Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

DaniilKharms

RobertKK wrote: »

Some in the US getting upset that others do what the US does.

The US interferes in elections, topple governments they dislike, and even use lies to go to war to topple governments.

So what if Russia did to the US, what the US also does to other nations, maybe if the media debated these points, one would take the whole Russia tried to influence the election more seriously.
It is a witch hunt being done by witches, when they are all at it.

Conflating the two issues does no one any good.

Professor Moriarty

RobertKK wrote: »

What I posted is factually correct, it is either wrong for the US to be interfering in foreign elections, supporting coups against democratically elected governments, toppling regimes using lies or it is not.

The thing is Trump can make a show of the US if US authorities go against his family by being a president who comes out and exposes all the US is doing, and expose the hypocrisy of the system in the US, it is ok if we do it, but end of the world if it is someone else.

Maybe people here are happy with the hypocrisy, and would rather play an ostrich and ignore the elephant in the room.

Who in the US has ever being held accountable for interfering in elections, supporting coups against democratically elected government and who has ever being held accountable for toppling the governments of Iraq and Libya and causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and wars and battles that continues many, many years after they started the wars?
No one, but we are all suppose to be outraged at the Trump family.

I might be if there wasn't so much hypocrisy involved.

You shouldn't be outraged at Trump's behaviour because other people did or didn't do the same. You should be outraged at Trump's because iof Trump's behaviour.

Calina

RobertKK wrote: »

Calina wrote: »

I don't care if countries try. If the targets find out they have a right to respond rather than lie down and say 'you got us'.

When has the US ever being held accountable though?

That isn't a failing of the US and my piint applies to the US getting caught as well.

George Sunsnow

Yeah but it's one thing to be interfering in a fledgling or immature democracy or a tinpot dictatorship
It's Quite something to have this visited upon the greatest Economy or supposed beacon of democracy on the planet

DaniilKharms

Noel82 wrote: »

Providing proof of what?

There's proof the Ukranian government disseminated documents working with paid DNC staffers alluding fraud which led to Paul Manafort resigning.

Selective moral outrage is a thing it seems.

First, that's the DNC, not the candidate or his team.

Second, the Ukraine is not a hostile foreign power trying to meddle in the US election.

So, you know, try again.

RobertKK

DaniilKharms wrote: »

Conflating the two issues does no one any good.

One can watch CNN, and see the holier than thou attitude as if the US is on some pedestal and what some people associated with Trump are suppose to have done, or nor done and this is some major crime...
Double standards does come into this.

DaniilKharms

RobertKK wrote: »

One can watch CNN, and see the holier than thou attitude as if the US is on some pedestal and what some people associated with Trump are suppose to have done, or nor done and this is some major crime...
Double standards does come into this.

It doesn't though, because Russia would be doing this even if the US wasn't.

And saying that people of country X deserve some treatment by country y, because of something the politicians in country x did is EXACTLY the sort of attitude that leads to **** foreign policy.

I hate US foreign policy more than the average US foreign policy hater, but that doesn't mean America deserves some random punishment.

I'd be ALLLLLL for war crimes trials, etc., for US pols and military leaders, going back to post WW1, but that doesn't give random countries license to break the same laws I don't like the US breaking.

Christy42

RobertKK wrote: »

What I posted is factually correct, it is either wrong for the US to be interfering in foreign elections, supporting coups against democratically elected governments, toppling regimes using lies or it is not.

The thing is Trump can make a show of the US if US authorities go against his family by being a president who comes out and exposes all the US is doing, and expose the hypocrisy of the system in the US, it is ok if we do it, but end of the world if it is someone else.

Maybe people here are happy with the hypocrisy, and would rather play an ostrich and ignore the elephant in the room.

Who in the US has ever being held accountable for interfering in elections, supporting coups against democratically elected government and who has ever being held accountable for toppling the governments of Iraq and Libya and causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and wars and battles that continues many, many years after they started the wars?
No one, but we are all suppose to be outraged at the Trump family.

I might be if there wasn't so much hypocrisy involved.

Whataboutery at its finest. Two wrongs don't make a right. Is it right for middle eastern people to bomb the us? No it is not yet if we apply your logic it would be.

You assume that people were ok with those invasions as well. Countries are too big to seriously punish. You think Russia cares about the diplomats that badly?

Never mind that whether or not you agree with it toppling a horrendous regime is worse than interfering in a working democracy.

Finally you were very critical of Obama's aggressive foreign policy and yet I have not seen you comment on Trump's far more aggressive foreign policy. You sure you wish to discuss hypocrisy? Many here have been critical of Obama's foreign policy but we can realise that someone who is worse in this regard and also far far worse in every other regard is a worse president.

But hey its cool. The Trump's can do what they like as long as someone has done something worse right?

Noel82

DaniilKharms wrote: »

First, that's the DNC, not the candidate or his team.

Second, the Ukraine is not a hostile foreign power trying to meddle in the US election.

So, you know, try again.

Ukraine did meddle in the US election. All you're doing is meandering and squirming to turn a blind eye to it. Unlike Trump/Russia, there's actual proof on the other side.

This idea that Russia are hostile and Ukraine are not depends entirely on your Political standing and belief system, they were certainly hostile to the Trump campaign.

This type of thing goes on all the time, the only reason it's so blown up is because people are still refusing to accept Trump won the election and are clinging to the collective "hopeism" the media are providing which bolstered their ratings. They are the storytellers, you are the toddlers sucking your thumbs.

http : // www .politico .com /story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

"Donald Trump wasn’t the only presidential candidate whose campaign was boosted by officials of a former Soviet bloc country.

Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found. "

Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz said there's no crime in what Don Trump JR did, and I'll go out on a whim and suggest he knows more than the eggheads at CNN, so until you actually catch someone in a quid pro quo, it's all huff, puff and smoke without a fire. The lawyer in question has a history in the US lobbying on the the Magnitsky act, and she's approached other Politicians in the US in the same vein as she approached Trump JR.

The act of hacking an institution and stealing documents, is illegal. The act of spreading that information isn't. What Wikileaks, the NYTimes, Wap Post, basically every news outlet on the planet did during the election isn't illegal in any sense whatsoever. The people who stole those documents are the ones who are in trouble. If Russia did the hacking, that means Trump people didn't.

Based on the facts are we have them now, nothing is going to happen. That doesn't mean Mueller doesn't have extra information or that a quid pro quo might reveal itself in the future.

RobertKK

George Sunsnow wrote: »

Yeah but it's one thing to be interfering in a fledgling or immature democracy or a tinpot dictatorship
It's Quite something to have this visited upon the greatest Economy or supposed beacon of democracy on the planet

Under Obama, Hillary Clinton as Secretary of Sate supported the coup against the democratically leader of Honduras.
She called for new elections after the elected leader was not allowed to take office, and it was Hillary against the UN and EU and others who said the coup was illegal.
Hillary said it was legal.

The US is not a beacon of democracy, it is one step away from a dictatorship with only two parties and a foreign policy that seems to be directed by the CIA.

This is what the alternative to Trump supported:

Leaked emails from Clinton’s private server which were published by WikiLeaks show that during this period, the US pushed the OAS to support new elections and sideline Zelaya.

But the ousted leader still had real support at home: tens of thousands of people took to the streets in daily demonstrations demanding his return and the cancellation of the November elections which Clinton advocated.

Meanwhile, the crackdown was brutal, said Karen Spring of the Honduras Solidarity Network. “People were beaten, tortured, disappeared, jailed illegally. There were no conditions for free and fair elections; there was no peaceful transition.”

New elections that November went ahead without any international observers – apart from a delegation from the US Republican party – and were boycotted by large sections of society. The independent candidates, and some from Zelaya’s Liberal party, pulled out.

Mass protests continued until the rightwing National party’s Pepe Lobo Sosa, was sworn in as president in January 2010.

The new government swiftly unveiled a collection of pro-business policies and aggressively pursued a sell-off of natural resources.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/31/hillary-clinton-honduras-violence-manuel-zelaya-berta-caceres


So this is what the US supported and I am suppose to be horrified by the Trumps?

Absolute hypocrisy in the US.

DaniilKharms

Noel82 wrote: »

Ukraine did meddle in the US election. All you're doing is meandering and squirming to turn a blind eye to it. Unlike Trump/Russia, there's actual proof on the other side.

This idea that Russia are hostile and Ukraine are not depends entirely on your Political standing and belief system, they were certainly hostile to the Trump campaign.

This type of thing goes on all the time, the only reason it's so blown up is because people are still refusing to accept Trump won the election and are clinging to the collective "hopeism" the media are providing which bolstered their ratings. They are the storytellers, you are the toddlers sucking your thumbs.

http : // www .politico .com /story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

"Donald Trump wasn’t the only presidential candidate whose campaign was boosted by officials of a former Soviet bloc country.

Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found. "

Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz said there's no crime in what Don Trump JR did, and I'll go out on a whim and suggest he knows more than the eggheads at CNN, so until you actually catch someone in a quid pro quo, it's all huff, puff and smoke without a fire. The lawyer in question has a history in the US lobbying of lobbying on the the Magnitsky act, and she's approached other Politicians in the US in the same vein as she approached Trump JR.

The act of hacking an institution and stealing documents, is illegal. The act of spreading that information isn't. What Wikileaks, the NYTimes, Wap Post, basically every news outlet on the planet did during the election isn't illegal in any sense whatsoever. The people who stole those documents are the ones who are in trouble. If Russia did the hacking, that means Trump people didn't.

Based on the facts are we have them now, nothing is going to happen. That doesn't mean Mueller doesn't have extra information or that a quid pro quo might reveal itself in the future.

Ukraine did NOT meddle in the US election. That's a nonsense.

Trump WON the election and Hillary is the worst national politician in my memory, but absolutely NONE of that is related to Russian interference.

Trying to justify one with the other is of course bull****.

Sharing stolen material is of course illegal. Try stealing a watch and selling it on and see how far your defense gets ya.

I agree that nothing will likely happen, but garbage happening in America with no consequence is nothing new. In fact that happens in most countries. The lack of consequence isn't a meaningful way to measure if something is right or wrong, or even illegal. And I know you know that.

Dershowitz, btw., has been saying all sorts of things that are widely disputed by other legal experts like Jeffrey Toobin. And if I remember my Obama bashing correctly, going to Harvard makes you an un-American elite.

RobertKK

Christy42 wrote: »

Whataboutery at its finest. Two wrongs don't make a right. Is it right for middle eastern people to bomb the us? No it is not yet if we apply your logic it would be.

You assume that people were ok with those invasions as well. Countries are too big to seriously punish. You think Russia cares about the diplomats that badly?

Never mind that whether or not you agree with it toppling a horrendous regime is worse than interfering in a working democracy.

Finally you were very critical of Obama's aggressive foreign policy and yet I have not seen you comment on Trump's far more aggressive foreign policy. You sure you wish to discuss hypocrisy? Many here have been critical of Obama's foreign policy but we can realise that someone who is worse in this regard and also far far worse in every other regard is a worse president.

But hey its cool. The Trump's can do what they like as long as someone has done something worse right?

But how can the US get it right about Russia, when they refuse to look in the mirror at their own actions?
If the US is suppose to be 'leader of the free world', it gives the most horrific example of what it stands for, if others are suppose to mirror the US, and when they do, it becomes an awful crime.

I don't think it right if anyone does it, but if the US is suppose to be a leader, well then Russia was just following.

DaniilKharms

RobertKK wrote: »

But how can the US get it right about Russia, when they refuse to look in the mirror at their own actions?
If the US is suppose to be 'leader of the free world', it gives the most horrific example of what it stands for, if others are suppose to mirror the US, and when they do, it becomes an awful crime.

I don't think it right if anyone does it, but if the US is suppose to be a leader, well then Russia was just following.

Again, these things are unrelated.

It's like justifying the murder of a baby, because the baby's dad was a murderer.

Noel82

DaniilKharms wrote: »

Ukraine did NOT meddle in the US election. That's a nonsense.

Blinded by hate, sad to see. I'll try make it easier for you.

http / www. politico. com /story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

"Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found. "

RobertKK

DaniilKharms wrote: »

Again, these things are unrelated.

It's like justifying the murder of a baby, because the baby's dad was a murderer.

Who said any of this is justified?

I think they should all admit they do it, because people getting upset over Russia, are either ostriches with head in the sand, so anti-Trump they can't admit the US is a world leader in interfering in elections and governments, or people are very deluded when it comes to the US.

I love the US as a country but it is a disgrace, all this finger pointing when they do exactly the same.
How can we ever have justice in the world if people doing wrong can only see the wrong others do, but not their own?
That is my issue with all this.

Professor Moriarty

Noel82 wrote: »

Blinded by hate, sad to see. I'll try make it easier for you.

http / www. politico. com /story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

"Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found. "

From your link:

A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.

So no actual proof. Unlike Junior's meeting.

Furthermore, from your link:

The Ukrainian efforts had an impact in the race, helping to force Manafort’s resignation and advancing the narrative that Trump’s campaign was deeply connected to Ukraine’s foe to the east, Russia. But they were far less concerted or centrally directed than Russia’s alleged hacking and dissemination of Democratic emails.

Russia’s effort was personally directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin, involved the country’s military and foreign intelligence services, according to U.S. intelligence officials. They reportedly briefed Trump last week on the possibility that Russian operatives might have compromising information on the president-elect. And at a Senate hearing last week on the hacking, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said “I don't think we've ever encountered a more aggressive or direct campaign to interfere in our election process than we've seen in this case.”

So, according to your link, we can see that by comparison Russian interference and Trump's culpability is exponentially greater.

DaniilKharms

Noel82 wrote: »

Blinded by hate, sad to see. I'll try make it easier for you.

http / www. politico. com /story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

"Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found. "

First, I'm not a clinton or Trump supporter... so maybe cop on.

Second, people all over the world, including the US - most especially Republicans candidates - questioned Trump's fitness for office. They were right, btw.

Third, what you're talking about is more like a traditional dirty trick, you'll remember the John McCain "****** baby" scandal, than interference. Russia engaged in active measures to STEAL PRIVATE PROPERTY and then use that to damage a candidate. They also hacked into election systems in dozens of states.

Finally, while I may not LIKE what Ukraine did, Hillary Clinton is NOT President - maybe you didn't know that?

If she WAS I'd be 100% for investigating anything untoward she did in the campaign.

For people that want to compare the two issues, this is useful:

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/07/russia-trump-ukraine-clinton/533394/

It's pretty clear that equating the two is a nonsense. On top of that, trying to make it out that only "hate" could stop someone from connecting the two is a nonsense.

I don't hate either Clinton OR Trump, but I GREATLY dislike both and think BOTH would've been disasters. Clinton less so, but still a disaster.

Noel82

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So, according to your link, we can see that by comparison Russian interference and Trump's culpability is exponentially greater.

Sure, my only point is that it's not some intergalactic phenomenon to see foreign countries interfere in others elections. Obama used tax payer money funding pacs to try oust Netanyahu in Israel for example.

DaniilKharms

RobertKK wrote: »

Who said any of this is justified?

I think they should all admit they do it, because people getting upset over Russia, are either ostriches with head in the sand, so anti-Trump they can't admit the US is a world leader in interfering in elections and governments, or people are very deluded when it comes to the US.

I love the US as a country but it is a disgrace, all this finger pointing when they do exactly the same.
How can we ever have justice in the world if people doing wrong can only see the wrong others do, but not their own?
That is my issue with all this.

I hate to break it to you, but no one in the US is ever going to either admit all the atrocious behaviour they've been up to for decades and decades.

Americans can easily use google to figure out the truth about their own country and most don't. Schools indoctrinate kids to believe BS lies about America, and the US media is utterly complicit in the spread of dangerous propaganda to US citizens.

None of that is going to change.

I have spent years and years and years and years trying to inform people about this stuff and 99.99999% of them do NOT care.

Connecting that to what Russia did is a non-starter.

And it's also illogical. What can people hope to do with that information? If you didn't notice after 9/11 the world demanded that the US didn't invade Iraq... and... well, you know...

The US government is a law unto itself and always will be.

Professor Moriarty

Noel82 wrote: »

Sure, my only point is that it's not some intergalactic phenomenon to see foreign countries interfere in others elections. Obama used tax payer money funding pacs to try oust Netanyahu in Israel for example.

Legally so. And again, the scale of the intervention was exponentially smaller.

Noel82

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Legally so. And again, the scale of the intervention was exponentially smaller.

There's many other examples of what the US did in foreign elections or states that are just as bad as what Russia did, and many worse with military action. Take this report from NPR

http://www.npr.org/2016/12/22/506625913/database-tracks-history-of-u-s-meddling-in-foreign-elections

"This is hardly the first time a country has tried to influence the outcome of another country's election. The U.S. has done it, too, by one expert's count, more than 80 times worldwide between 1946 and 2000. That expert is Dov Levin of Carnegie Mellon University."

Anyway this is someway off topic, time for the beer garden x).

Professor Moriarty

Noel82 wrote: »

There's many other examples of what the US did in foreign elections or states that are just as bad as what Russia did, and many worse with military action. Take this report from NPR

http://www.npr.org/2016/12/22/506625913/database-tracks-history-of-u-s-meddling-in-foreign-elections

"This is hardly the first time a country has tried to influence the outcome of another country's election. The U.S. has done it, too, by one expert's count, more than 80 times worldwide between 1946 and 2000. That expert is Dov Levin of Carnegie Mellon University."

Anyway this is someway off topic, time for the beer garden x).

That would make an interesting thread. But this thread is about The Donald.

TGIF

RobertKK

DaniilKharms wrote: »

I hate to break it to you, but no one in the US is ever going to either admit all the atrocious behaviour they've been up to for decades and decades.

Americans can easily use google to figure out the truth about their own country and most don't. Schools indoctrinate kids to believe BS lies about America, and the US media is utterly complicit in the spread of dangerous propaganda to US citizens.

None of that is going to change.

I have spent years and years and years and years trying to inform people about this stuff and 99.99999% of them do NOT care.

Connecting that to what Russia did is a non-starter.

And it's also illogical. What can people hope to do with that information? If you didn't notice after 9/11 the world demanded that the US didn't invade Iraq... and... well, you know...

The US government is a law unto itself and always will be.

I spoke to Americans about this, this is why people talk about fake news, because only one half of the story is reported in the news.
They seem bored with the Russian story, as they agreed the US does it too, and I don't think they wanted to appear as being hypocrites on the matter.

It is this type of thing that got Trump elected, because the media treats people as being stupid as if they must believe their narrative, rather than give the full story.
People can see how the establishment lied about Iraq, Libya and supporting regimes like Saudi Arabia.
Trump is guilty of this too.

But it is leading to people going more extreme routes especially in western society as the establishment are not able to control things due to the internet.
It leads to bad decisions like Brexit and in the US, the two worst candidates for the presidency that I can ever remember running for the job.

This is what half truths, not reporting the full news because it is unsavoury and the established media expects the audience to not look elsewhere to get news.
There are some decent established news groups, but most seem to want a certain viewpoint to be shown.

I just think the US is playing with fire when they are not innocent and a lot of Americans are disillusioned with their political system.

Professor Moriarty

RobertKK wrote: »

I spoke to Americans about this, this is why people talk about fake news, because only one half of the story is reported in the news.
They seem bored with the Russian story, as they agreed the US does it too, and I don't think they wanted to appear as being hypocrites on the matter.

It is this type of thing that got Trump elected, because the media treats people as being stupid as if they must believe their narrative, rather than give the full story.
People can see how the establishment lied about Iraq, Libya and supporting regimes like Saudi Arabia.
Trump is guilty of this too.

But it is leading to people going more extreme routes especially in western society as the establishment are not able to control things due to the internet.
It leads to bad decisions like Brexit and in the US, the two worst candidates for the presidency that I can ever remember running for the job.

This is what half truths, not reporting the full news because it is unsavoury and the established media expects the audience to not look elsewhere to get news.
There are some decent established news groups, but most seem to want a certain viewpoint to be shown.

I just think the US is playing with fire when they are not innocent and a lot of Americans are disillusioned with their political system.

Where would you recommend as a good source of unbiased news?

DaniilKharms

RobertKK wrote: »

I spoke to Americans about this, this is why people talk about fake news, because only one half of the story is reported in the news.
They seem bored with the Russian story, as they agreed the US does it too, and I don't think they wanted to appear as being hypocrites on the matter.

It is this type of thing that got Trump elected, because the media treats people as being stupid as if they must believe their narrative, rather than give the full story.
People can see how the establishment lied about Iraq, Libya and supporting regimes like Saudi Arabia.
Trump is guilty of this too.

But it is leading to people going more extreme routes especially in western society as the establishment are not able to control things due to the internet.
It leads to bad decisions like Brexit and in the US, the two worst candidates for the presidency that I can ever remember running for the job.

This is what half truths, not reporting the full news because it is unsavoury and the established media expects the audience to not look elsewhere to get news.
There are some decent established news groups, but most seem to want a certain viewpoint to be shown.

I just think the US is playing with fire when they are not innocent and a lot of Americans are disillusioned with their political system.

That's NOT what Fake news is. Fake news is people calling real news that they dislike fake. Much of what is fake news is in fact, factual.

MANY Americans - in fact 50% is polls (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/11/15953514/trump-russia-poll-republicans-divided-distraction-serious-issue) think Russian interference is serious.

Saying that, public opinion is kinda beside the point. Pols ignore it daily, when it suits them. And US public opinion about ITSELF is at best delusional.

The establishment has lied as long as there's been an establishment, and frankly many many many people knew of examples of this BEFORE the internet. Ask Noam Chomsky or Michael Moore.

ALL news is biased as well, in case you haven't noticed. That's why you have to read widely if you want a sense of the truth, and even then you only get what people want you to get. Easy example: Media folks knew about the Steele Dossier for months and months and months before they bothered to tell anyone. Sanders was basically frozen out of the media in many area as well.

And on and on and on.

And btw., if you tried to report on something, no matter how hard you tried to not show your bias, people would complain you're biased. These days especially, if you DON'T express bias, people will accuse you OF bias.

The root causes of America's issues - of which Trump is one symptom - are legion and unsolvable.

Oh and btw., and fyi., I'm a US expat.

InTheTrees

Noel82 wrote: »

There's many other examples of what the US did in foreign elections or states that are just as bad as what Russia did

I'm not sure what you're point is.

You're saying the Russians did indeed meddle in the US election, but you consider it okay?

So the Americans are perfectly correct to be investigating and going after finding out who was responsible then?

RobertKK

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Where would you recommend as a good source of unbiased news?

There are some clearly biased media, lets say Fox News, CNN, Alex Jones :pac: but there is some good reporting by various newspapers, though one can question if they work as hard to keep whoever or whatever accountable to same degree.
We all know the inward looking press in the UK and how biased or bad their reporting is.
I think the Guardian does have some good articles.

Professor Moriarty

RobertKK wrote: »

There are some clearly biased media, lets say Fox News, CNN, Alex Jones :pac: but there is some good reporting by various newspapers, though one can question if they work as hard to keep whoever or whatever accountable to same degree.
We all know the inward looking press in the UK and how biased or bad their reporting is.
I think the Guardian does have some good articles.

Are you sure? The Guardian hammers Trump at every opportunity.

DaniilKharms

During the meeting, Akhmetshin said Veselnitskaya brought with her a plastic folder with printed-out documents that detailed what she believed was the flow of illicit funds to the Democratic National Committee. Veselnitskaya presented the contents of the documents to the Trump associates and suggested that making the information public could help the Trump campaign, he said.

“This could be a good issue to expose how the DNC is accepting bad money,” Akhmetshin recalled her saying.

Trump Jr. asked the attorney if she had all the evidence to back up her claims, including whether she could demonstrate the flow of the money. But Veselnitskaya said the Trump campaign would need to research it more. After that, Trump Jr. lost interest, according to Akhmetshin.

https://apnews.com/dceed1008d8f45afb314aca65797762a/Russian-American-lobbyist-says-he-was-in-Trump-son's-meeting

So apparently yet another lie has been exposed.

First the meeting was lied about, then when it was discovered, it was leaked to the press, then DTJr said it was just about adoption, with people he didn't know and that PM and JK didn't know what it was about, then the emails were about to come out, so he put them out himself, and it was revealed that PM and JK did know what it was about, but hey, it was only some rando Russian lady, and she only wanted to talk about adoption, bummer, then it turned out that not only was a rando Russian but also an ex-Soviet intel person there, but hey, they didn't get any info, so it wasn't collusion...

And now that turns out to be bull**** as well.

SeamusFX

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Are you sure? The Guardian hammers Trump at every opportunity.

Just because a media outlet hammers Trump, doesn't mean it isn't fair, Trump just happens to be a rogue nail sitting out in the open asking to be hammered! The things Trump says and does, any media outlet that doesn't hammer him, obviously isn't fair and balanced!

Also I think CNN is fair and maybe even too fair. They've added a lot of Republicans and ex Fox News people to their staff and many of these people aren't fair and wrongly biased towards the GOP and Trump no matter what he says or does. Plus they have Kelly Ann Conway, Jeffrey Lord, Corey Lewandowski and a lot of other Trump mouthpieces on almost every day and they say a lot of bat crazy stuff! Fox News doesn't have anywhere near as many Democrats on. Having a different opinion is one thing, but people out and out lying should have no place in any news outlet!

InTheTrees

Noel82 wrote: »

This type of thing goes on all the time, the only reason it's so blown up is because people are still refusing to accept Trump won the election and are clinging to the collective "hopeism" the media are providing which bolstered their ratings. They are the storytellers, you are the toddlers sucking your thumbs.

Did you read don jr's email?

That's hardly "hopeism".

And Alan " torture is fine" Dersowitz lost most of his credibility supporting George w Bush's war efforts.

InTheTrees

When I got up this morning the news was breaking that it had turned out there were actually five people in the meeting with Don Jr.
Then while I was at work there was more breaking news that there were actually six people in the meeting. Now I just got home and MSNBC is saying there's now evidence of Eight people in the meeting.

Professor Moriarty

InTheTrees wrote: »

When I got up this morning the news was breaking that it had turned out there were actually five people in the meeting with Don Jr.
Then while I was at work there was more breaking news that there were actually six people in the meeting. Now I just got home and MSNBC is saying there's now evidence of Eight people in the meeting.

It's like the loaves and fishes.

RobertKK

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Are you sure? The Guardian hammers Trump at every opportunity.

I don't care if they hammer Trump, they do have as I said, some good articles.

Professor Moriarty

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't care if they hammer Trump, they do have as I said, some good articles.

Fair enough. So, in future discussions, The Guardian will be the benchmark of what is and isn't fake news.

Water John

Wonder did the 2 Russians think they were only going to meet Don Jnr? They may have ducked when they saw the number on the other side.
That might explain the 20 min meeting, if that is what it was.

LeinsterDub

Water John wrote: »

Wonder did the 2 Russians think they were only going to meet Don Jnr? They may have ducked when they saw the number on the other side.
That might explain the 20 min meeting, if that is what it was.

They probably figured incorrectly that one of the six wasn't a fool

Water John

That's my point, indeed, well put. If you wanted to achieve what they possibly wanted, you would start gradually with one. This would have been going, way too fast, uncontrollable and unbelievable.

DaniilKharms

When you actually look at who was in the meeting it was pretty obviously a Putin operation.

Just sayin.

Billy86

Noel82 wrote: »

Providing proof of what?

Proof that Trump Jr (Trump's son who runs many of his business interests), Kushner (Trump's son in law and close adviser) and Manafort (at the time Trump's presidential campaign manager) spoke with people acting on behalf of Russian government officials both about sanctions against Russia and about digging up dirt on the DNC. You seem unaware, but speaking about sanctions before taking office is exactly why Michael Flynn was forced to resign due to a clear violation of the law. That is fact, and if you don't believe me then refer to those who were actually in the meeting.

RobertKK wrote: »

What I posted is factually correct, it is either wrong for the US to be interfering in foreign elections, supporting coups against democratically elected governments, toppling regimes using lies or it is not.

The thing is Trump can make a show of the US if US authorities go against his family by being a president who comes out and exposes all the US is doing, and expose the hypocrisy of the system in the US, it is ok if we do it, but end of the world if it is someone else.

Maybe people here are happy with the hypocrisy, and would rather play an ostrich and ignore the elephant in the room.

Who in the US has ever being held accountable for interfering in elections, supporting coups against democratically elected government and who has ever being held accountable for toppling the governments of Iraq and Libya and causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and wars and battles that continues many, many years after they started the wars?
No one, but we are all suppose to be outraged at the Trump family.

I might be if there wasn't so much hypocrisy involved.

The richness of this after you were big on harping on about Seth Rich prior to the election, calling something that both those on the Trump side and the Russians who attended the meeting, have admitted to as being a "witch hunt" is comical beyond belief.

Keep whatabouting though, because all it does is show you are entirely unable to show an act of treason like this as precedent or to defend it in any way beyond the punch line that is "but... but... but Hillary/Obama/and so on".

Show me an American politician colluding with a hostile nation against the US electorate to influence and election though, go on.

DaniilKharms

WASHINGTON—The Russian lawyer whom Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort met last year with the hopes of receiving damaging information about Hillary Clinton says she talked with the office of Russia’s top prosecutor while waging a campaign against a U.S. sanctions law and [Bill Browder] the hedge-fund manager who backed it.

Lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya said she wasn’t working for Russian authorities, but she said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal that she was meeting with Russian authorities regularly, and shared information about the hedge-fund manager with the Russian prosecutor general’s office, including with Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika, a top official appointed by the Kremlin.

“I personally know the general prosecutor,” Ms. Veselnitskaya said. “In the course of my investigation [about the fund manager], I shared information with him.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-lawyer-who-trump-jr-met-says-she-was-in-contact-with-top-russian-prosecutor-1500063809

If you don't know who Bill Browder is:

In 2006, after ten years doing business in the country, Browder was blacklisted by the Russian government as a "threat to national security" and denied entry to the country. The Economist wrote that the Russian government blacklisted Browder because he interfered with the flow of money to "corrupt bureaucrats and their businessmen accomplices". Browder had been a supporter of Russian president Vladimir Putin before, though.[13]

As reported by The New York Times in 2008, "over the next two years several of his associates and lawyers, as well as their relatives, became victims of crimes, including severe beatings and robberies during which documents were taken". In June 2007 dozens of police officers "swooped down on the Moscow offices of Hermitage and its law firm, confiscating documents and computers. When a member of the firm protested that the search was illegal, he was beaten by officers and hospitalized for two weeks, said the firm’s head, Jamison R. Firestone." Hermitage became "victim of what is known in Russia as 'corporate raiding': seizing companies and other assets with the aid of corrupt law enforcement officials and judges". Three Hermitage holding companies were seized on what the company's lawyers insist were bogus charges.[2]

The raids in June 2007 enabled corrupt law enforcement officers to steal the corporate registration documents of three Hermitage holding companies, permitting them to perpetrate a fraud, claiming (and receiving) the $230 million of taxes paid by those companies to the Russian state in 2006. In November 2008 one of Hermitage's lawyers, Sergei Magnitsky, was arrested. He was charged with the very tax evasion that he had uncovered.[14] Magnitsky died on November 16, 2009, after eleven months in pretrial detention.[15]

In February 2013, Russian officials announced that Browder and Magnitsky would both be put on trial for evading $16.8 million in taxes. Furthermore, as announced in March 2013, Russian authorities will be investigating Hermitage's acquisition of Gazprom shares worth $70 million. The investigation will be focusing on whether Browder violated any Russian laws when Hermitage used Russian companies registered in the region of Kalmykia to buy shares. (An investigation by the Council of Europe's Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights cleared Browder of the accusations of improprieties that surfaced at this time.)[16] At the time, according to the Russian law, foreigners were barred from directly owning Gazprom shares. Browder has also been charged with trying to gain access to Gazprom's financial reports.[17] Browder admitted having sought influence in Gazprom but denied any wrongdoing;[18] in his view, purchasing Gazprom shares was an investment in the Russian economy, while the desire to influence the Gazprom management was driven by the need to expose a "huge fraud going on at the company", and the scheme with Russian-registered subsidiaries entitled to tax advantages was practised by other foreign investors at the time and was not illegal.[19] He also said that he believed the trial was in response to the United States passing the Magnitsky Act, which had blacklisted Russian officials involved in Magnitsky's death from entering the U.S. As claimed by The Financial Times, this trial was deemed to be the first in Russian history over a dead defendant.[20] Amnesty International described the trial as “a whole new chapter in Russia’s worsening human rights record” and a “sinister attempt to deflect attention from those who committed the crimes Magnitsky exposed.”[21]

On 11 July 2013, Browder was convicted in absentia by a district criminal court in Moscow on charges under article 199 of the RF Criminal Code (tax-evasion by organisations), and sentenced to nine years.[22][23] In May 2013 and again in July 2013, Interpol rejected requests by Russia's Interior Ministry[24] to put Browder on its search list and locate and arrest him, saying that Russia's case against him was "predominantly political".[25]

In April 2014, the European Parliament unanimously passed a resolution to impose sanctions on over 30 Russians complicit in the Magnitsky case; the first time in the parliament's history that a vote has been held to establish a public sanctions list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Browder#Conflict_with_the_Russian_legal_system

JRant

If this was a Putin operation then why was this lawyer given special dispensation from AG Lynch and the Obama administration to overstay her visa?

None of this makes a lick of sense IMO. A publicist sends an email out of nowhere to Donald jnr. Jnr thinks it might be useful to meet this person and find out what they're about. Nothing happens at this meeting, according to the 2 main persons involved (not some "source") and everyone is losing their shït talking about treason FFS.

Here's a fairly balanced article on it, seems to lay out the players involved and the content of any information that she could have been trying to peddle. Basically it was already in the public domain and amounted to the square root of fook all.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-12/russian-at-trump-tower-is-said-to-have-gathered-details-on-ziffs

DaniilKharms

JRant wrote: »

If this was a Putin operation then why was this lawyer given special dispensation from AG Lynch and the Obama administration to overstay her visa?

None of this makes a lick of sense IMO. A publicist sends an email out of nowhere to Donald jnr. Jnr thinks it might be useful to meet this person and find out what they're about. Nothing happens at this meeting, according to the 2 main persons involved (not some "source") and everyone is losing their shït talking about treason FFS.

Here's a fairly balanced article on it, seems to lay out the players involved and the content of any information that she could have been trying to peddle. Basically it was already in the public domain and amounted to the square root of fook all.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-12/russian-at-trump-tower-is-said-to-have-gathered-details-on-ziffs

Because she was there representing another client and then didn't leave when she was supposed to.

And you're trusting someone that lied to you repeatedly already. Do that at your peril.

DaniilKharms

Ex-Russian intel officer at Trump Jr. meeting allegedly orchestrated an international hacking conspiracy

The Daily Beast reports that a case filed with New York Supreme Court in 2015 alleges that Akhmetshin successfully orchestrated the hacking of two computer systems and stole documents from International Mineral Resources (IMR), a Russian mining company.

“The U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. was told in July 2015 that Akhmetshin had arranged the hacking of a mining company’s private records — stealing internal documents and then disseminating them,” the Daily Beast reports. “The corporate espionage case was brought by IMR, who alleged that Akhmetshin was hired by Russian oligarch Andrey Melinchenko, an industrialist worth around $12 billion.”

Akhmetshin denied that he orchestrated any hacking of the company, but acknowledged that he “found” a hard drive that just happened to contain sensitive IMR documents.

Akhmetshin, a registered congressional lobbyist, has in the past also done work on behalf of Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya, who was also present at the June 9 meeting at Trump Tower.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/07/ex-russian-intel-officer-at-trump-jr-meeting-allegedly-orchestrated-an-international-hacking-conspiracy/

JRant

Billy86 wrote: »

Proof that Trump Jr (Trump's son who runs many of his business interests), Kushner (Trump's son in law and close adviser) and Manafort (at the time Trump's presidential campaign manager) spoke with people acting on behalf of Russian government officials both about sanctions against Russia and about digging up dirt on the DNC. You seem unaware, but speaking about sanctions before taking office is exactly why Michael Flynn was forced to resign due to a clear violation of the law. That is fact, and if you don't believe me then refer to those who were actually in the meeting.



The richness of this after you were big on harping on about Seth Rich prior to the election, calling something that both those on the Trump side and the Russians who attended the meeting, have admitted to as being a "witch hunt" is comical beyond belief.

Keep whatabouting though, because all it does is show you are entirely unable to show an act of treason like this as precedent or to defend it in any way beyond the punch line that is "but... but... but Hillary/Obama/and so on".

Show me an American politician colluding with a hostile nation against the US electorate to influence and election though, go on.

Ah Billy, I think we can agree that what happened is wrong but treason? Really?

It's no more treason than what HRC's campaign were at with the Ukrainian government. It's underhanded unethical dirt digging, of which both sides are equally shameless at.

JRant

DaniilKharms wrote: »

Because she was there representing another client and then didn't leave when she was supposed to.

And you're trusting someone that lied to you repeatedly already. Do that at your peril.

I hadn't read that she had overstayed her visa.

I'm not trusting anyone, just trying to make sense of it all. So far we have 2 accounts that seem to indicate nothing happened. I wouldn't trust these other "sources" one jot to be honest.

Professor Moriarty

JRant wrote: »

Ah Billy, I think we can agree that what happened is wrong but treason? Really?

It's no more treason than what HRC's campaign were at with the Ukrainian government. It's underhanded unethical dirt digging, of which both sides are equally shameless at.

Not at all. Meaningless comparison. They were of a completely different order. You couldn't possibly compare them.

Water John

I think for those on whataboutery, Mueller will make clear sense of it.

listermint

Water John wrote: »

I think for those on whataboutery, Mueller will make clear sense of it.

Yep, as I said before.


It's going to be awesome.

Water John

Poor Junior will be in knots.
The Irish word Gamhalog, tends to apply.