Russia’s State TV Calls Trump Their ‘Agent’

  
Via:  john-russell  •  2 months ago  •  161 comments

Russia’s State TV Calls Trump Their ‘Agent’
Vesti Nedeli, a Sunday news show on the same network, pointed out that it was Trump, personally, who asked Lavrov to pose standing near as Trump sat at his desk. It’s almost the literal image of a power behind the throne.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


191216-Russia_s_State-TV-Calls-Trump-The

Sometimes a picture doesn’t have to be worth a thousand words. Just a few will do. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov returned home from his visit with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office last week, Russian state media was gloating over the spectacle. TV channel Rossiya 1 aired a segment   entitled   “Puppet Master and ‘Agent’—How to Understand Lavrov’s Meeting With Trump.”

Vesti Nedeli , a Sunday news show on the same network,   pointed out   that it was Trump, personally, who asked Lavrov to pose standing near as Trump sat at his desk. It’s almost the literal image of a power behind the throne.

And in the meantime, much to Russia’s satisfaction, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is   still waiting for that critical White House meeting   with the American president: the famous “quid pro quo” for Zelensky announcing an investigation that would smear Democratic challenger Joe Biden. As yet, Zelensky hasn’t done that, and as yet, no meeting has been set.

Russian state television still views the impending impeachment as a bump in the road that won’t lead to Trump’s removal from office. But President Vladimir Putin’s propaganda brigades   enjoy   watching the heightened divisions in the United States, and how it hurts relations between the U.S. and Ukraine.

They’ve also added a cynical new a narrative filled with half-joking ironies as they look at the American president’s bleak prospects when he does leave office. 

Appearing on   Sunday Evening With Vladimir Soloviev , Mikhail Gusman, first deputy director general of ITAR-TASS, Russia’s oldest and largest news agency,   predicted : “Sooner or later, the Democrats will come back into power. The next term or the term after that, it doesn’t matter... I have an even more unpleasant forecast for Trump. After the White House, he will face a very unhappy period.” 




“Russia's state television uses every opportunity to demoralize the Ukrainians with talking points based on Trump’s distaste for their beleaguered country.”



The host, Vladimir Soloviev, smugly asked: “Should we get another apartment in Rostov ready?” Soloviev’s allusion was to the situation of Viktor Yanukovych, former president of Ukraine, who was forced to flee to Russia in 2014 and settled in the city of Rostov-on-Don.

Such parallels between Yanukovych and Trump are being drawn not only because of their common association with Paul Manafort, adviser to the first, campaign chairman for the second, but also because Russian experts and politicians consider both of them to be openly pro-Kremlin. 

Tightly controlled Russian state-television programs constantly reiterate that Trump doesn’t care about Ukraine and gave Putin no reasons to even contemplate concessions in the run-up to the recent   Normandy Four summit   in Paris. 

State-television news shows use every opportunity to demoralize the Ukrainians with a set of talking points based on the U.S. president’s distaste for their beleaguered country. The host of   Who’s Against   on Rossiya-1, Dmitry Kulikov, along with pro-Kremlin guests, took repeated jabs at the Ukrainian panelist, boasting about the meeting between Trump and Lavrov. 

“There are no disagreements or contradictions between Trump and Russia,”   argued   Valery Korovin, director of the Center for Geopolitical Expertise, appearing on the state-television channel Rossiya-24. Korovin insisted that the Democrats in Congress are the main antagonists in the relationship between Russia and the United States.

Dmitry Kiselyov, the host of the Sunday news show   Vesti Nedeli ,   accused the Democrats   of joining forces with Hollywood, carrying out various conspiracies in order to undermine Trump’s popularity. Reporting for   Vesti Nedeli  from Washington, Mikhail Antonov   used the term   “the Cold War,” a fraught rhetorical twist to describe the clash between Trump and the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    2 months ago
“There are no disagreements or contradictions between Trump and Russia,”   argued  Valery Korovin, director of the Center for Geopolitical Expertise, appearing on the state-television channel Rossiya-24. Korovin insisted that the Democrats in Congress are the main antagonists in the relationship between Russia and the United States.
 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

Yeah...it's called co-existing and living in peace. It seems the left in the US wants to start another cold war with Russia.

Have yet to see how Russia has helped Trump, since interfering in the 2016 election and changing votes charges have been debunked.

 
 
 
katrix
1.1.1  katrix  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    2 months ago
interfering in the 2016 election and changing votes charges have been debunked.

Actually Russian interference has been proven. But right wing propaganda keeps lying so its low information audience believes whatever Trump wants them to think.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    2 months ago
Yeah...it's called co-existing and living in peace.

4acc7eaf8836da487166543c6e567dab--trump-

 
 
 
KDMichigan
1.2  KDMichigan  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

LEFT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation.  They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. 

Wow NT lets this be used as a news source? 

Shouldn't this be put under Satire?

256

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
1.2.1  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  KDMichigan @1.2    2 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.3  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

It's called PROPAGANDA!

 
 
 
CB
2.1  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @2    2 months ago

The fact is in the picture. If Russia feels 'nothing but contempt' for Trump, moreso than Putin felt for Obama, can you explain why Lavrov is standing in the Oval Office with Russia's heavy sanctioner, President Trump? Please explain why Putin is pleased to not criticize Trump.

There is something incoherent about Russian sanctions and Russia's attitude toward Trump! 

By the way, the heavy sanctions on Russia were put on by a bipartisan Congress despite President Trump's complaint about losing leverage in some future US-Russia deal-making. At least, that is the way I remember it occurring. Is this what you remember too?

You figure out what it is and share it with the rest of us!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  CB @2.1    2 months ago

Why would a president remain seated while a foreign envoy stands over and behind him? I think Trump likes to be photographed sitting down so often because he knows he is fat. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    2 months ago
Why would a president remain seated while a foreign envoy stands over and behind him? I think Trump likes to be photographed sitting down so often because he knows he is fat. 

Do you just dream up shit to obsess over regarding Trump?

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    2 months ago

What's with the over sized sloppy suits?

With all his alleged money, you'd think he'd wear nicer clothes.

I know they're over sized to cover up his vast fat piggishness though - hard to make 300 pounds look slim though.  

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.4  XDm9mm  replied to  CB @2.1    2 months ago
You figure out what it is and share it with the rest of us!

Simple.   The Russians are simply continuing making abject fools of the left and Trump haters.  They know that those suffering TDS are so easily triggered that anything they do will make their collective minds explode.

Obviously, with the responses of some, they're quite correct and they'll continue to play the left for the fools they are as long as they can.

By the way, the heavy sanctions on Russia were put on by a bipartisan CongressdespitePresident Trump's complaint about losing leverage in some future US-Russia deal-making. At least, that is the way I remember it occurring. Is this what you remember too?

Read the links.   Do your own research.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.5  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.2    2 months ago
Vesti Nedeli, a Sunday news show on the same network,pointed out that it was Trump, personally, who asked Lavrov to pose standing near as Trump sat at his desk. It’s almost the literal image of a power behind the throne.

Debating you people is like shooting ducks in a barrel. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.6  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    2 months ago
Debating you people is like shooting ducks in a barrel. 

You don't want debate.  You want surrender and capitulation to your own pathetic world view and vitriolic hatred of Donald Trump.  Anything less is in your mind unworthy.

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.6    2 months ago

Bingo!!!

Ding, ding, ding!

We have a winner!!!!

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.8  MUVA  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.6    2 months ago

The Russians could only  hope for the amount of rubes that believe their disinformation propaganda they have a ready made audience of dunces to help them spread it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    2 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.10  XDm9mm  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.7    2 months ago

removed for context

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.11  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.9    2 months ago

Why arent you worried about the mental health of your president, if you love him so much? 

He clearly has a collection of psychological problems. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.12  XDm9mm  replied to  MUVA @2.1.8    2 months ago
The Russians could hope for the amount of rubes that believe their disinformation propaganda they have a ready made audience of dunces to help them spread it.

What's amazing is that the fools don't even recognize nor understand they're being manipulated to do just what they're doing.  They're succeeding in doing what Russia is unable to do.....   give life to unrealistic propaganda to try to take down President Trump.

You really have to feel a bit of sympathy for them.  They're being used and abused and don't have the mental capacity to recognize it themselves and even when it's pointed out, they still deny it's happening.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.13  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.11    2 months ago
He clearly has a collection of psychological problems. 

So you're a psychologist now?   

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.14  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.6    2 months ago

Well, to this extent - Trump is not fit to hold office in the United States.  He's not even fit to be an alderman on the NY City Council.  

I will talk to conservatives about the issues, but there is no point to it as long as they insist on renominating trump for president.  Nominate someone who is fit for office and then issues will be more discussed. 

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.15  MUVA  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.12    2 months ago

Just think our media has helped Russia more than they could ever repay.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.16  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.14    2 months ago
I will talk to conservatives about the issues, but there is no point to it as long as they insist on renominating trump for president.

Have no fear JR....   he'll be RE-ELECTED.

It will be interesting to watch the abject hatred boil up to the surface then.  I wonder to what extremes the radicals of the left will go to then?  What extremes will you go to JR?  Move out of the country as so many others promised?  Just as a reminder, they were all cowards as they stayed right here as "here" is still better than any other place they could move to.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.17  XDm9mm  replied to  MUVA @2.1.15    2 months ago
Just think our media has helped Russia more than they could ever repay.

Can you imagine what the ad bills would be if they didn't get all that free shit?

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.18  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.14    2 months ago

How can you discuss issues when the place you get your left wing talking point of the day are being proven wrong over and over again .Maggie Haberman for  has been proven wrong over and over with her unsourced storylines.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.19  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.4    2 months ago
kUuht00m_normal.jpg
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

Our relationship with Russia is at an all-time & very dangerous low. You can thank Congress , the same people that can't even give us HCare!


  1. The relationship is complicated with Russia.
  2. As you can see Trump did not want the heavy sanctions.
  3. Trump is trying to get Putin to the White House in 2020 (I guess.)
  4. Trump won't fix the Russian meddling in our election crises.
  5. Trump won't accept our intelligence on Russia meddling in our elections.
  6. Trump is still pursuing Ukraine authorities as "culprits" in the 2016 election meddling, despite intel on Russia.
  7. Trump tries to get the new "initiate" Ukraine president to come to a staged microphone event and lie on his nation - in favor of getting Russia off the hook.

So nothing is as simple as you make it sound.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.20  XDm9mm  replied to  CB @2.1.19    2 months ago
  • The relationship is complicated with Russia.
  • As you can see Trump did not want the heavy sanctions.
  • Trump is trying to get Putin to the White House in 2020 (I guess.)
  • Trump won't fix the Russian meddling in our election crises.
  • Trump won't accept our intelligence on Russia meddling in our elections.
  • Trump is still pursuing Ukraine authorities as "culprits" in the 2016 election meddling, despite intel on Russia.
  • Trump tries to get the new "initiate" Ukraine president to come to a staged microphone event and lie on his nation - in favor of getting Russia off the hook

Is that supposed to be a quote by someone, or are they your own disjointed thoughts?  If it's a quote, provide the source.

Curious minds want to know

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.21  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.11    2 months ago
Why arent you worried about the mental health of your president, if you love him so much? 

Because I am not a stark raving mad Trump hater.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.22  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.6    2 months ago

No. Here is what is so damn stupid about your worldview as it relates to President Donald Trump. You and other conservatives are willing to detach Trump from a system of checks and balances, because for whatever reason you prefer his outcomes. What is overlooked is one day Trump will leave the presidency (in a shambles as a political machine) and whoever comes next is going to insist on wielding the same amount and degree of free-ranging governance. Of course, if it is a democrat or a woman president, you will be highly opposed, animated, and agitated. And by the way, you have not yet seen democrats play hardball.

There is the debate position to consider.

 
 
 
lady in black
2.1.23  lady in black  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.9    2 months ago

Your trump denial is very concerning to some of us.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.24  XDm9mm  replied to  CB @2.1.22    2 months ago
There is the debate position to consider.

Collusion, collusion, collusion....   BULLSHIT

Russia, Russia, Russia......  BULLSHIT

Conspiracy, Conspiracy, Conspiracy.......  BULLSHIT

Mueller, Mueller, Mueller.......    BULLSHIT

Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine......   BULLSHIT

Where may I ask was the debate?  Where was any evidence or wrongdoing?  All we've heard for three plus years are the ruminations of the left insisting their suppositions, conjecture, innuendo, hyperbole and rumors were the be all end all that would take down Trump.  The left has been on an impeachment frenzy since Trump was not only sworn in, but elected and not even having taken the Oath of Office yet.

So continue to throw shit against the wall hoping something someday sticks.  We'll continue to support Trump as he restores America to the position or preeminent economic and military power it once was before others tried to make it equal to lesser nations.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.1.25  XDm9mm  replied to  CB @2.1.22    2 months ago
And by the way, you have not yet seen democrats play hardball.

That's a joke.  All they've done is play with themselves.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.26  Tessylo  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.21    2 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.27  loki12  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.25    2 months ago
All they've done is play with themselves.

And watch Golf while they claimed there was a constitutional crisis going on.......Fucking hypocrites.

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/congressman-caught-watching-presidents-cup-during-president-trump-impeachment-hearings-is-your-hero-of-the-week

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.28  Texan1211  replied to  lady in black @2.1.23    2 months ago
Your trump denial is very concerning to some of us.

WTF does that even mean?

I have never denied that Trump is our President.

???????

As far as your faux concern goes, keep it!

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
2.1.29  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.6    2 months ago
You want surrender and capitulation

You mean like Trump has shown Putin at every single opportunity? How we can have so many supposed Americans defending Russia when they so clearly stabbed us in the back and continue to do so is just mind blowing. Putin wants nothing more than the destruction of western democracy and the recognition of his power and for the world to see him as "Putin the Great", and Trump is just a means to that end. He has been laughing his ass off at the mess he made of our political system and the fact that many Trump supporters are refusing to acknowledge that he did anything at all, even when he has literally come right out and admitted it, “President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?” "“Yes, I did. Yes, I did. ", is simply stunning.

It's sad that so many supposed Americans have bowed down to Russia and they act as if we should fear the start of another cold war from a nation that has a GDP smaller than that of California. Russia's illegal action around the world should bother us all and there is no reason we should capitulate with such vile disgusting pieces of shit as Putin and his criminal oligarch regime. I see some on here basically bending over and saying "Yeah, that's how we like it from Russia, right in the pooper so they don't start up the cold war again. Everyone should be afraid and just do what the guys with the old nukes and crumbling joke of a military tell us". What slimy fucking weakling thinking. Makes be embarrassed for them and I really can't imagine how they actually consider themselves Americans after a groveling cowardly display like that.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.30  loki12  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.1.29    2 months ago
You mean like Trump has shown Putin at every single opportunity?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.................You should write a for CNN.......You are hilarious!  

You mean like how trump surrendered Crimea? Syria? allowed Putin to bomb Americans. Like that?   This is a perfect example of the Left accusing the right of exactly what they are guilty of!

Explain to us again how the right are all racists, While you explain to us how minorities are too stupid to get into college or get ID's to vote without the lefts help......That one is always a winner!

 
 
 
lady in black
2.1.31  lady in black  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.28    2 months ago

You deny that he is a liar, a cheater, a buffoon, he's broken the law, etc., etc., etc., 

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.32  loki12  replied to  lady in black @2.1.31    2 months ago
he's broken the law,

I would love to see the code that he has violated, would you please provide it? Thanks!

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.1.33  Ronin2  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.1.29    2 months ago
How we can have so many supposed Americans defending Russia when they so clearly stabbed us in the back and continue to do so is just mind blowing. Putin wants nothing more than the destruction of western democracy and the recognition of his power and for the world to see him as "Putin the Great",

Who the hell is defending Russia? Just more projectionist BS. 

He has been laughing his ass off at the mess he made of our political system and the fact that many Trump supporters are refusing to acknowledge that he did anything at all, even when he has literally come right out and admitted it, “President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?” "“Yes, I did. Yes, I did. ", is simply stunning.

No, Putin wanted to sow discord and fracture the US beyond repair. He did it thanks to the help of leftist morons that actually believe Russia changed one damn vote in 2016. Look to the words of Barack Obama, the election results are valid. Get over it already!

As for Trump. Of course Putin is going to say he wanted Trump to win! WTF. Do you think Putin likes Trump? He wouldn't of had his BOTs organize protests against Trump after the election results were in, and during his inauguration. The left are very useful fools.  They can ignore Obama open mic "Wait until after the elections, and then I can be more flexible" to Russia. Obama stating, "The cold war is over, get a new foreign policy" to Romney in debates. What a fucking idiot. Changed his tune damn quick when it suited his purpose after the elections.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.34  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.20    2 months ago

Stop blowing chunks. Those are my points. While you tossing your cookies, you are not dealing with the content of the comment.  And oh golly molly - you got votes for that!  You da man!

 
 
 
CB
2.1.35  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.24    2 months ago

Okay, cut the crap.

  1. The Mueller Report did not clear President Trump; you will find this out if Donald fails to win a second term. No presidential title to shield him from the long-hand of the federal justice system; no AG Barr; and on comes the AG/Southern District of New York.
  2. Obstruction of Congress will end. President Trump out of office - executive privilege gone.
  3. The conspiracies are Trump's anyway. Only Trump, Hannity, and Fox News care about those.
  4. Collusion? Well cuz' guess what? Trump out of office, Trump's cabinet members can be called to testify before Congress. Hopefully, a courageous House not afraid to ask honest questions.

Let me be clear. This iteration of President Donald Trump who serves your whims and cranks I want to lose. I want him to get the same justice and treatment every other dead president feared or received for being a rank ASS. I thank Donald Trump for the good he has done and might do, but at the same time he is a dirty, low-down, lying, cheating, revengeful spirit who is unworthy of the majority's trust, friendship, and votes.

Clear? Or, should I continue on?

 
 
 
CB
2.1.36  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.25    2 months ago

Okay! You've got jokes!  I'm all cracked up now. NO, not really (flatly).

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.37  Texan1211  replied to  lady in black @2.1.31    2 months ago
You deny that he is a liar, a cheater, a buffoon, he's broken the law, etc., etc., etc., 

Really? Care to quote me doing that, or did you just make it up?

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.38  TᵢG  replied to  lady in black @2.1.31    2 months ago

Texan @2.1.37 has tacitly admitted that Trump is a liar, a cheater, a buffoon, has broken the law, etc.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.39  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.38    2 months ago

Your comment is a logical fallacy, not denying something is not a tactical approval. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.40  TᵢG  replied to  loki12 @2.1.39    2 months ago

That is why I used the qualifying adverb 'tacitly' ("understood or implied without being stated").

Here is what took place:

  • lady in black @2.1.3 1 ☞ You deny that he is a liar, a cheater, a buffoon, he's broken the law, etc., etc., etc., 
  • Texan @2.1.37Really? Care to quote me doing that, or did you just make it up?

Texan's weak equivocation is tacitly equivalent to him stating:  I have never denied that Trump is a liar, cheater, buffoon, law-breaker, etc.

Of course, if Texan was not equivocating he might have written something like:  Yeah, lady in black, Trump is a cheater, a buffoon, a law-breaker, etc.   But, he chose a weak equivocation which tacitly makes lady in black's point.


In other words, I would agree with you if I had not (intentionally) qualified my comment with 'tacitly'.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.41  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.40    2 months ago

Still a logical fallacy, he in no way agreed or disagreed, tactically or not. Period! Your qualifier not with standing. Fail!

You have simply projected your opinion onto his statement.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.42  Texan1211  replied to  loki12 @2.1.39    2 months ago

Is it just me, or does it seem as though some want to tell you what you approve of or believe on a topic, and then argue that?

Sounds a little lazy and intellectually dishonest to me!

What do you think?

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.43  loki12  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.42    2 months ago

Happens here all the time. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.44  TᵢG  replied to  loki12 @2.1.41    2 months ago
Still a logical fallacy, he in no way agreed or disagreed, tactically or not. Period!

That was predictable:  when one cannot rebut, simply repeat one's claim with emphasis 'Period!' as if that is an argument.      jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

No surprise that you ignored the contextual meaning of ' tacitly ' even after it has been carefully explained to you.   

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.45  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.42    2 months ago

Here is a test for you Texan:

Do you consider Trump to be a liar, cheater, buffoon, law-breaker, etc.?

My comment suggested that you will most likely answer 'no'.   (Actually you will run away, but if you did answer it would most likely be 'no'.)

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.46  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.45    2 months ago

Sorry, but what you asked was a trick question and you know it!

 
 
 
WallyW
2.1.47  WallyW  replied to  CB @2.1.35    2 months ago

Trump out of office,

Then you would have Pence.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.48  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.44    2 months ago

When you post is still wrong a new explanation isn’t needed, but you responded with the same lie, which is typical of those who can’t except the fact you were wrong, and the snarky copies exactly what I expected from you! I shouldn’t have given you credit for understanding what logical fallacies are, obviously you believe posting a definition even if incorrect is all it takes. Try harder!

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.49  loki12  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.1.46    2 months ago

It was intellectually dishonest, 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.50  TᵢG  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.1.46    2 months ago

A trick question?   Let's break it down:

  1. Do you consider Trump to be a liar?
  2. Do you consider Trump to be a cheater?
  3. Do you consider Trump to be a buffoon?
  4. Do you consider Trump to be a law-breaker?

Are these four 'trick' questions?    

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.51  TᵢG  replied to  loki12 @2.1.48    2 months ago
... but you responded with the same lie ...

What, specifically, is the lie?   

I shouldn’t have given you credit for understanding what logical fallacies are ...

A single word like 'tacitly' changes the meaning from 'explicitly stated' to 'implied'.    Thus, as I noted, Texan's weak equivocation is tacitly equivalent to him stating: I have never denied that Trump is a liar, cheater, buffoon, law-breaker, etc  

Adverbs like 'tacitly' are conveniences to express a subtle point.   But one must understand how the adverb works and, given I have explained it (and you could always consult a dictionary), the onus remains on you to apply the English rules of grammar.   Your repetition and now new claims of a lie does not change how English works.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.52  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.51    2 months ago

And you are still wrong, Let me demonstrate, 

I have never said I'm pro-life.....That doesn't mean i tacitly approve of abortions. Period! and to say so is dishonest and a lie.  

I think we are done here, you are bond and determined to project meaning and ideas onto others when they specifically haven't claimed what you said.

One more example, If you believe in affirmative action, you are tacitly supporting racism. 

Do you believe in affirmative action?

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.53  Texan1211  replied to  loki12 @2.1.52    2 months ago

Simply a waste of time.

Save yourself time and effort, give it up now. You might as well be talking to a brick wall. The net effect will be the same.

But kudos for your continued patience.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.54  TᵢG  replied to  loki12 @2.1.52    2 months ago
I have never said I'm pro-life.....That doesn't mean i tacitly approve of abortions

Correct.  But you changed what happened.   If you want to honestly offer an analogy, it would be this (note the form):

  1. Q:  You deny that you are pro-life?
  2. A:   Loki ☞ I have never said I'm pro-life.

Line 1 asks if you deny holding the position of 'pro-life'.    Your response in line 2 is implicitly answering that question.   You could answer that you are pro-life, NOT pro-life or have a more nuanced position (which, still, will either be predominantly pro- or NOT pro-).     (I suspect you agree at this point.)

... that established ...

But your answer was a deflection — you merely claimed that you have never said that you are pro-life.    You did not explicitly state you are NOT pro-life, but your response implies (by deflecting —by not answering— the direct question) that you disagree with the implication of the question ... that you are NOT pro-life.

That is, your response tacitly indicates that you are NOT pro-life.   Not explicit, but implicit.

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.55  It Is ME  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.50    2 months ago
  • Do you consider Trump to be a liar?
  • Do you consider Trump to be a cheater?
  • Do you consider Trump to be a buffoon?
  • Do you consider Trump to be a law-breaker?

Is He any of those things ?

If so....why do you "feel" that way ?

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.56  TᵢG  replied to  It Is ME @2.1.55    2 months ago

You have completely missed the point.    The point was that those are not trick questions.   They are obviously four opinion questions.   And, if combined into a single question, the result is an opinion question.   One can answer 'no' to the combination (which is equivalent to answering 'no' to each of the four I enumerated) or one can give a mixed answer (reflecting a mixed opinion).   One can also answer with a qualification.

The point is, there is nothing 'tricky' about the questions.

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.57  It Is ME  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.56    2 months ago
The point was that those are not trick questions.

Sure they are. jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

It's a way for Trump haters to try and "Force" someone to (as you require) "Logically" argue them. jrSmiley_90_smiley_image.gif

But then you say:

"They are obviously four opinion questions."

They read as "Specific" to me. jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

In case you haven't noticed....."Opinion" is a long and drawn out process ! "Opinion" doesn't require "Scientific Evidence" (which you don't accept anyway) . jrSmiley_98_smiley_image.gif

"one can give a mixed answer"

Can they …… Really ? jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.58  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.53    2 months ago
Simply a waste of time.

I agree.   The rules of English grammar and the meaning of the word 'tacitly' are not going to be changed by this thread.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.59  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.54    2 months ago
That is, your response tacitly indicates that you are NOT pro-life

[deleted]

I believe a woman has the right to choose.

I personally believe abortion is murder. Hence i won't have one, but not force my belief onto you. 

I do believe i will now take Texans advice and be done with you, 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.60  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.50    2 months ago

Yes, because you are set to condemn any that do not conform to your own political views.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.61  CB   replied to  WallyW @2.1.47    2 months ago

One person down and righteously so—if it happens. Trump is a clear and present danger. Trump is the problem.  A leader who is defined by his outright lies, omissions, and misleading statements is a tyrant. Moreover, it is highly probable the reason you are not bothered by Trump's lies is you have a perception he has not harmed you. But that leaves a larger question:

  1. Does nation-grade lies harm the republic in any lasting way?

  2. How comfortable are you with leaders and politicians excelling and escalating in the lies and the like they are willing to share with their constituents?
  3. Finally, how many lies, omissions, and misleading statements can the public process before truth itself is flipped on its head, leading to a national state of delusion?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
2.1.62  r.t..b...  replied to  CB @2.1.61    2 months ago
Does nation-grade lies harm the republic in any lasting way?

The bottom line. If his individual shortcomings, which even his GOP apologists acknowledge, are excused away in the already dysfunctional power play, what line does one need to cross and at what point does such behavior become no longer acceptable? The 'it was inappropriate' trope is meaningless without accountability. I cannot imagine it becoming worse, but if we continue this downward spiral, we need look back no further than this administration as the point we gave up focusing on the shared national interests of our republic in lieu of the purely partisan. Sad daze, these.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.63  TᵢG  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.1.60    2 months ago

That makes no sense.   A question is a trick question (or not) on its own merits.   It has nothing to do with one's political views.   Besides, I rarely discuss politics.

It is funny that you think one cannot offer one's opinion on those questions without being 'tricked'.   

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.64  TᵢG  replied to  loki12 @2.1.59    2 months ago

I have noticed that throughout you have never rebutted my point on English grammar and the meaning of the word 'tacitly'.   What you have done (and this is routine on social media) is simply repeat your claim, offer a mangled analogy and now you have decided to offer a strawman argument trying to change the topic to the question of beliefs vs. imposing action:

loki @2.1.59 - I personally believe abortion is murder. Hence i won't have one, but not force my belief onto you. 

Not the point, not even remotely close to the point.

Only to somebody who has already made their mind up on what position I hold ...

No, wrong yet again.    I did not claim that you were NOT pro-life.   I stated that your deflection to a direct question implies (note where 'tacitly' enters the picture) you are NOT pro-life.

Understanding the meaning of the adverb 'tacitly' is crucial.   Ignoring it changes the entire meaning of the sentence.    Look it up.   You cannot change the meaning of the adverb nor can you change the rules of English grammar.   It is up to you to properly use (and read) language. 

... be done with you.

Wise choice.   It is silly to try to prevail on a lost cause.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.65  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.64    2 months ago
 I stated that your deflection to a direct question implies (note where 'tacitly' enters the picture) you are NOT pro-life.

[Deleted] Period! Those that don't need to pigeon hole others into boxes they are comfortable with can understand that.

"What you have done (and this is routine on social media) is simply repeat your claim,"

He said as he repeated his claim..........Sigh..........You are still failing to pigeonhole me into a small little box that you can be comfortable with. And fail. Small f this time.

"Understanding the meaning of the adverb 'tacitly' is crucial."  and we have moved on to Hubris.....

[deleted]

I will give you the last word. Good Luck!

 
 
 
CB
2.1.66  CB   replied to  r.t..b... @2.1.62    2 months ago

Here is the argument the republicans in the House and Senate are failing to process:

  1. How do republicans know when Donald Trump is telling the truth? (Answer: The republicans do not know when Trump is telling the truth. Not a clue.)
  2. President Donald Trump has locked republicans out from the truth along with democrats - with his lies, omissions, misleading statements, and obfuscations.
  3. How are republicans defending Trump's innocence when pertinent documents and witnesses are being 'locked' out of testifying under oath?

This is a deception happening in real-time to ALL OF US. We all are involved. We all are suffering Trump abuse.

PRESIDENT TRUMP IS DECEIVING THE WHOLE NATION IN REAL-TIME.

PRESIDENT TRUMP IS CHEATING THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS IN REAL-TIME AND OUR REPUBLICAN CONGRESS IS HELPING HIM DO IT.

 
 
 
katrix
2.1.67  katrix  replied to  r.t..b... @2.1.62    2 months ago
if we continue this downward spiral, we need look back no further than this administration as the point we gave up focusing on the shared national interests of our republic in lieu of the purely partisan

It's a pretty crappy time in America. The GOP members of Congress have come right out and said they will violate their oaths - they aren't even going to pretend to be impartial jurors or do their jobs of providing checks and balances over the Executive branch, and they are working directly with the White House to obey Trump's wishes during the trial. The Trump idolators cheer them on for their refusal to do their jobs. What the hell is wrong with these idiots? When did they lose their patriotism and reason? All these assholes should be expelled for violating their oaths for fear of pissing off Trump and his troglodyte traitor fans.

Honestly, I feel like almost half of Americans - the right wing half - hate our country. They believe Trump over any sanity or facts. They admire Trump when he toadies up to Putin and Kim and insults our allies, our intelligence agencies, and our entire system of government. They laugh while he spits all over our Constitution. They refuse to read any valid sources, choosing to remain willfully ignorant. Conspiracy theorists are idiots and they're coming out of the woodwork.

They don't want accountability, they're happy with Trump as dictator. All they really want is to fuck over their fellow Americans who aren't right wingers, and they brag about how that's what drives them.

Sickening.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.68  TᵢG  replied to  loki12 @2.1.65    2 months ago
Only to the simple minded. Period!

Deliver an insult with a convincing:  ' Period !'  ⇨  'Although I cannot rebut your responses, I am right because I say so.   Period!'    Well, that certainly is persuasive.      jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

If you want to prevail, you first must be correct.   English grammar and the meaning of the word ' tacitly ' are staring you in the face.    Dishonest tactics will not change that.   And since you are unable to show where my use of grammar and my use of the adverb ' tacitly ' is wrong, it is obvious that you realize you are incorrect and should take the Dunning–Kruger effect to heart.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.69  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.68    2 months ago
take the Dunning–Kruger effect to heart.

I will in all future exchanges with you......If any.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.70  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.63    2 months ago

Maybe trick question was not the right term. A trap question would probably be more accurate. But either way I said my piece, I'm standing by it and I'm done. Have a good day.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.71  CB   replied to  katrix @2.1.67    2 months ago

Hi Katrix! I will surmise what is happening to our nation in a nutshell:

  1. President Donald Trump wants and excels as an authoritarian. He wants authoritarian rule.
  2. The Republican Party and Conservative movement see in Trump someone dedicated to conservative TAKEOVER principles of the Rule of Law: "Might makes Right.
  3. No new policy or existing policy will be permitted to hold, unless it meets conservative standards of approval and acceptance.
  4. The Constitution will be enforced in the unique prescribed manner of "White Conservative Male Dominance' - over the power centers and levers of government as it was in the founding of the country. The modifier being prioritized as, conservative. No women, 'browns,' 'blacks,' or "yellows' disproportionately in charge. Trump is going to 'root' out all dissent. Even in violation of law, civil rights, and pushing officials out.

President Donald Trump has been tasked with upholding his end of the bargain to make this happen. Republicans and conservative legislators, thinkers, and surrogate 'actors' are blocking all legitimate attempts to stop Trump.

This is a broad outline.

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.72  It Is ME  replied to  CB @2.1.71    2 months ago

The "Constitution" of this nation says to "Promote the General Welfare".

Not "Provide" for the General Liberals" !

Trump "Promotes" !

Trump DOESN'T "Provide".

That's the "Lefts" entire beef with Trump. He isn't into the normal "Lefts" idea of "Provide EVERYTHING" !

Look at the "Lefts" candidates running for 2020 right now. All that "Spews" out of their mouths is "Free, Free.....FREE for ALL (PROVIDE) " !

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.73  TᵢG  replied to  loki12 @2.1.69    2 months ago

If you do engage me, try to first read every word in my comment.    And if you miss a crucial word no problem, but when I bring it to your attention and it makes all the difference in the world, the honest thing to do is to acknowledge the word (and the resulting meaning) and offer a 'nevermind'.    That would save a bunch of petty nonsense.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.74  TᵢG  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.1.70    2 months ago

Are these 'trap' questions, Ed?:

  1. Do you consider Trump to be a liar?
  2. Do you consider Trump to be a cheater?
  3. Do you consider Trump to be a buffoon?
  4. Do you consider Trump to be a law-breaker?

Where is the trap?    For each question you could answer 'no', 'yes' or provide a more qualified opinion.   After all, each question is a question about your opinion.   It is a question about your personal views.  

Are these trap questions too?:

  • Do you consider Trump to be a PotUS that our kids should strive to emulate?
  • Do you consider Trump to be a true Republican?
  • Do you consider Trump to be a dignified PotUS?
  • Do you consider Trump to be a racist?
  • Do you consider Trump to be a misogynist?

What question about one's opinion regarding Trump can be asked without being a 'trap' or 'trick' question?

 
 
 
katrix
2.1.75  katrix  replied to  CB @2.1.71    2 months ago
No new policy or existing policy will be permitted to hold, unless it meets conservative standards of approval and acceptance.

I'm not sure it matters whether it meets conservative standards of approval. The House has passed hundreds of bills and McConnell has blocked virtually every single one from consideration in the Senate. Look at the travesty McConnell pulled about Garland. They are the obstructionist party - but the majority of their base seems to swallow all the lies and they go around complaining the Dems are the obstructionists. It is as though they live in opposite world - if you prove that one plus one equals two, but Trump says it equals three, they'll turn blue in the face screeching NO IT's THREE!

And I don't think they care about the Constitution at all. Trump certainly doesn't - and his fans are doing everything they can to make his authoritarian, narcissistic, uninformed vision of reality ... actual reality. I remember when I respected Republicans, and they never would have tolerated a dictator like Trump. But now it seems that for many Reps, their hatred of anyone who isn't right-wing, their fear and hatred of equal rights for everyone, their unreasonable hatred of all things liberal, and their complete lack of intellectual capacity have turned them into people who would be better recognized in earlier eras, in other countries ....and not good ones.

I kind of saw this coming. When Obama was elected, and when gay marriage was legalized, the fear and hatred burst out of these troglodytes. This type of backlash often happens when other groups are given rights; remember that studies have shown that a defining feature of conservatives is fear of change. And since many of them live in more isolated places where they aren't exposed to people who are different from them ...

Those things fired up the troglodytes to try desperately to reverse the change; the outrage that a black man was our President, and the outrage that gays can have the same rights as I can .. those are complete anathema to racists and bigots, and even to people who are just scared and ignorant because of their lack of exposure to different things.

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.76  It Is ME  replied to  katrix @2.1.75    2 months ago
The House has passed hundreds of bills......

…...that were wacky "left wing Progressive" stuff. "Resolutions" and "Post Office renaming's" are in that 100 wack stuff too !

Have you actually read any of the "Lefts" proposals/resolutions/crap ?

McConnell already said...he wasn't going to let ANY "Wacky Left" things go through, that would hurt the country !

"And I don't think they care about the Constitution at all."

You must NOT be FOR...." Promoting the General Welfare" ? jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

" Provide for the General Welfare" sounds better ? jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.77  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.74    2 months ago

This is all I'm going to say. It is not your question, it is the response to the loaded questions you will give when you do not get the answer you want to hear. Anybody that answers a yes to any of the above, it is a safe bet that you or others will tell them how wrong they are and condemn for not sharing yours and others views. Seen it on NT too many times before. Bye now.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.78  CB   replied to  It Is ME @2.1.72    2 months ago

Okay. Finally some Republicans are trying to take back their party from the 'disease' of Trump. Their words.  " The Lincoln Project " is coming. "The Lincoln Project" is coming.

Rumor has it that republican secrets are about to be aired in public—by republicans who know them. My ears are "ON."

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.79  It Is ME  replied to  CB @2.1.78    2 months ago
Rumor has it

That's been going on since inauguration day January 2017....and way before that too with Trump Haters ! jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.80  TᵢG  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.1.77    2 months ago

Now this is interesting.   So basically, now you are saying that lady in black's question is not a trick question or a trap question and none of the questions I provided are trick or trap questions but you are concerned that if you answer any of these questions that a subsequent question will be 'loaded'.

Maybe you should wait then until you actually see a trick, trap or loaded question before crying foul.

Also, what on Earth are you afraid of?  Why not state your opinion?   If you think that Trump is not a liar, for example, then you answer 'no' and stand your ground.   If you think he is a liar but have qualifying remarks such as: 'but I care more about what he does, not what he says' then you provide your answer and stand your ground.   Why engage in a forum if you are concerned about expressing your opinions?

Finally, you seem to presume that I have certain political views yet I rarely weigh in on political / partisan matters (on purpose).   

Seems like a lot of presuming going on.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.81  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.80    2 months ago

Think what you will. As I said, I have nothing further to say. I see this conversation as just going downhill because you don't seem to get my point and I don't seem to get yours. Better we  just agree to disagree and let it go at that. I respect your right to your opinion and I ask the same. Have a good evening.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.82  TᵢG  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.1.81    2 months ago

Ed this was never a conversation.   I reacted to your accusation of trickery where none was at play but, rather, you expected trickery to follow.   Given you cannot possibly know how I operate in political discussions (given I almost never talk politics and have largely ignored political discussions on online forums for almost a decade) you really have no basis for presuming dishonest intent. 

You do indeed have the right to your opinion, but when your opinion is an accusation of presumed dishonest intent you should not be surprised if there is a rebuttal to same.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.83  Freedom Warrior  replied to  katrix @2.1.67    2 months ago

What you have is an invalid premise.   The House hearings were a travesty of a mockery of a sham.  As such there is no basis upon which acknowledge any responsibility as you suggest.

Further, your poisoned vitriol is another example of the type of projection we routinely see anymore from many of those on the left.   It has become so commonplace now that when someone on the left accuses the President of something unethical, criminal and worse I can almost be assured they are involved in the same sort of activity themselves.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.84  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.82    2 months ago

If I misunderstood, then please accept my apologies.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.85  TᵢG  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.1.84    2 months ago

No apologies necessary, but thanks.    I was just defending myself.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.86  CB   replied to  katrix @2.1.75    2 months ago
I kind of saw this coming. When Obama was elected, and when gay marriage was legalized, the fear and hatred burst out of these troglodytes. This type of backlash often happens when other groups are given rights; remember that studies have shown that a defining feature of conservatives is fear of change. And since many of them live in more isolated places where they aren't exposed to people who are different from them ...

I was going to applaud you at this point, but I kept on reading. . . .

Those things fired up the troglodytes to try desperately to reverse the change; the outrage that a black man was our President, and the outrage that gays can have the same rights as I can .. those are complete anathema to racists and bigots, and even to people who are just scared and ignorant because of their lack of exposure to different things.

7caKe8GAi.gif

The way the conservatives and republicans saw it—we, liberals took something from them back back in time. Something they never agreed to let depart.

It was not contracted in the Constitution their forefathers approved and signed. Some Conservatives will tell you the constitution was better served when it ended with its Bill of Rights . Some more conservatives will tell you the constitution as a whole is intact and warranted. All conservatives will explain the constitutional document is static and its original meanings are its reasonable intent. Beyond the letters on its writ, there is no other thing to be asserted or resuscitated

Conservatism likes the freedoms bound up in mystery. Somehow and in some way we, the citizens of America, were supposed to continue in tribes—as pods, without reshuffling. However, as is the way of nature, outside pressures push inward on the separate tribes, banging them into one another and altering these tribes trailing edges. Thus, some tribes began to see value in turning a simple, important, and static constitution into a 'living soul' for the people as citizens. 

Conservatism has never budged on the static original intent to the Constitution. They have been grasping, wrestling, taking two steps forward and one step back for a century now; always claiming a wrong was afoot with each step of progressivism. 

Conservatism begrudged itself a hardened leader. Finally , it has an "old salt" in Donald Trump. A man willing to take the slings, arrows, and  blows of progressive liberals and fling it all back at their adversary.

Oh, but the Impeachment clause. . .   .

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2.1.87  Freedom Warrior  replied to  CB @2.1.86    2 months ago

Naturally, you are generally wrong about all of those assertions regarding conservatives.  Not that it doesn't fit a warped stereotype propagated by the left.  It serves their hatred well.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.88  CB   replied to  It Is ME @2.1.79    2 months ago

I'm going to consider calling it: "WHEN REPUBLICANISM GOT ITS GROOVE BACK."


The 2020 general election, by every indication, will be about persuasion, with turnout expected to be at record highs. Our efforts are aimed at persuading enough disaffected conservatives, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents in swing states and districts to help ensure a victory in the Electoral College, and congressional majorities that don’t enable or abet Mr. Trump’s violations of the Constitution, even if that means Democratic control of the Senate and an expanded Democratic majority in the House.

We Are Republicans, and We Want Trump Defeated

The president and his enablers have replaced conservatism with an empty faith led by a bogus prophet.

By George T. Conway III , Steve Schmidt , John Weaver and Rick Wilson

The authors have worked for and supported Republican campaigns.

Dec. 17, 2019

Credit: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opinion/lincoln-project.html

 
 
 
CB
2.1.89  CB   replied to  Freedom Warrior @2.1.87    2 months ago

Yeah, well I am not holding any breath for any truthiness from you, Freedom Warrior. So excuse me, you're in my way. . . .

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.90  It Is ME  replied to  CB @2.1.88    2 months ago

George Conway...…..jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
CB
2.1.91  CB   replied to  It Is ME @2.1.90    2 months ago

and Kellyanne Conway...….. Strangest marriage ever, because Donald 'allows' it.

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.92  It Is ME  replied to  CB @2.1.91    2 months ago
Strangest marriage ever, because Donald 'allows' it.

The Dems shoulda put that in their Impeachment papers. jrSmiley_89_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tacos!
3  Tacos!    2 months ago

We hear for three years from the Democrats what unrivaled liars and manipulators the Russians are. But they put out an article saying something the Democrats want to hear and suddenly it's "Listen to these guys! They are speaking important truths!"

You're kidding, right?

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Tacos! @3    2 months ago
You're kidding, right

Nope.   That's their logic, or lack thereof.

 
 
 
loki12
3.2  loki12  replied to  Tacos! @3    2 months ago

Is there any doubt that is where they have been getting their talking points all along?  Didn't Lenin describe them perfectly?

 
 
 
bbl-1
4  bbl-1    2 months ago

I wonder what was discussed and agreed to ( if anything ) at Helsinki?  The body language and mannerisms of Putin and Trump as they exited the room revealed something not normal.

The wisest political move for Zelensky would be to interact with Trump as a 'fair weather friend' at best.

As far as Lavrov, he is a professional political manipulator and Trump is a manipulated non-professional. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.1  Greg Jones  replied to  bbl-1 @4    2 months ago

You have no idea of what you are talking about.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @4    2 months ago

Still pushing your Helsinki conspiracy theory?

LMMFAO!

Can you get back to us when you have some FACTS--not "feelings" about what you GUESS went on? Give us a little something more than "body language" interpretations!

Say, are you a body language expert? What are your qualifications?

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2    2 months ago
Say, are you a body language expert?

Uhmmm....   speaking of body language, was Obama getting ready to go down on Medvedev when he was bending over with his hand on his knee talking about "more flexibility"?

See, everyone can play those types of games if they want to.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
4.2.2  KDMichigan  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2    2 months ago
Say, are you a body language expert? What are your qualifications?

Somebody flipped him of once and he got the message.

 
 
 
MUVA
4.2.3  MUVA  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2    2 months ago

I almost forgot about that one to go along with Russia ,Stormy, phone calls conspiracy theory’s.

 
 
 
bbl-1
4.2.4  bbl-1  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2    2 months ago

That is the problem.  There aren't any facts.  It is a secret known to only Trump and Putin.  The US translator was ordered to surrender her notes and not speak of anything said in the meeting by the US president.  And you do not find that...…...odd?

Perhaps you don't.  And that would certainly explain that, wouldn't it?

 
 
 
CB
4.2.5  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.1    2 months ago

And here you were talking about being more responsible. I guess you could'nt help yourself. Discussions with Russia are always complicated and tedious. Here is your Obama-Medvedev 'moment.'

Obama tells Medvedev he will have "more flexibility" after election

  1. There is a room full of people spread out.
  2. There are cameras everywhere attending the meeting.
  3. These world leaders "get it" by critics no matter what they say in the moment. Including Trump. Including when it is an innocuous exchange.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @4.2.4    2 months ago
That is the problem.  There aren't any facts. 

I agree, which is why I wonder why you are so full of speculation and guesses, and woefully short on ANY facts to back your absurd claims up.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.7  XDm9mm  replied to  bbl-1 @4.2.4    2 months ago
There aren't any facts.

Well holy shit bat man.....  someone FINALLY admitted that very simple fact.   The radical left rails about things when there are no facts!!

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.2.8  XDm9mm  replied to  CB @4.2.5    2 months ago
  • There is a room full of people spread out.

Maybe he likes to be watched?

  • There are cameras everywhere attending the meeting.

[Deleted]

  • These world leaders "get it" by critics no matter what they say in the moment. Including Trump. Including when it is an innocuous exchange.

" Including Trump.  Including when it is an innocuous exchange."  Well hot damn.  Thank you for finally admitting that salient FACT.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.9  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @4.2.4    2 months ago

You are always good for a laugh. After all, I love a good unfounded, blathering conspiracy theory!

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.2.10  Tacos!  replied to  CB @4.2.5    2 months ago
Including when it is an innocuous exchange.

You mean it's possible to have an "innocuous exchange" with a Russian? Or is that only for Democrats?

 
 
 
CB
4.2.11  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @4.2.8    2 months ago

You're welcome! For the truth-for a good work, I do not condemn President Donald Trump. He is HIRED to serve all the citizens. It is when he is being a selfish, bombastic, lying, dishonest leader that violates truth, life, and the 'American Way' that I stick it to his rank ASS.

I hope we have an understanding about what 'trips' me with President Trump now. Nobody in their right mind should condemn another person for doing a good and righteous deed for all the people.

 
 
 
CB
4.2.12  CB   replied to  Tacos! @4.2.10    2 months ago

What do you think, Taco? Form an opinion, not a jeer, and come back.

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.2.13  Tacos!  replied to  CB @4.2.12    2 months ago

I felt it would be more polite and respectful to ask a question (like I did) and let you answer it rather than form an opinion for someone else.

 
 
 
CB
4.2.14  CB   replied to  Tacos! @4.2.13    2 months ago
You mean it's possible to have an "innocuous exchange" with a Russian? Or is that only for Democrats?

You would not be forming any opinion for me to answer your questions. Nothing in life is simply for one side or the other.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5  Sean Treacy    2 months ago

Didn't the Steele dossier teach you guys not to believe propaganda?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
5.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Sean Treacy @5    2 months ago

Some of them still think it's true.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Greg Jones @5.1    2 months ago
Some of them still think it's true.

Some??   All of them think it's true to the very core of their being.

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.2  lib50  replied to  Greg Jones @5.1    2 months ago
Some of them still think it's true.

Why don't you specifically point out all of the parts that have been proven untrue. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.3  XDm9mm  replied to  lib50 @5.1.2    2 months ago
Why don't you specifically point out all of the parts that have been proven untrue.

The entire document.   Hell, even the source Steele used to create that bit of balderdash refutes the accuracy of it.  As he indicated, it was trash bar talk with NO basis in fact.

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.4  lib50  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.1    2 months ago

Heck, since you all lost your bootstraps, here is something to read.   Its not all cut and dried, and there is plenty of meat.   Not all corroborated, but not disproven either.  Over time it will come out, when Trump can't stop the flow of information.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/steele-dossier-retrospective

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.5  XDm9mm  replied to  lib50 @5.1.4    2 months ago
Not all corroborated,

Come back if ANYTHING is actually corroborated.  Ever.

Oh, I neglected to indicate this salient point for you to peruse.  Please note the DATE of your linked article.

Friday, December 14, 2018

Appreciably before the Horowitz Report became public knowledge and he eviscerated the Steele Dossier as 'less viable than a comic book'. (My description, and a generous one at that.)

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
5.1.6  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.5    2 months ago
Come back if ANYTHING is actually corroborated.  Ever.

"The dossier said the "Russian regime had been behind the recent leak of embarrassing e-mail messages, emanating from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to the WikiLeaks platform."

Proven.

"The dossier said that in return for Russia's help in dumping hacked emails damaging to the Clinton campaign, the "TRUMP team had agreed to sideline Russian intervention in Ukraine as a campaign issue and to raise US/NATO defence commitments in the Baltics and Eastern Europe to deflect attention away from Ukraine, a priority for PUTIN who needed to cauterize the subject."

The "well-developed conspiracy of cooperation between [the Trump campaign] and the Russian leadership was managed on the Trump side by the Republican candidate's campaign manager, Paul Manafort," the dossier added. In July 2016, while Manafort was still leading the campaign, a change was made to the Republican Party's platform on Ukraine."

Proven.

The dossier claimed that Russian agents were attempting to cultivate high level sources including Michael Flynn. Flynn of course plead guilty to lying to investigators about his call with Kislyak where he was telling the Russian ambassador not to worry about the new sanctions the Obama administration had just put in place in response to Russia's election meddling and that the new administration would discard them asap so there was no reason for Russia to retaliate.

Proven.

Much of the dossier was about Paul Manafort and virtually every claim the dossier made about him was proven accurate. He was taking money from pro-Russian Ukrainian oligarchs, he was deep in debt to Russian entities at the time he offered to work for free as Trumps campaign manager. He is now serving time for a litany of financial crimes including providing confidential polling data to pro-Russian oligarch Kilimnik as the dossier had alleged.

Proven.

https://www.businessinsider.com/steele-dossier-allegations-trump-russia-mueller-investigation-2019-1#whats-been-corroborated-and-what-hasnt-14

Okay, so the pee tape wasn't ever proved and Cohens trip to Prague may not have happened (though Cohen admitted it was planned and he was working on the Trump Tower Moscow project as the dossier rightly claimed). Other than that, as lawfareblog claims, "The dossier holds up well over time, and none of it, to our knowledge, has been disproven. The dossier is actually a series of reports—16 in all—that total 35 pages. Written in 2016, the dossier is a collection of raw intelligence. Steele neither evaluated nor synthesized the intelligence. He neither made nor rendered bottom-line judgments. The dossier is, quite simply and by design, raw reporting, not a finished intelligence product."

https://www.lawfareblog.com/steele-dossier-retrospective

All the right wing noise about it being "fake" is just that, ignorant plug their ears and hum a song white noise so they can't hear the truth they desperately don't want to accept. What a sad may to live. I almost feel sorry for them, but then I see another mullet cow with a shirt that reads "Trump can Grab me by the pussy!" in scrawled sharpie and I realize they simply aren't worth any empathy.

 
 
 
katrix
5.1.7  katrix  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @5.1.6    2 months ago
All the right wing noise about it being "fake" is just that, ignorant plug their ears and hum a song white noise so they can't hear the truth they desperately don't want to accept

That's why they watch Hannity and the other Fox entertainers and take them seriously. Why would anyone choose to listen to a liar rather than looking for facts? As you said, they desperately don't want to accept the truth.

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.8  MUVA  replied to  lib50 @5.1.4    2 months ago

You need to look up the meaning of pulling yourself up by the bootstraps is has nothing to do with the way you misuse it.Also you can just read the IG report to tell you and some of the other deniers missed.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5.1.9  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @5.1.6    2 months ago

Wow!  Steele included some publicly available information in his reports!  

But one must ask, why have you  cited only  outdated click bait and partisan summaries and ignored the recent, comprehensive authority on the subject, the IG report? 

An honest person looking to assess the credibility of the dossier would simply cite the IG report.  But this is one of those tells that reveal alot about a person's intellecual honesty. Those who still defend the Steele dossier or claim Trump colluded with Russia are simply wignut conspiracy theorists, like 9/11 truthers. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.10  XDm9mm  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @5.1.6    2 months ago
https://www.lawfareblog.com/steele-dossier-retrospective

As I told lib50....   maybe you should look at something more current than the Friday, December 14, 2018 lawfarebolg link you used.  The Horowitz report effectively destroyed the entire Steele Dossier as bar talk of drunks.

And the left wonders why we laugh at them.

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.11  lib50  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.10    2 months ago

Still waiting for your proof.  What specifically is disproven?  DP cited a lot of facts from the dossier. 

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.12  lib50  replied to  MUVA @5.1.8    2 months ago

Lol, you giving 'bootstraps' definition?  

Why don't you start by looking up how the right uses it? 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.13  XDm9mm  replied to  lib50 @5.1.11    2 months ago
Still waiting for your proof.  What specifically is disproven?  DP cited a lot of facts from the dossier. 

You'll need to read the IG Horowitz report for yourself.  I can't do it for you.

Oh, and you might want to check what the Chief Justice of the FISC noted.   She has gone so far as to question publicly the veracity of all other FISA warrants that were obtained.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
5.1.14  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.13    2 months ago

It is obvious that some people just cannot bring themselves to admit that the Horowitz report totally shreds the alleged veracity of the Steele Document. Even if they have actually read it, they are terrified that they might have to change their viewpoints and opinions. Many would rather chew on a mouthful of maggots than admit that thatvthe right was correct and that they were lied to by their liberal media and political masters. 

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.15  lib50  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @5.1.14    2 months ago

The Horowitz report doesn't shred anything.  It identified areas of concern in the fisa process and mistakes made.  It didn't disprove the Steele information.  The dossier is a collection of information, and plenty has been corroborated, not all but much of it, and it didn't impact the opening of the case.  Which was rightly opened. The problems were in the application process and that is legitimately a problem.  But nothing that vindicates Trump.  Barr's fake investigations show that he knows it doesn't.  The right keeps repeating Trump lies and trying to deflect from Trump's crimes. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5.1.16  Sean Treacy  replied to  lib50 @5.1.15    2 months ago
It didn't disprove the Steele informatio

You don't think the IG detailing how Steele's sources told the FBI that  Steele misrepresented/made up  the information  Steele claims they told him disproves Steele's information?  Have some pride.

 
 
 
lib50
5.1.17  lib50  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.1.16    2 months ago

Steele collected information, he didn't make up anything.  He got information from various sources and it was handed over to Fusion GPS who commissioned it.  It was raw data, information. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.18  XDm9mm  replied to  lib50 @5.1.17    2 months ago
Steele collected information,

Steele collected drunk bar talks.  Shit, even his "source" said it was bar talk with no substance or background.

The real problem with it was that the FBI already KNEW Steele was a bad source.....  that's why THEY fired him.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5.1.19  Sean Treacy  replied to  lib50 @5.1.17    2 months ago

Please read the report. His own sources deny providing him with the information that Steele claimed they did. This is all documented in the report. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.20  XDm9mm  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.1.19    2 months ago
Please read the report.

To some, ignorance is bliss.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
5.1.22  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  lib50 @5.1.15    2 months ago

Thank you for proving my point.

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.23  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @5.1.17    2 months ago
Steele collected information, he didn't make up anything.  He got information from various sources and it was handed over to Fusion GPS who commissioned it.  It was raw data, information.

Seems like much of it was unsubstantiated bullshit. Which the FBI failed to inform the FISA court of.  Anything and everything in that Steele dossier is suspect.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
5.1.24  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.23    2 months ago

Yep.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6  Nerm_L    2 months ago

Well, of course Russian media wants to spin the picture.  The reality is that Sergey Lavrov is standing in the position of faithful manservant.

 
 
 
Ronin2
6.1  Ronin2  replied to  Nerm_L @6    2 months ago

That is the way I took it as well. Surprised some White House staffer didn't hand him a clean white towel and gloves to cap it off.

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.2  Tacos!  replied to  Nerm_L @6    2 months ago

Like maybe 30 seconds after this shot, the guy served Trump tea.

 
 
 
Tacos!
7  Tacos!    2 months ago

It's a weird photo just because of the composition. It looks more like a snapshot taken before or after the real photo they were planning on using.

As for what it means, if you're so inclined, you make up any shit you want. Which of course is exactly what people did. Big surprise!

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
7.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Tacos! @7    2 months ago

Actually, that is a cardboard cutout of Lavrov strategically placed at just that spot by White House staff for effect....

 
 
 
Tacos!
7.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @7.1    2 months ago

Ha! It does look like that. jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
It Is ME
8  It Is ME    2 months ago

"Russia’s State TV Calls Trump Their ‘Agent’"

Why does the "Left" keep believing what Russia says ? jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

And Trump is the "Agent" ? jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

Gosh… I read the following in the article:

"Appearing on   Sunday Evening With Vladimir Soloviev , Mikhail Gusman, first deputy director general of ITAR-TASS, Russia’s oldest and largest news agency,   predicted : “Sooner or later, the Democrats will come back into power."

Russia "NEEDS" the Democrats back in power ! jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
CB
8.1  CB   replied to  It Is ME @8    2 months ago

Frankly, democrats don't care what Russia needs. However, you are spinning a delusion anyway.  Trump still attempting to get Putin over for a visit to the White House?

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.1  It Is ME  replied to  CB @8.1    2 months ago
Frankly, democrats don't care what Russia needs.

Sure they do !

Democrats "USE" whatever the Russians say against Trump....whenever they can !

Again I'll put this up:

"Appearing on   Sunday Evening With Vladimir Soloviev , Mikhail Gusman, first deputy director general of ITAR-TASS, Russia’s oldest and largest news agency,   predicted : “Sooner or later, the Democrats will come back into power."

Do you deny what the "Russians" Said ?

Besides....Democrats have "Donuted" with Putin.....quite a few times !

 
 
 
CB
8.1.2  CB   replied to  It Is ME @8.1.1    2 months ago

You're spinning. And more to the point - YOU SHOULD KNOW YOU ARE SPINNING.

And, of course, democrats will use whatever they can get THAT IS USEFUL and proves itself out against Trump and anybody else accordingly. So cut the crap that somehow and in some meaningful way, truth usage is "problematic."

Why the heaven would I deny that 'sooner or later the Democrats will come back into power'? Democrats will. And similarly the way the perpetual pendulum works so will Republicans. —Those are facts, It Is Me, not incriminations!

You have got to stop whatever it is you are doing, because context is your friend.

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.3  It Is ME  replied to  CB @8.1.2    2 months ago
And, of course, democrats will use whatever they can get THAT IS USEFUL, and proves itself out against Trump and anybody else accordingly....

….to "Further" their next election bid.

Funny how "Whatever Is Useful"....is only a good thing for the "Left".

"Why the heaven would I deny that 'sooner or later the Democrats will come back into power'?"

Because "Russians" said so ! 

 
 
 
CB
8.1.4  CB   replied to  It Is ME @8.1.3    2 months ago

That word, "useful" usually means "based on truth" to people of good will. I won't tell you what that says about where your mind is. But all that said: This is getting tedious. Ta-ta for now.

"Clown" and 'blow smoke' with you later,

CB

 
 
 
It Is ME
8.1.5  It Is ME  replied to  CB @8.1.4    2 months ago
That word, "useful" usually means "based on truth"

No....it doesn't "Usually"... Mean that .....when it comes to politics. (I won't tell you what that says about where your mind is.) if that's what you think !jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
loki12
9  loki12    2 months ago

To sum up how I feel about the democrats claims,

Trump took on the Bush dynasty, and 16 other professional politicians and defeated them in the republican primary.

He then took on the lying left mainstream media, the entire Clinton political machine, the FBI and the CIA and still managed to win the Whitehouse.

Now the idiots on the left thinks he needs Ukraine's help to beat a senile, creepy, old gropey Joe Biden?

[deleted]

 
 
 
freepress
10  freepress    2 months ago

Of course, because he is their agent, whether knowingly or not. A shady businessman, New York tycoon, Hollywood celebrity reality show host was never going to have a clue about serving the American people. He serves himself only and often other foreign adversaries reap the benefits of his self serving agenda.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online




24 visitors