2017 by Andaman Al

[boomerangutang]

3 hours ago, Gary A said:

Has anyone given any thought to think out of the box? Why would the Russians want Trump to win the election? Hillary is the one who gave Russia the uranium and took huge amounts of money from them.

There are several reasons why Putin would want Trump ahead of HRC.  here is a partial list:

 

>>>  He hates HRC because she wasn't shy about telling the world about Russian law-breaking, killing journalists, etc

>>>  DT has biz investments in Russia which benefit Putin.  Same for Tillerson.

>>>  DT would lift sanctions against Russia

>>>  DT and Tillerson would pave the way for Exxon drilling in the Arctic.  Putin also likes that.  Anything that reeks of billions of dollars of profit in their pockets, is lovely for that trio.

>>>  DT doesn't have a problem with Russia taking over Ukraine

>>>  Same for Russia taking back some or all of its former Soviet states.

>>>  DT wants to weaken NATO.  That's music to Putin's ears.

 

Any one of those reasons outshadows any Uranium deal which may have happened - related to the Clintons.

 

3 hours ago, Morch said:

Not discounting Olbermann's report (which is well worth paying attention to), he is in no way "ahead" of any official investigation. In fact, quite a bit of what appears in the clip is actually based on undisclosed intelligence sources. As a journalist, Olbermann is not bound by the same regulations relevant to intelligence services and other official investigative committees. That's why he's able to air some stories, whereas official channels need to exercise greater care.

                       FBI's Comey may dig up some dirt on Trump and associates, but that doesn't mean he will allow it to be released.  All that he's released thus far is because he's been forced to and/or it's already been leaked or released by the press corps.  Journalists are ahead of the FBI on the investigations.  

 

                FBI is playing catch-up.   There's also timing:  Republican Comey has already proven he's subjective and trying to soften everything for Trump.  He could "delay, delay, delay," (Trump's words re; Obama's supreme court nominee), indefinitely.  Comey could also invoke "classified" and other shadowy reasons of why not to expose any of Trumpsters' law-breaking and possible treasonous activities.   

 

                  Trump is Comey's boss.  Comey is acting like a police captain who is charged with investigating police brass' crimes in his own precinct.   I don't expect anything worthwhile to come of the FBI's hollow investigation.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

There are several reasons why Putin would want Trump ahead of HRC.  here is a partial list:

 

>>>  He hates HRC because she wasn't shy about telling the world about Russian law-breaking, killing journalists, etc

>>>  DT has biz investments in Russia which benefit Putin.  Same for Tillerson.

>>>  DT would lift sanctions against Russia

>>>  DT and Tillerson would pave the way for Exxon drilling in the Arctic.  Putin also likes that.  Anything that reeks of billions of dollars of profit in their pockets, is lovely for that trio.

>>>  DT doesn't have a problem with Russia taking over Ukraine

>>>  Same for Russia taking back some or all of its former Soviet states.

>>>  DT wants to weaken NATO.  That's music to Putin's ears.

 

Any one of those reasons outshadows any Uranium deal which may have happened - related to the Clintons.

 

                       FBI's Comey may dig up some dirt on Trump and associates, but that doesn't mean he will allow it to be released.  All that he's released thus far is because he's been forced to and/or it's already been leaked or released by the press corps.  Journalists are ahead of the FBI on the investigations.  

 

                FBI is playing catch-up.   There's also timing:  Republican Comey has already proven he's subjective and trying to soften everything for Trump.  He could "delay, delay, delay," (Trump's words re; Obama's supreme court nominee), indefinitely.  Comey could also invoke "classified" and other shadowy reasons of why not to expose any of Trumpsters' law-breaking and possible treasonous activities.   

 

                  Trump is Comey's boss.  Comey is acting like a police captain who is charged with investigating police brass' crimes in his own precinct.   I don't expect anything worthwhile to come of the FBI's hollow investigation.

 

The FBI is not the only agency investigating related matters, and considering your known views, can't really call your take on anything concerning Comey as objective.

 

Comey is beholden by law and regulation, Olbermann, much less so.

[boomerangutang]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

The FBI is not the only agency investigating related matters, and considering your known views, can't really call your take on anything concerning Comey as objective.

Comey is beholden by law and regulation, Olbermann, much less so.

                 We can agree to not agree.  I think we're close to being on the same page.  Reading the same book.

 

                   I can't be objective about Comey or Trump.  Trump and the flawed people he surrounds  himself with are dangerous for the  US and the world - that's subjective for me and most Americans.  Kushner shouldn't even have security clearance.  He's secretly met in Dec with head of a US-sanctioned Russkie bank.  And that's just what we, the public, know - and we found out via journalists, not via any gov't people.    Kushner has facilitated his father-in-law laundering money for Russian oligarchs.  Those things aren't even denied by the WH.   

 

           I stand by my views of Comey and Olbermann.  The latter is a courageous journalists, like Maddow, who is connecting a lot of dots in the treasonous actions of Trump and his people.   Comey may be doing some things right, but he's dragging his feet.   The congressional committees are even worse, because they're controlled by Republicans who aren't even trying to hide the fact that they're cushioning Trump & Associates as much as possible.  The House committee has essentially failed to function for the past 3 weeks.  Trump shut 'em down, by telling Nunes to fall in line - and it worked.

 

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                 We can agree to not agree.  I think we're close to being on the same page.  Reading the same book.

 

                   I can't be objective about Comey or Trump.  Trump and the flawed people he surrounds  himself with are dangerous for the  US and the world - that's subjective for me and most Americans.  Kushner shouldn't even have security clearance.  He's secretly met in Dec with head of a US-sanctioned Russkie bank.  And that's just what we, the public, know - and we found out via journalists, not via any gov't people.    Kushner has facilitated his father-in-law laundering money for Russian oligarchs.  Those things aren't even denied by the WH.   

 

           I stand by my views of Comey and Olbermann.  The latter is a courageous journalists, like Maddow, who is connecting a lot of dots in the treasonous actions of Trump and his people.   Comey may be doing some things right, but he's dragging his feet.   The congressional committees are even worse, because they're controlled by Republicans who aren't even trying to hide the fact that they're cushioning Trump & Associates as much as possible.  The House committee has essentially failed to function for the past 3 weeks.  Trump shut 'em down, by telling Nunes to fall in line - and it worked.

 

 

Neither Olbermann, nor Maddow, operate under similar constraints to those governing the work of officials. The worst that could happen if they get things wrong, is a drop in rating. That both use official and unofficial materials and sources originating from the intelligence community is a fact. If and when they will report something which is obviously news to the intelligence  community, then asserting that they are "ahead" may be correct.

[boomerangutang]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

Neither Olbermann, nor Maddow, operate under similar constraints to those governing the work of officials. The worst that could happen if they get things wrong, is a drop in rating. That both use official and unofficial materials and sources originating from the intelligence community is a fact. If and when they will report something which is obviously news to the intelligence  community, then asserting that they are "ahead" may be correct.

                           The so-called 'intelligence committees' should do their jobs.  Let me qualify that.... the REPUBLICANS on those committees should do their jobs.  The House committee is essentially dead-in-the-water, ball-less.  At the least, they should indicate to Americans that they are ready and willing and able to do their jobs.  Thus far, Republicans haven't indicated that.  

 

                  Olbermann and Maddow are garnering a lot of incriminating data and are connecting the dots.  If the FBI or either of the investigative committees are doing half as much, we aren't hearing about it.  

 

                     I realize Committee members aren't supposed to divulge info during the course of an investigation.  But neither are they supposed to stymie progress or drag their feet, which it appears they're doing.   They need to indicate they're doing something.  All they've indicated, thus far, is that they're trying to shield the president from any flak.

 

               Journalists are doing the work and following leads.   Taxpayer-paid Republican so-called law-makers are dragging their tails in the mud.   Comey showed his alliance when he did (what he knew at the time) would hurt HRC's chances of winning in Nov.  Comey was advised by his staff not to release the letter about Weiner's emails (which none of them had seen at that time), but he did the partisan Republican action of doing it.   Comey is not objective in this whole mess.  He is aligned with his boss, the president, and probably doing all he can to shield the prez.   

 

                      Comey should recuse himself, and there should be an independent commission appointed by fair-minded people (which precludes Republicans).

 

 

[Scott]

Continuing to make off-topic remarks will result in warnings.  As noted, the thread isn't about Hillary Clinton and it has been pointed out that having a financial stake in a uranium mining company does not mean you get the uranium.   Investors get the money from the production and sale of uranium, but not the uranium itself.  

[Opl]

"The United Arab Emirates arranged a secret meeting in January between Blackwater founder Erik Prince and a Russian close to President Vladi­mir Putin as part of an apparent effort to establish a back-channel line of communication between Moscow and President-elect Donald Trump, according to U.S., European and Arab officials."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/blackwater-founder-held-secret-seychelles-meeting-to-establish-trump-putin-back-channel/2017/04/03/95908a08-1648-11e7-ada0-1489b735b3a3_story.html?utm_term=.16f1b8e03b8b

[Andaman Al]

Here is the next diversion tactic from Trump! Anything to keep the press away from Russia.

 

Quote

Bannon Loses National Security Council Role in Trump Shakeup

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-04-05/bannon-removed-from-national-security-council-role-in-shakeup

 

It seems true that Trump watches "Good Morning Joe" amongst other cable channels in the morning. The news crew looked straight into the camera a few days ago and said "President Trump, we know you are watching, you MUST get rid of Steve Bannon if you are to survive". LMAO.

Edited April 5, 2017 by Andaman Al

[Morch]

2 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

                           The so-called 'intelligence committees' should do their jobs.  Let me qualify that.... the REPUBLICANS on those committees should do their jobs.  The House committee is essentially dead-in-the-water, ball-less.  At the least, they should indicate to Americans that they are ready and willing and able to do their jobs.  Thus far, Republicans haven't indicated that.  

 

                  Olbermann and Maddow are garnering a lot of incriminating data and are connecting the dots.  If the FBI or either of the investigative committees are doing half as much, we aren't hearing about it.  

 

                     I realize Committee members aren't supposed to divulge info during the course of an investigation.  But neither are they supposed to stymie progress or drag their feet, which it appears they're doing.   They need to indicate they're doing something.  All they've indicated, thus far, is that they're trying to shield the president from any flak.

 

               Journalists are doing the work and following leads.   Taxpayer-paid Republican so-called law-makers are dragging their tails in the mud.   Comey showed his alliance when he did (what he knew at the time) would hurt HRC's chances of winning in Nov.  Comey was advised by his staff not to release the letter about Weiner's emails (which none of them had seen at that time), but he did the partisan Republican action of doing it.   Comey is not objective in this whole mess.  He is aligned with his boss, the president, and probably doing all he can to shield the prez.   

 

                      Comey should recuse himself, and there should be an independent commission appointed by fair-minded people (which precludes Republicans).

 

 

 

You may label them "so-called", but I'm still sure they've got more of a handle on things than either yourself, Olbermann or Maddow. And, of course, there's that difference between intelligence community and intelligence committees. Not same same.

 

Members on any body investigating the issue do not "need" to indicate anything. They need to do their job and release findings when the investigation is concluded.

 

Not being completely brain dead, I do recall Comey being alternately denounced and praised at different stages of this saga. That you choose to conclusively opine on his position and loyalties is not based on fact or special insight, but is more a reflection of your political views. That's quite alright, bearing in mind it's an interpretation of things, rather than objective reality.

 

Your last sentence, make the whole point redundant - clearly not much room for reasonable discussion.   

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

Here is the next diversion tactic from Trump! Anything to keep the press away from Russia.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-04-05/bannon-removed-from-national-security-council-role-in-shakeup

 

 

 

Good news for a change.

 

I don't think that's a diversion tactic move. If anything it draws even more attention to dodgy going-ons in Trump administration. More like panic mode.

 

Seems like McMaster wasn't quite the pushover or sellout some imagined him to be.

 

[boomerangutang]

                Comey is partisan Republican.  He proved it when he wrote a letter to congress saying the FBI would look into Weiner's emails, 9 days before the election.  He was advised not to do it, but he did it anyway, despite it being unprecedented and borderline illegal. 

 

                  Concurrently, he didn't mention, until 2 weeks ago, that the FBI has been investigating Trump and Trump's campaign ties with the Russkies since July 2016.  

 

                    So, on the one hand, Comey was making a lot of noise for months during the prez campaign about possible HRC breaking laws (which concluded that no law-breaking was taking place) .....while concurrently keeping quiet about the (quite possibly treasonous) Russia/Trump connection.   That's completely partisan.

 

                     So why should Americans trust Comey to do a fair job investigating anything to do with Trump and his cabal?  Comey should recuse himself.   He can't be trusted. 

[Andaman Al]

18 minutes ago, Morch said:

Seems like McMaster wasn't quite the pushover or sellout some imagined him to be.

I was only just pondering that very thing. I can only imagine there was a one on one 'chat' between McMaster and Trump along the lines of ' either he goes or I go'. Trump will get even for such an outspoken approach if it occurred but for now it is as you say 'good news'. 

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                Comey is partisan Republican.  He proved it when he wrote a letter to congress saying the FBI would look into Weiner's emails, 9 days before the election.  He was advised not to do it, but he did it anyway, despite it being unprecedented and borderline illegal. 

 

                  Concurrently, he didn't mention, until 2 weeks ago, that the FBI has been investigating Trump and Trump's campaign ties with the Russkies since July 2016.  

 

                    So, on the one hand, Comey was making a lot of noise for months during the prez campaign about possible HRC breaking laws (which concluded that no law-breaking was taking place) .....while concurrently keeping quiet about the (quite possibly treasonous) Russia/Trump connection.   That's completely partisan.

 

                     So why should Americans trust Comey to do a fair job investigating anything to do with Trump and his cabal?  Comey should recuse himself.   He can't be trusted. 

 

There are multiple bodies investigating the various Trump-Russia-Whatever affairs. Your original post was about Olbermann begin "ahead" of them. Re-hashing your views about Comey won't make this assertion correct. Going on about partisanship while voicing partisan views isn't much of an argument.

[boomerangutang]

21 minutes ago, Morch said:

Good news for a change.

I don't think that's a diversion tactic move. If anything it draws even more attention to dodgy going-ons in Trump administration. More like panic mode.

Seems like McMaster wasn't quite the pushover or sellout some imagined him to be.

                    McMaster recently tried to get a young man dismissed from his own staff.  He couldn't.  Trump and Bannon wouldn't allow McMaster to excuse the inexperienced inept man.  Meanwhile, Trump assigns his completely inexperienced son-in-law to head over a dozen portfolios, including brokering peace between Israel and the Palestinians.  Kushner has more clout than Sec. of State Tillerson.   Maybe it's just a coincidence that Kushner probably couldn't get security clearance for working at an airport ticket counter.    .....unless airports are ok with hiring people who have secret meetings with heads of Russian banks which are under sanctions by the US government.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

I was only just pondering that very thing. I can only imagine there was a one on one 'chat' between McMaster and Trump along the lines of ' either he goes or I go'. Trump will get even for such an outspoken approach if it occurred but for now it is as you say 'good news'. 

 

No idea, of course, if such a conversation took place or if such a condition was raised. But if it did, would be interesting to know if this took place initially or after a while on the job. Then again, it's also possible that this development was not planned, but rather a consequence of the unfolding Russian drama.

[boomerangutang]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

There are multiple bodies investigating the various Trump-Russia-Whatever affairs. Your original post was about Olbermann begin "ahead" of them. Re-hashing your views about Comey won't make this assertion correct. Going on about partisanship while voicing partisan views isn't much of an argument.

                   I still believe Olbermann and Maddow and other journalists at the vanguard - have better handles on what's going on between Trumpsters and Russian agents (Putin included).   The journalists probably don't have access to as much classified data as the investigative committees.   However, just having access to data, doesn't mean the bureaucrats are going to look closely at it.   More importantly, is connecting the dots.   That's where it's even clearer that people like Olbermann and Maddow are ahead of the FBI and the Congressional committees.  

 

                 If in doubt, look at the questions posed to the FBI and NSA directors at the recent open hearing.   The Democratic committee members asked probing questions about who was involved and to what extent.  The Republican members didn't do any of that.  They simply went on monologues about leaks - which mirrors the WH's concern.    No Republican congresspeople nor anyone in the WH wants to find out what really went on between the Trump campaign and the Russkies.   The FBI may want to know, but they're dragging their feet because they're partisan in favor of shielding the president and his henchmen.

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                    McMaster recently tried to get a young man dismissed from his own staff.  He couldn't.  Trump and Bannon wouldn't allow McMaster to excuse the inexperienced inept man.  Meanwhile, Trump assigns his completely inexperienced son-in-law to head over a dozen portfolios, including brokering peace between Israel and the Palestinians.  Kushner has more clout than Sec. of State Tillerson.   Maybe it's just a coincidence that Kushner probably couldn't get security clearance for working at an airport ticket counter.    .....unless airports are ok with hiring people who have secret meetings with heads of Russian banks which are under sanctions by the US government.

 

And this have to do with what your replied to....how?

 

Trump's judgement, the people he appointed for various offices, and their complicity in the matters being investigated - all these were not challenged. Rather the opposite.

 

Trump ruled out McMaster on firing Cohen-Watnick, after Bannon and Kushner intervened on his behalf. Cohen-Watnick was brought on board by Flynn, and he is said to be Nunes's source. What were McMaster's exact reasons for firing Cohen-Watnick, I have no idea. There's no telling if he got an inkling of something fishy going on, or just cutting of Flynn's leftovers.

 

And obviously, we do not know what are the exact motivations for Bannon's removal. Could be down to McMaster's wishes, or a move designed to shield Bannon/Trump from investigation related flak, or perhaps Bannon figures he got what he needed there. Then there's the option Trump just decided to. Too little information on this breaking story.

[Morch]

18 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                   I still believe Olbermann and Maddow and other journalists at the vanguard - have better handles on what's going on between Trumpsters and Russian agents (Putin included).   The journalists probably don't have access to as much classified data as the investigative committees.   However, just having access to data, doesn't mean the bureaucrats are going to look closely at it.   More importantly, is connecting the dots.   That's where it's even clearer that people like Olbermann and Maddow are ahead of the FBI and the Congressional committees.  

 

                 If in doubt, look at the questions posed to the FBI and NSA directors at the recent open hearing.   The Democratic committee members asked probing questions about who was involved and to what extent.  The Republican members didn't do any of that.  They simply went on monologues about leaks - which mirrors the WH's concern.    No Republican congresspeople nor anyone in the WH wants to find out what really went on between the Trump campaign and the Russkies.   The FBI may want to know, but they're dragging their feet because they're partisan in favor of shielding the president and his henchmen.

 

Yeah, I'm not into the whole adulation thing, sorry. And no, they are not at the "vanguard" of anything. Note how they quote undisclosed sources withing the intelligence community? That sort of means that the intelligence community is in possession of information before it is aired on said journalists shows.

 

You are, intentionally or not, conflating between the public face of political committees investigating matters, and investigations run by intelligence agencies. Calling them "bureaucrats" is nonsense, same goes for assertions about them not looking closely into things. There is also a difference between open hearings and classified ones, same goes for investigation materials.

 

Republicans politicians may be partisan, but not all are as blindly partisan as you claim.

[Scott]

Troll post and reply removed.

 

[Andaman Al]

This guy should be part of the Chief Resistance Council. I have been trying to find words to describe Trump, but am now at a loss no more. He nails it.

 

 

[F4UCorsair]

23 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

The Washington Post is a reputable media site.  Like all sites, they have a bias.  But they are honest. 

 

'Bias' and 'honesty' don't easily fit together.

[boomerangutang]

              There are many aspects to conducting a thorough criminal investigation.  It's not just enough to have access to classified data.   Here's a partial list of what's needed:

 

>>>  asking probing questions,

>>>  looking for clues, following leads

>>>  access to useful info, and digging ever deeper

>>>  not being thwarted by higher ups, via threats or them withholding/skewing data, or whatever

>>>  knowledge of how people think, and how the world works (economics, int'l relations, biz dealings, etc)

>>>  seeing connections, and following ever-newer leads

>>>  gauging who is lying and who is telling the truth

>>>  coming to conclusions based on facts and circumstantial evidence

>>>  not being cowed by powerful people/entities - particularly when it's time to publish findings.

 

            Comey and the FBI are possibly doing some of those things.  Republicans on the Intelligence committees don't seem to be doing much of anything useful in that regard.  The public is only really aware of that re; the House Committee, but that's because the House has shown its cards (Nunes' actions stand out).

 

              At this point, it's becoming clear that Republicans are too partisan to be partaking in any of those 3 investing committees.  Dems have less partisan loyalty to Trump and his people, but an independent commission would be best.   Ryan is at the center of the partisan storm.   He thinks the American public can't see how he is thwarting the course of justice, but it's plain as day.

 

                That's why adept investigative journalists are a needed component.  The alternative is for the US to devolve to being like Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Iran, Cambodia or China, where all state matters are dictated from the top down, and their citizens know it's futile to take issue.

[boomerangutang]

Trump is getting more desperate by each hour of each day. . . . . . . . . . .

 

He tried blaming Obama for his problems - that didn't work.

He tried blaming Hillary, - that also didn't work.

Now he's focusing his blame on Susan Rice, who is happy to speak out and tell the truth - because everything she did was legal and within her job description.

 

Bring it on, Humpty Trumpty - you're gonna have a great fall.

 

npr.org/2017/04/05/522779483/trump-picks-strategy-to-counter-russia-storyline-blame-susan-rice

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

'Bias' and 'honesty' don't easily fit together.

Everybody is biased.  Doesn't mean they are not honest.  They fit together perfectly.  As long as the honestly is there.  You just don't seem to want to accept what they publish.

[Peterw42]

16 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Everybody is biased.  Doesn't mean they are not honest.  They fit together perfectly.  As long as the honestly is there.  You just don't seem to want to accept what they publish.

There is a big difference between media bias and silencing those who oppose or question you. Media bias will balance itself out, the left view, the right view, and the truth is somewhere in the middle.

By labeling anyone who opposes or questions as Fake, is shutting down one side of the balance.

The media has to be biased, otherwise it doesnt exsist. If there are no contrary reports or questioning, Thats propaganda.

 

Edited April 6, 2017 by Peterw42

[boomerangutang]

Cenk from The Young Turks, nails it. . . . . 

 

 

[kevkev1888]

On 4/5/2017 at 7:34 AM, boomerangutang said:

Here is part of what Rice has on Trump.   She told Trump, officially, that Flynn was promising the Russkies the US would lift sanctions BEFORE he was in an official capacity. BEFORE Trump was inaugurated.  In other words, he was breaking the law by representing the US government as a private citizen.  Trump knew it, and also knew Flynn had lied to Pence about it, YET TRUMP DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO DISCIPLINE FLYNN FOR NEARLY 3 WEEKS !   Both Pence and Trump knew Flynn was a paid foreign agent (for Turkey and possibly also for Russia) before and during the time Flynn was in the administration AND IN ATTENDANCE AT TOP SECURITY MEETINGS. 

Curious as to how you think you KNOW this?

As I understand it all that is known is that the subject of sanctions came up.

[boomerangutang]

1 minute ago, kevkev1888 said:

Curious as to how you think you KNOW this?

As I understand it all that is known is that the subject of sanctions came up.

I follow the news.  Very few people KNOW 100%, but if there are 100 gashes in the hull of Trump's ship of state, and you can see the water pouring in, you can ascertain that the ship is sinking.

[kevkev1888]

On 4/5/2017 at 7:34 AM, boomerangutang said:

Flynn was promising the Russkies the US would lift sanctions

OK you just made that up. Thanks for clarifying.