Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Professor Moriarty

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

CIA NSA MI6 they lied about Iraq having chemical factories. I remember clearly a Pentagon briefing or maybe it was the UN the brought photographs of one of these facilities and they told the world here they are making biological and chemical weapons. What they find out later it was a milk producing factory.

Have you a link to where the CIA or NSA categorically stated that Iraq were developing WMDs?

Cheerful Spring

Sassygirl1999 wrote: »

People all over the world are talking about the reprehensible damage that the Donald is doing to himself and America's standing in the world.

There's no denying any of that now. That's for sure

But the damage he has just done to his office that of the presidency, to international U.S.A diplomacy and to a basic common sense of decency is inestimable

I not sure why people are opposed to better relationships. Frankly peace with North Korea and Russia is not a bad thing.

Is the economy not doing better in terms of jobs?

Iran issue is problematic but Iran has serious issues how it treats women so it needs to cleanups its act. I think Trump would do better talking to them.

Trump has a point about Nato why should the US pay for it all? If other countries are not paying for protection he has a right to talk about that.

Illegal immigration. Its illegal for a reason you can't have people coming in and wrecking havoc.

rossie1977

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It all linked why do you think the democrats are so upset with Russia they needed someone to blame. Let's ignore we are corrupt ourselves and start blaming Russia nobody will talk about how corrupt we are then. Who in the media talks about that anymore forgotten as if it never happened.

Clinton was brought in front of Congress and grilled for days by a partisan Republican committee intent on taking her down re: emails/server and they found absolutely nothing they could charge her with.

On the flip side we have had multiple arrests, convictions, indictments of Trump campaign members since the 2016 election and the people looking into it are mostly Republican..one was even chosen by Trump himself. Not to mention the clear connection between WikiLeaks, Roger stone and Trump's own son who admitted he set up meeting seeking Russian help. In Russia there have been a number unexplained deaths of high ranking officials since November 2016.

As a conspiracy theorist I would have expected you to be all over this.

Cheerful Spring

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Have you a link to where the CIA or NSA categorically stated that Iraq were developing WMDs?

Powell's U.N. Appearance ::: Feb. 5, 2003
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell goes in person to the U.N. to make the case against Iraq. Citing evidence obtained by American intelligence, he tells the U.N. that Iraq has failed "to come clean and disarm." Powell adds:
"My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."

CIA is American intelligence. If they disagreed with the White House it's their job to voice these concerns openly.

everlast75

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

I’m utterly outraged to be honest.

How can I go about my normal life tomorrow and raise my kids after his comments???

Grow up folks he’s 1 person, life isn’t dictated by him.

Get a grip. "He is just one man".

He is the most powerful man on the planet.

You either don't care or don't know enough to care. And that's fine.

There's no hysterics here mate. I know its easier for you to rubbish proper debate by claiming there is, but you're out of luck. Try the conspiracy theory thread.

Everyone here is managing to raise their kids perfectly fine thank you. If you're saying that is therr barometer - if it doesn't effect your kids don't comment, then why are you on here? To give us the secret to your happy life?

I take it you're running for local elections. I mean, if you're that locally minded that would be the obvious thing to do.

Its the most talked about political story of the moment. Get used to people guessing what happened in that meeting. Trump wouldn't have this speculation if he didn't lock everyone out of it.

All of this is his own fault. All of it.

Professor Moriarty

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Powell's U.N. Appearance ::: Feb. 5, 2003
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell goes in person to the U.N. to make the case against Iraq. Citing evidence obtained by American intelligence, he tells the U.N. that Iraq has failed "to come clean and disarm." Powell adds:
"My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."

CIA is American intelligence. If they disagreed with the White House it's their job to voice these concerns openly.

Colin Powell was a politician when he said that.

So, unlike their categorical and very public assertion that Russia interfered in the election, neither the CIA or the NSA ever stated that Iraq was making WMDs?

Cheerful Spring

rossie1977 wrote: »

Clinton was brought in front of Congress and grilled for days by a partisan Republican committee intent on taking her down re: emails/server and they found absolutely nothing they could charge her with.

On the flip side we have had multiple arrests, convictions, indictments of Trump campaign members since the 2016 election and the people looking into it are mostly Republican..one was even chosen by Trump himself. Not to mention the clear connection between WikiLeaks, Roger stone and Trump's own son who admitted he set up meeting seeking Russian help. In Russia there have been a number unexplained deaths of high ranking officials since November 2016.

As a conspiracy theorist I would have expected you to be all over this.

If it was anyone else you be in jail just a fact. She an establishment figure highly regarded so she was protected by the FBI.

You have indictments that are not the same as charging and proving a crime in a court of law. I don't see the problem liking one candidate over the other who cares if Russia liked Trump more. You have to prove Russia lost Hilary the election and I have seen nothing that proves that.

Cheerful Spring

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Colin Powell was a politician when he said that.

So, unlike their categorical and very public assertion that Russia interfered in the election, neither the CIA or the NSA ever stated that Iraq was making WMDs?

Yes they did how else would Bush have gotten his war. The assessments came from the CIA unless you think the FBI was operating in Iraq?

Itssoeasy

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I not sure why people are opposed to better relationships. Frankly peace with North Korea and Russia is not a bad thing.

Is the economy not doing better in terms of jobs?

Iran issue is problematic but Iran has serious issues how it treats women so it needs to cleanups its act. I think Trump would do better talking to them.

Trump has a point about Nato why should the US pay for it all? If other countries are not paying for protection he has a right to talk about that.

Illegal immigration. Its illegal for a reason you can't have people coming in and wrecking havoc.

1.What peace with North Korea would that be exactly ? The North Koreans have no intention of giving up their nuclear weapons. They have done this before, the only difference is a sitting US president has given them legitimacy. Having better relations with Russia would be a positive but not the way trump is doing it.
2. The economy was doing fine way before trump took office so let's not give trump all the credit.
3. Yes Iran had issues with many things including how women are treated, but so do the Saudis who trump has no problem with. The women issue isn't why he dislikes them. It's Israel that doesn't like them.
4.The US does not pay for all of NATO btw. It pays about 60 percent or less. Also Trump saying that other NATO countries should pay up to 4% GDP on defense. The US doesn't even spend that now, it spends 3.3 % according to the pentagon.
4. Illegal immigrants are shown to cause less crime than American citizens. Also what havoc are they causing ? Any links as havoc suggests widespread trouble.

Hurrache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Yes they did how else would Bush have gotten his war. The assessments came from the CIA unless you think the FBI was operating in Iraq?

They didn't, they said there was no definitive proof, and there was the small matter of a faked dossier. The CIA said the WMD rationale was nonsense so the US government at the time moved to throw in other reasons to invade.

The CIA had separately concluded that reports of Iraqi training on weapons of mass destruction were "episodic, sketchy, or not corroborated in other channels," the inspector general's report said

What's clear now is that earlier intelligence reports suggesting Saddam Hussein's regime was attempting to obtain uranium from the African nation of Niger were based on false information, including forged documents.

But what's even more embarrassing to Bush administration officials is that the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department had themselves earlier concluded the Niger uranium reports were almost certainly not true.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/08/wbr.iraq.claims/

How do you not know any of this well publicised scandal?

Cheerful Spring

Itssoeasy wrote: »

1.What peace with North Korea would that be exactly ? The North Koreans have no intention of giving up their nuclear weapons. They have done this before, the only difference is a sitting US president has given them legitimacy. Having better relations with Russia would be a positive but not the way trump is doing it.
2. The economy was doing fine way before trump took office so let's not give trump all the credit.
3. Yes Iran had issues with many things including how women are treated, but so do the Saudis who trump has no problem with. The women issue isn't why he dislikes them. It's Israel that doesn't like them.
4.The US does not pay for all of NATO btw. It pays about 60 percent or less. Also Trump saying that other NATO countries should pay up to 4% GDP on defense. The US doesn't even spend that now, it spends 3.3 % according to the pentagon.
4. Illegal immigrants are shown to cause less crime than American citizens. Also what havoc are they causing ? Any links as havoc suggests widespread trouble.

5 or 6 months ago they were sending ICBMs over Japan. Since then they have stopped testing, have blown up 2 nuclear facility sites and are in the process of handing over Korean war dead remains. North and South Korea are openly communicating with each other. They are in better place than 6 months ago.

Trump economic growth is strong he has brought in policies that keep jobs in America. Bad for us but he is the US president it's his job to look after America.

US: 71.7 percent of its combined defense expenditure. In short, the U.S. contributed more funds to NATO than Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and Canada combined.

It does not matter if they cause less crime they are entering the country illegally this puts a burden on a country resources.

mcmoustache

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

No one can fault you for originality:D

If we're bringing this back, I want to bring back the budweiser frogs.


Wassssaaaaaaaaapppp!

mcmoustache

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

What’s interesting to me how much the American left is ultra nationalistic. It’s unique in the developed western world. Accusations of treason, fetishing of the military or the secret services. The sheer inability to know the history of their own country’s involvement in the elections (and the overthrow of democracy) in dozens of countries, including Russia.

These accusations were coming from the right too. Hence today's failed intervention.

pixelburp

Trying to reframe the whole controversy as the left wing shouting match is inherently disingenuous. Republicans and Trump aligned figures have made just as much noise, this has been widely covered yet the attempts to ignore the cross-the-aisle outrage is cynical and false.

mcmoustache

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Isn’t the Russians hacked the US elections a literal conspiracy theory?

Not in modern parlance. It involves various conspiracies in the same way tthat a bank robbery is a conspiracy. Kudos though on being more original than the tired old Hillary/Server/WMD/Obama/Emails stuff that's shown up here today.

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It all linked why do you think the democrats are so upset with Russia they needed someone to blame. Let's ignore we are corrupt ourselves and start blaming Russia nobody will talk about how corrupt we are then. Who in the media talks about that anymore forgotten as if it never happened.

Are you seriously saying, that after all the indictments, all guilty pleas, all the evidence that's out in the open that Russia had nothing to do with this?

Cheerful Spring

Hurrache wrote: »

They didn't, they said there was no definitive proof, and there was the small matter of a faked dossier. The CIA said the WMD rationale was nonsense so the US government at the time moved to throw in other reasons to invade.



http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/08/wbr.iraq.claims/

How do you not know any of this well publicised scandal?

We have the document that's just nonsense. CIA can say what they like after the invasion but they did say Iraq had WMD.

Read the key judgements
https://fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd-nie.pdf

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

5 or 6 months ago they were sending ICBMs over Japan. Since then they have stopped testing, have blown up 2 nuclear facility sites and are in the process of handing over Korean war dead remains. North and South Korea are openly communicating with each other. They are in better place than 6 months ago.

Trump economic growth is strong he has brought in policies that keep jobs in America. Bad for us but he is the US president it's his job to look after America.

US: 71.7 percent of its combined defense expenditure. In short, the U.S. contributed more funds to NATO than Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and Canada combined.

It does not matter if they cause less crime they are entering the country illegally this puts a burden on a country resources.

Do Russians not have any other means of debate beyond whataboutery? It's very transparent.

Hurrache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

We have the document that's just nonsense. CIA can say what they like after the invasion but they did say Iraq had WMD.

Read the key judgements
https://fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd-nie.pdf

Have you been in touch with the UN Security Council, and various government committees around the world to tell them they're all wrong?

And who's "we"?

Cheerful Spring

Hurrache wrote: »

Have you been in touch with the UN Security Council, and various government committees around the world to tell them they're all wrong?

And who's "we"?

Not sure what world you live its established already Iraq WMD intelligence was fake.

People who are not dumb to fall for the same lies again.

Cheerful Spring

mcmoustache wrote: »

Are you seriously saying, that after all the indictments, all guilty pleas, all the evidence that's out in the open that Russia had nothing to do with this?

That Russia won the election for Trump yes that's fantasy promoted by people like you.

Professor Moriarty

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

We have the document that's just nonsense. CIA can say what they like after the invasion but they did say Iraq had WMD.

Read the key judgements
https://fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd-nie.pdf

I read that document - or the bits that were left after it was heavily redacted. It certainly states categorically that the CIA believed that Iraq possessed a variety of WMDs. Where did the document come from?

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

That Russia won the election for Trump yes that's fantasy promoted by people like you.

I never said that. My claim is that Russia intervened in the US election to support Trump. They did this through social media targetting, GRU hackers and by funneling money into Trump's campaign. Feel free to challenge any of that because there's a heap of evidence out there supporting my claims.

StringerBell

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

What’s interesting to me how much the American left is ultra nationalistic. It’s unique in the developed western world. Accusations of treason, fetishing of the military or the secret services. The sheer inability to know the history of their own country’s involvement in the elections (and the overthrow of democracy) in dozens of countries, including Russia.

Certainly not soley an issue of the left.

WinnyThePoo

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXpRswM-tzc

Do you not realize why Trump came out with the 'rigged election' angle whilst he was a candidate .

Hurrache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Not sure what world you live its established already Iraq WMD intelligence was fake.

People who are not dumb to fall for the same lies again.

Do you realise you're actually arguing against yourself now?

mcmoustache

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXpRswM-tzc

Nice video and I enjoy the double meaning that it's posting suggests but it doesn't answer the question.


I'll repeat it for you. I know that it's easier to shít-stir than to take a position for some people so here we go:

Are you seriously saying, that after all the indictments, all guilty pleas, all the evidence that's out in the open that Russia had nothing to do with this?

You don't need to actually answer - you can post some Hillary memes or whatever - but either way, it'll show up what you're about.

goodolegill

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

People on this board forget too easily intelligence services lied to the world about Iraq WMD and other things since 2003. Some of us have longer memories. A few fake facebook accounts supporting Trump is hardly going to sway 60 million Americans to vote for Trump. There absolutely nothing that's show people were swayed by the Russians to vote Trump. Frankly, even if the Russians did hack the DNC they did the world and US people a service as they highlighted deep corruption in the Democratic primary that's the real scandal. Why is CNN not going after these people? Maybe the democrats are disappointed their corruption was found out. They obviously are trying to switch focus off them to Trump.

The information didn't need to sway 60 million people, the partisan nature of a 2 party system already has their soldiers on each side. Trump's "representation" as the head of the Republican party need to bring along staunch republicans and independents. The election came down to 80,000 votes in 3-4 states so don't downplay the role that negative propaganda can do. Why do you think campaigns spend so much time and money on their social media targeting.

"The deep democratic party corruption" What exactly is meant by this statement. Did the Democratic Party favour one candidate over another. Damn right they did, Hillary (as flawed as she was) was one of their own, a first lady to a success regime, a secretary of state and a champion for the democratic center. Bernie was none of those, he wasn't even classified as a democrat, he spent his years in congress as an independent.

So this notion that this was corruption, they wanted one of their own to win rather than an outsider as sure as I am that the GOP would have favoured Marco Rubio over Trump. Hillary Clinton received 2-3 million more votes than Sanders so was legitimately the Democratic candidate.

To conflate - getting the questions ahead of a debate to working with a foreign adversary to arrange a meeting for information on your opponent that was stolen seems ludicrous.

But I can rarely make sense of Trump cult members :eek:

Cheerful Spring

mcmoustache wrote: »

I never said that. My claim is that Russia intervened in the US election to support Trump. They did this through social media targetting, GRU hackers and by funneling money into Trump's campaign. Feel free to challenge any of that because there's a heap of evidence out there supporting my claims.

Your upset that a few fake Russia online accounts supported Trump? Russia has 156 million people are you so sure this was not some lonely Russia girls/guys just showing an interest in the US election? How can a few online accounts push 60 million voters to pick Trump?

Even if the GRU hacked the DNC what the complaint? They exposed corruption at the highest levels. A rigged primary election. Hilary and DNC got exposed for the corrupt people they really are well done Russia. Trump, as far I have seen ran a fair fight with her and he had his own fair share of scandals that would have ended the presidency run just goes to show it was the popular support that won out not Russian intervening in the election.

Funnelling money to Trump campaign. This would be a big deal if Putin was directly funding his campaign what evidence you got for that?

mcmoustache

Hurrache wrote: »

Do you realise you're actually arguing against yourself now?

The skripal thread was the same. If you can remember, Russia promoted multiple, mutually exclusive alternative theories. He made the same claims despite it not being logically possible for them to all be true.