SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,079
|
Post by SSHoya on Jul 8, 2017 6:43:54 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2017 9:35:44 GMT -5
Remember when you guys said Obama was acting like a king and then you elected a guy who literally thinks he is....Fox would be slamming a Dem if they did this and they would be 100% correct in doing so. Photo courtesy of our Russian bosses...
This jaw-dropping image of Ivanka Trump sitting in for her father at meeting of G20 heads of state was later deleted by Russia's @lanalukash
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,219
|
Post by hoya9797 on Jul 8, 2017 9:59:27 GMT -5
It could be worse. Her father could be sitting there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2017 10:06:12 GMT -5
If that’s where the issue rested after today’s meeting, that’d be bad enough. But Tillerson made matters worse. He offered additional thoughts on what “more work” might be done. Trump and Putin, Tillerson announced, “agreed to explore creating a framework around which the two countries can work together to better understand how to deal with these cyber threats.”
A framework for understanding? Not consequences? Not sanctions? Not even the threat of retaliation from the United States?
There is no need for a framework of understanding. Vladimir Putin understands what this diplo-feculence means: The Trump administration will not punish him in any way for his aggressive attempts to interfere in the 2016 election. And we don’t need a framework for understanding to see what that’ll mean for future elections—here and elsewhere: It will happen again.
The intelligence community predicted as much six months before Friday’s meeting. As the January 6 report said: “We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes.”
In the unlikely event that there was any remaining confusion about U.S. capitulation, Tillerson used a response to a reporter’s question to end it. “I think what the two presidents, I think rightly, focused on is how do we move forward; how do we move forward from here.”
The embarrassment wasn’t limited to interference in U.S. elections. There was Syria, too, where Tillerson claimed that American and Russian “objectives are exactly the same.”
It is absurd to claim that our objectives in Syria—where the United States has called for the end of the Assad regime that Russia is supporting—are exactly the same. Forget being identical; in most cases, they aren’t even coincidental.
On April 6, President Trump ordered strikes on the Shayrat Air Base in Syria in response to chemical weapons attacks conducted by the Syrian regime. In a statement from Mar-a-Lago that evening, Trump said: “Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad launched a horrible chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians. Using a deadly nerve agent, Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women, and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many. Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. No child of God should ever suffer such horror.”
That same night, U.S. officials told me that Russia knew in advance of the chemical weapons attacks. The Russians were flying a drone over a hospital treating victims of the attack, a U.S. official later told the Associated Press: “Hours after the drone left, a Russian-made fighter jet bombed the hospital in what American officials believe was an attempt to cover up the usage of chemical weapons. The U.S. official said the presence of the surveillance drone over the hospital couldn’t have been a coincidence, and that Russia must have known the chemical weapons attack was coming and that victims were seeking treatment.”
So in April the U.S. government accused Russia of complicity in an unprovoked chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians. And on Friday, the secretary of State claimed that America and Russia have exactly the same objectives in Syria.
And then Tillerson went even further. On matters where the United States and Russia have different views, he said, it may be that the Russians (who are actively backing a dictator slaughtering his own people) have got “the right approach and we’ve got the wrong approach.” Imagine for a moment the reaction from Republicans if John Kerry had made such a claim.
Tillerson summarized the Trump-Putin meeting this way: “The two leaders, I would say, connected very quickly. There was a very clear positive chemistry between the two.”
Yes. And that’s the problem.
____
Working with the Russians on Cyber Security is like working with the guys who robbed your home last week on Home Security. You couldn't have a softer response from this faux tough guy his supporters keep trying to prop up...
He's either soft as Charmin, compromised, or doesn't care because it's to his advantage....
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,477
|
Post by TC on Jul 8, 2017 10:21:25 GMT -5
It could be worse. Her father could be sitting there. Or Princess Ivanka could be worse because this is basically monarchy. She wasn't elected. She wasn't appointed by elected officials.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2017 14:28:22 GMT -5
Oh....
So this administration is going to take Putin's word over our own American intelligence officials? Americans who have dedicated their lives in defense of this country?
Face to face this guy sided with Putin over the C.I.A, how can supporting him be considered patriotic? He just threw the real patriots under the bus...
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jul 8, 2017 14:42:59 GMT -5
Assuming everything you just wrote is accurate, and Trumpnis completely over his head and unfit for the job, what was his play there? Tell Putin, "No you are a liar and I can prove it" or does he say, "Alright Mr. Putin, I will accept your word of honor that your country did not meddle in our election." Putin will never admit it, thus Trump has now set him up as a liar on the world stage if it turns out they did. I think Trump may have walked ass-backwards into a strategically sound play here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2017 15:25:38 GMT -5
Assuming everything you just wrote is accurate, and Trumpnis completely over his head and unfit for the job, what was his play there? Tell Puton, "No you are a liar and I can prove it" or does he say, "Alright Mr. Putin, I will accept yourword of honor that your country did not meddle in our election." Putin will never admit it, thus Trump has now set him up as a liar on the world stage if it turns out they did.I think Trump may have walked ass-backwards into a strategically sound play here. Couple questions: 1) The world already knows Putin is a liar. The world already knows Putin has been causing mischief all over. Please explain how proving this for the umpteenth time is some strategically sound play? What evidence do you have that's Trump M.O. here? If it is his strategy, what happens after that? Sounds like you're placing a foreign policy stance onto him and labeling it smart... 2) Who cares what Putin will admit? That's like saying despite mountains of evidence the robbers will never admit they burglarized your home, so let's just move on... 3)"If it turns out they did" Is it you're belief they did not?
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jul 8, 2017 15:31:22 GMT -5
Assuming everything you just wrote is accurate, and Trumpnis completely over his head and unfit for the job, what was his play there? Tell Puton, "No you are a liar and I can prove it" or does he say, "Alright Mr. Putin, I will accept yourword of honor that your country did not meddle in our election." Putin will never admit it, thus Trump has now set him up as a liar on the world stage if it turns out they did.I think Trump may have walked ass-backwards into a strategically sound play here. Couple questions: 1) The world already knows Putin is a liar. The world already knows Putin has been causing mischief all over. Please explain how proving this for the umpteenth time is some strategically sound play? What evidence do you have that's Trump M.O. here? If it is his strategy, what happens after that? Sounds like you're placing a foreign policy stance onto him and labeling it smart... 2) Who cares what Putin will admit? That's like saying despite mountains of evidence the robbers will never admit they burglarized your home, so let's just move on... 3)"If it turns out they did" Is it you're belief they did not? Let me ask you a question. What would President Yaboy have done here? You offer many wonderful criticisms but not a single suggestion. No it is not my belief that did not meddle, but I am a stickler for things like actual proof. So letting Putin again state they did not sets him up nicely when we actually come up with the evidence that they did.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2017 15:46:16 GMT -5
Couple questions: 1) The world already knows Putin is a liar. The world already knows Putin has been causing mischief all over. Please explain how proving this for the umpteenth time is some strategically sound play? What evidence do you have that's Trump M.O. here? If it is his strategy, what happens after that? Sounds like you're placing a foreign policy stance onto him and labeling it smart... 2) Who cares what Putin will admit? That's like saying despite mountains of evidence the robbers will never admit they burglarized your home, so let's just move on... 3)"If it turns out they did" Is it you're belief they did not? Let me ask you a question. What would President Yaboy have done here? You offer many wonderful criticisms but not a single suggestion.No it is not my belief that did not meddle, but I am a stickler for things like actual proof. So letting Putin again state they did not sets him up nicely when we actually come up with the evidence that they did. Pot meet kettle? How about this, I answer your question and you answer the ones I asked above that you just ducked... Deal? I would stand up for our Democracy. I would tell him that I take the word of OUR intelligence officials over him. I would tell him that attacks on our democracy will not go unpunished. And if he thought electing me would be to his benefit let me make this clear. My loyalties are to this country and it's defense. Then I would announce some type of punitive measure to let him know I meant business.. Pretty simple to come up with and looks like a winner politically for him across the board to me.... That being said since you're a Republican shouldn't you be more worried about what Reagan would do Elvado? Reagan in a face to face meeting would take Putin's word over the CIA, and then wait to catch him in a lie later for the purpose of? Now can you answer my questions?
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jul 8, 2017 15:54:26 GMT -5
Let me ask you a question. What would President Yaboy have done here? You offer many wonderful criticisms but not a single suggestion.No it is not my belief that did not meddle, but I am a stickler for things like actual proof. So letting Putin again state they did not sets him up nicely when we actually come up with the evidence that they did. Pot meet kettle? How about this, I answer your question and you answer the ones I asked above that you just ducked... Deal? I would stand up for our Democracy. I would tell him that I take the word of OUR intelligence officials over him. I would tell him that attacks on our democracy will not go unpunished. And if he thought electing me would be to his benefit let me make this clear. My loyalties are to this country and it's defense. Then I would announce some type of punitive measure to let him know I meant business.. Pretty simple to come up with and looks like a winner politically for him across the board to me.... That being said since you're a Republican shouldn't you be more worried about what Reagan would do Elvado? Now can you answer my question? Maybe he should have told him he would have more flexibility after his reelection. That was a steely response from a brave statesman. Let me know when you run for office. I will vote for you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2017 16:23:19 GMT -5
Pot meet kettle? How about this, I answer your question and you answer the ones I asked above that you just ducked... Deal? I would stand up for our Democracy. I would tell him that I take the word of OUR intelligence officials over him. I would tell him that attacks on our democracy will not go unpunished. And if he thought electing me would be to his benefit let me make this clear. My loyalties are to this country and it's defense. Then I would announce some type of punitive measure to let him know I meant business.. Pretty simple to come up with and looks like a winner politically for him across the board to me.... That being said since you're a Republican shouldn't you be more worried about what Reagan would do Elvado? Now can you answer my question? Maybe he should have told him he would have more flexibility after his reelection. That was a steely response from a brave statesman. Let me know when you run for office. I will vote for you. I like how you're suddenly triggered by fair criticism. ... I'll let yo know but keep your vote, just try being consistent first...
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,079
|
Post by SSHoya on Jul 8, 2017 16:31:43 GMT -5
Pot meet kettle? How about this, I answer your question and you answer the ones I asked above that you just ducked... Deal? I would stand up for our Democracy. I would tell him that I take the word of OUR intelligence officials over him. I would tell him that attacks on our democracy will not go unpunished. And if he thought electing me would be to his benefit let me make this clear. My loyalties are to this country and it's defense. Then I would announce some type of punitive measure to let him know I meant business.. Pretty simple to come up with and looks like a winner politically for him across the board to me.... That being said since you're a Republican shouldn't you be more worried about what Reagan would do Elvado? Now can you answer my question? Maybe he should have told him he would have more flexibility after his reelection. That was a steely response from a brave statesman. Let me know when you run for office. I will vote for you. Just like Bush looking into Putin's eyes, seeing his soul and stating he could work with him. In both cases, naivete in dealing with a KGB thug. Trump hasn't learned that lesson? In any event, evidence indicates that Trump is transactional not strategic thinker. I see no evidence of a strategy.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jul 8, 2017 16:47:47 GMT -5
Maybe he should have told him he would have more flexibility after his reelection. That was a steely response from a brave statesman. Let me know when you run for office. I will vote for you. Just like Bush looking into Putin's eyes, seeing his soul and stating he could work with him. In both cases, naivete in dealing with a KGB thug. Trump hasn't learned that lesson? In any event, evidence indicates that Trump is transactional not strategic thinker. I see no evidence of a strategy. As stated in my first post, I think he walked ass-backwards into setting Putin up...
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Jul 8, 2017 17:57:50 GMT -5
Just like Bush looking into Putin's eyes, seeing his soul and stating he could work with him. In both cases, naivete in dealing with a KGB thug. Trump hasn't learned that lesson? In any event, evidence indicates that Trump is transactional not strategic thinker. I see no evidence of a strategy. As stated in my first post, I think he walked ass-backwards into setting Putin up... Why does Putin care though? Everyone in the world knows he lies about things. Looks at the NK ICBM, Crimea, Malaysia Flight 17. Putin lying to the west doesn't make him look bad, it's who he is.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,477
|
Post by TC on Jul 8, 2017 20:32:22 GMT -5
The Democrats set us up so that they could lose the election and frame us is a strange defense.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,079
|
Post by SSHoya on Jul 8, 2017 20:38:46 GMT -5
Just like Bush looking into Putin's eyes, seeing his soul and stating he could work with him. In both cases, naivete in dealing with a KGB thug. Trump hasn't learned that lesson? In any event, evidence indicates that Trump is transactional not strategic thinker. I see no evidence of a strategy. As stated in my first post, I think he walked ass-backwards into setting Putin up... Setting him up for what? As noted by others, we already know that Putin is a liar and murderer. (Don't you?) So I get your point that you are saying that perhaps Trump stumbled into an action that might be productive but productive of what? So there is no setting up to be done. What exactly is Trump's action going to tell us about Putin that the Western allies don't already know and believe? Trump appears sympatico with authoritarians such as Putin, Duterte, Erdogan and Duda because I believe he simply doesn't understand democratic values. Donald Trump, however, represents something much more radical. A president who plausibly owes his office at least in part to a clandestine intervention by a hostile foreign intelligence service? Who uses the bully pulpit to target individual critics? Who creates blind trusts that are not blind, invites his children to commingle private and public business, and somehow gets the unhappy members of his own political party either to endorse his choices or shrug them off? If this were happening in Honduras, we’d know what to call it. It’s happening here instead, and so we are baffled. In an online article for The New York Review of Books, the Russian-born journalist Masha Gessen brilliantly noted a commonality between Donald Trump and the man Trump admires so much, Vladimir Putin. “Lying is the message,” she wrote. “It’s not just that both Putin and Trump lie, it is that they lie in the same way and for the same purpose: blatantly, to assert power over truth itself.” www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/03/how-to-build-an-autocracy/513872/Donald Trump, or more specifically what he represents, calls some of these assumptions into question. Trump himself isn’t quite an Islamist, but he is a proponent of a kind of “illiberal democracy,” even if he himself may not be familiar with the term. Drawing on a wellspring of white nativism and machismo, candidate Trump has regularly made demeaning statements about entire groups of people, including African-Americans, Mexicans, and women. His commitment to the protections enshrined in U.S. constitution are questionable, at best, and if we assume the worst, downright frightening (the difficulty with Trump is that he’s not precise with words, so it’s sometimes hard to make sense of what he’s saying). He has expressed support for registering Muslims in a database, elaborating that they could “sign up at different places.” When a reporter asked how this was different from requiring Jews to register in Nazi Germany, Trump said “you tell me,” prompting The Atlantic’s David Graham to note that “it’s hard to remember a time when a supposedly mainstream candidate had no interest in differentiating ideas he’s endorsed from those of the Nazis.” Trump, for good measure, has also refused to disavow President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s internment of Japanese-Americans. www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/05/trump-president-illiberal-democracy/481494/
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,477
|
Post by TC on Jul 8, 2017 20:46:39 GMT -5
I don't know what's so hard about this :
- Putin hacked our election and lies about it, except when sometimes his underlings decide to brag about it online - Donald Trump just says stuff, it's hardly ever the truth. Who cares whether he claims he accepted Putin's word or not? An hour before the meeting he was claiming everyone at the G20 was talking about John Podesta and was outraged that Podesta didn't hand over DNC servers, which is nonsensical given that Podesta didn't work for the DNC and his involvement in this was that his cloud gmail was hacked. Trump's done nothing to secure us from interference in 2018 because he wants the Russians to interfere again.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,214
|
Post by EtomicB on Jul 8, 2017 21:01:30 GMT -5
Couple questions: 1) The world already knows Putin is a liar. The world already knows Putin has been causing mischief all over. Please explain how proving this for the umpteenth time is some strategically sound play? What evidence do you have that's Trump M.O. here? If it is his strategy, what happens after that? Sounds like you're placing a foreign policy stance onto him and labeling it smart... 2) Who cares what Putin will admit? That's like saying despite mountains of evidence the robbers will never admit they burglarized your home, so let's just move on... 3)"If it turns out they did" Is it you're belief they did not? Let me ask you a question. What would President Yaboy have done here? You offer many wonderful criticisms but not a single suggestion. No it is not my belief that did not meddle, but I am a stickler for things like actual proof. So letting Putin again state they did not sets him up nicely when we actually come up with the evidence that they did. The top 4 US intelligence agencies intel(which was signed off on by other groups) all conclude that Russia meddled in the election in many different ways.. The proof is in Elvado.. You seem to be confusing the collusion probe with the interference probe..
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,079
|
Post by SSHoya on Jul 8, 2017 21:26:27 GMT -5
|
|