The Democrats’ Russia-gate Obsession

[AUFAN78 3,780]

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/06/the-democrats-russia-gate-obsession/

[DKW 86 7,165]

27 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/06/the-democrats-russia-gate-obsession/

If anything good comes out of meeting with Putin, then Trump is in the tank. If nothing good comes out of it, them Trump is an idiot. Now, I  do not care for Trump, but i do care the US. Setting Our President up in a "Damned if you do, Damned if you dont" scenario doesnt help anyone. 

[homersapien 10,926]

14 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

If anything good comes out of meeting with Putin, then Trump is in the tank. If nothing good comes out of it, them Trump is an idiot. Now, I  do not care for Trump, but i do care the US. Setting Our President up in a "Damned if you do, Damned if you dont" scenario doesnt help anyone. 

He got his own self in this mess.  No one did it to him.

[DKW 86 7,165]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

He got his own self in this mess.  No one did it to him.

True enough, but we as a Nation need him to get something done, right?

[homersapien 10,926]

Just now, DKW 86 said:

True enough, but we as a Nation need him to get something done, right?

I'd be happy if he just stopped trying to undo things. 

[Grumps 3,395]

10 hours ago, homersapien said:

He got his own self in this mess.  No one did it to him.

How did Trump get himself into the mess of Russia-gate?

[Grumps 3,395]

Putin says that Russia didn't try to affect the US election. Trump should say, "I will give you proof, based on the evidence from all 17 US intelligence agencies." (note some sarcasm there) Then Putin and the world will know what they did. If the US cannot offer proof then Trump is vindicated. So, for Trump it would be a win-win situation.

[alexava 6,946]

53 minutes ago, Grumps said:

How did Trump get himself into the mess of Russia-gate?

Did you miss the entire campaign/ debate season?

[homersapien 10,926]

1 hour ago, Grumps said:

How did Trump get himself into the mess of Russia-gate?

There are two issues here:

1. Russians hacking the DNC computer in order to influence the election.

2. Possible Trump campaign collusion with the Russians.

He created the second issue from the people he recruited for his campaign - and most importantly - from things he said.  By asking, it's clear you need to read up on the history of this.

[homersapien 10,926]

1 hour ago, Grumps said:

Putin says that Russia didn't try to affect the US election. Trump should say, "I will give you proof, based on the evidence from all 17 US intelligence agencies." (note some sarcasm there) Then Putin and the world will know what they did. If the US cannot offer proof then Trump is vindicated. So, for Trump it would be a win-win situation.

How about for America?  Is Trump all you care about?  Are you really so willing to simply dismiss the U.S. intelligence community?

And that's pretty funny about presenting Putin with evidence - as if that would make him confess.  

[Grumps 3,395]

2 hours ago, alexava said:

Did you miss the entire campaign/ debate season?

So do most of you think that Trump was looking for staff who had ties to Russia? Do you all still REALLY think that Trump has some evil ties to Russia? Still?

[Grumps 3,395]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

There are two issues here:

1. Russians hacking the DNC computer in order to influence the election.

2. Possible Trump campaign collusion with the Russians.

He created the second issue from the people he recruited for his campaign - and most importantly - from things he said.  By asking, it's clear you need to read up on the history of this.

You are correct that I am ignorant to many of the Russia-gate issues. But on your list, #1 has nothing to do with Trump as far as I can tell. #2 starts with "possible" and I still have not seen evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians. If he broke the law then I hope that he is appropriately punished. I happen to think that implying that Russia-gate is Trump's fault is exaggerating.

[Grumps 3,395]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

How about for America?  Is Trump all you care about?  Are you really so willing to simply dismiss the U.S. intelligence community?

And that's pretty funny about presenting Putin with evidence - as if that would make him confess.  

EXCELLENT point! I don't think I said that I care about Trump at all, I was simply explaining it from Trump's perspective. I think it would be best for America if Trump would tell the truth and the media would tell the truth and the DNC would tell the truth about the whole issue. Nowhere did I dismiss the US intelligence community, my sarcasm was directed at the issue of whether all 17 US intelligence agencies gave opinions on the Russia situation as widely reported versus 4 agencies. I want the truth to be known regardless of where it comes from.

[alexava 6,946]

18 minutes ago, Grumps said:

So do most of you think that Trump was looking for staff who had ties to Russia? Do you all still REALLY think that Trump has some evil ties to Russia? Still?

While trump was insulting every other demographic on earth he had a sickening bro affair going on every time he spoke of Russia or Putin. He surrounded himself with Russia surrogates. Some lied about their ties. Google tillerson/ Russia. So yes being an ass to everyone in the world except Russia is going to raise questions when you pull an upset win that... guess who helped you win. 

[homersapien 10,926]

1 hour ago, Grumps said:

You are correct that I am ignorant to many of the Russia-gate issues. But on your list, #1 has nothing to do with Trump as far as I can tell. #2 starts with "possible" and I still have not seen evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians. If he broke the law then I hope that he is appropriately punished. I happen to think that implying that Russia-gate is Trump's fault is exaggerating.

Correct on all counts.

[homersapien 10,926]

1 hour ago, Grumps said:

So do most of you think that Trump was looking for staff who had ties to Russia? Do you all still REALLY think that Trump has some evil ties to Russia? Still?

Who knows?

I think Trump has financial ties to Russia that aren't necessarily illegal, much less "evil".  

[homersapien 10,926]

1 hour ago, Grumps said:

EXCELLENT point! I don't think I said that I care about Trump at all, I was simply explaining it from Trump's perspective. I think it would be best for America if Trump would tell the truth and the media would tell the truth and the DNC would tell the truth about the whole issue. Nowhere did I dismiss the US intelligence community, my sarcasm was directed at the issue of whether all 17 US intelligence agencies gave opinions on the Russia situation as widely reported versus 4 agencies. I want the truth to be known regardless of where it comes from.

What do you mean by the media "telling the truth"? 

Do you honestly think the "media" is lying?  

Who exactly, is the "media" anyway?

The "17 comment" was an unfortunate exaggeration which I think originated with Hillary Clinton.  Like many of the things she says, it's not exactly true nor is it exactly false.  The head of the NSA - Clapper - says the Russians were responsible.  All 17 of these agencies report to him.  But that doesn't necessarily mean every agency was involved.

[Grumps 3,395]

6 minutes ago, homersapien said:

What do you mean by the media "telling the truth"? 

Do you honestly think the "media" is lying?  

Who exactly, is the "media" anyway?

The "17" business was an unfortunate "spin" which I think originated with Hillary Clinton.  Like many of the things she says, it's not exactly true nor is it exactly false.  The head of the NSA - Clapper - says the Russians were responsible and all 17 of these agencies report to him.  But that doesn't mean every agency was involved.

Obviously, "media" is vague term. but numerous mainstream sources were spouting the "17" number. There are countless other examples. But yes, I think that CNN/FOX/MSNBC/PBS/NBC/CBS/ABC/WAPO/NYT et al. all say/print things that they know are at least misleading in order to cater to their audience. I think it is wrong. I think Trump and Mrs. Clinton and Obama and Pelosi and Ryan and McConnell and pretty much all of the politicians lie regularly as well. I think it is wrong.

[homersapien 10,926]

1 minute ago, Grumps said:

Obviously, "media" is vague term. but numerous mainstream sources were spouting the "17" number. There are countless other examples. But yes, I think that CNN/FOX/MSNBC/PBS/NBC/CBS/ABC/WAPO/NYT et al. all say/print things that they know are at least misleading in order to cater to their audience. I think it is wrong. I think Trump and Mrs. Clinton and Obama and Pelosi and Ryan and McConnell and pretty much all of the politicians lie regularly as well. I think it is wrong.

Maybe so, but I don't think they were "lying".  Why would they?

No one said the "media" is perfect, but passing along such a technical exaggeration - one that involves a red herring at that - is not lying.

Making a mistake is not deliberate deception.  If you really want to demonstrate a claim they "all" print/broadcast things that are "misleading in order to cater to their audience" you need a better example than that.  You are undoubtedly right about the cable outlets and possibly right about NBC and ABS.  (You left out CBS.)  

So, please focus on PBS, NYT and WAPO as they are the only ones that matter to me.  They are quick to issue corrections when they make mistakes.

[DKW 86 7,165]

 

15 hours ago, Grumps said:

Obviously, "media" is vague term. but numerous mainstream sources were spouting the "17" number. There are countless other examples. But yes, I think that CNN/FOX/MSNBC/PBS/NBC/CBS/ABC/WAPO/NYT et al. all say/print things that they know are at least misleading in order to cater to their audience. I think it is wrong. I think Trump and Mrs. Clinton and Obama and Pelosi and Ryan and McConnell and pretty much all of the politicians lie regularly as well. I think it is wrong.

Click Bait: Fake News is to create Click Bait. Clicks = Income and they all do it.

[DKW 86 7,165]

15 hours ago, homersapien said:

So, please focus on PBS, NYT and WAPO as they are the only ones that matter to me.  They are quick to issue corrections when they make mistakes.

PBS, I give a pass. NYT: They recently used a completely BS OPED that will now drag them into court and they will likely lose. The 6 Year Old completely debunked Loughman/Palin Story is complete Crap. The NYT knew that the moment they wrote the oped piece still claiming it was true. First, there was a time line issue. Loughman was stalking Giffords for years prior to Palin's Map. Loughman was a kook. There was no evidence that Loughman ever even saw the map. No evidence on his PC etc. 

NYT Issues Half Apology that could cost them the case.

Salon and even Hayes say the NYT is NUTZ.

Malice is looking pretty obvious for anyone with a clear head.

WAPO's Completely Fake Power Grid Hacking Story.

Click Bait was all it was.

Just for Homey: They are both still 25X better than Trump. Trump is just ludicrously insane.