Inspector General Review of the Trump/Russia Investigation
I saw it the first time.
I assumed that anybody who thought about it would realize that the assumptions behind it were uninformed and simplistic.
paulsurovell said:
Bump
Don't want this to get "missed" in the flurry.
@drummerboy? @nohero? @cramer? @sbenois? @jamie? @PVW? @ml1?
My apologies if I skipped anyone.
paulsurovell said:
More evidence that Trump is Putin's puppet. I'm sure that believers will say that Putin wanted Trump to do this.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-sanctions-halt-work-on-russias-gas-pipeline-to-europe-11576929267
paulsurovell said:
Bump
Don't want this to get "missed" in the flurry.
@drummerboy? @nohero? @cramer? @sbenois? @jamie? @PVW? @ml1?
My apologies if I skipped anyone.
paulsurovell said:
More evidence that Trump is Putin's puppet. I'm sure that believers will say that Putin wanted Trump to do this.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-sanctions-halt-work-on-russias-gas-pipeline-to-europe-11576929267
While I appreciate the recognition, I'm happy to yield my response time to the poster from Delaware.
paulsurovell said:
Then show my posts when you attempt to rebut them.
That's what drives some of s nuts, the repeated posting of posts. I try to edit to focus only on the specific point I am addressing. Anyone who wants to read the whole thing can scroll up, as I do.
paulsurovell said:
The Party of Trump is the party of Trump only so long as he serves the right-wing agenda which includes feeding the military-industrial complex, supporting the Security State, gutting anything that stands in the way of doing business and exploiting workers and enriching the rich by cutting taxes, privatization and giving away natural resources.
Nope! He's not Bush, Sr. or Jr.
It's a cult. The people at his rallies and those who supported him in the Primaries against Republicans for who that is true believe that the security state is their enemy, the rich are almost all liberals and Trump is the champion of the working people. Republican politicians are afraid of those people.
You are stuck in a 1950s or 1960s mindset. It's not your daddy's Republican Party. Trump could come out for Medicare for All and as long as he called it something else 80-90% of his base would support it.
drummerboy said:
paulsurovell said:
STANV said:
paulsurovell said:
Trump's survival depends on support of the Republican Senate. If he were to go against the demands of the intelligence community and declassify its crown jewels, many if not most Republican senators would desert him in a heart beat.
His survival and that of most Republican Senators depends on the support of White Evangelicals and others in his "base" that see him as their Tribune and Saviour. The Republican Party is the Party of Trump.
You and I seem to live in different realities.
The Party of Trump is the party of Trump only so long as he serves the right-wing agenda which includes feeding the military-industrial complex, supporting the Security State, gutting anything that stands in the way of doing business and exploiting workers and enriching the rich by cutting taxes, privatization and giving away natural resources.
The right wing (except for libertarians) is fully devoted to protecting the Security State (which includes the FBI, CIA and NSA). except for the one instance when the Security State went after Trump (Russiagate). They have no problem with ongoing violations of civil liberties of civil rights, peace and labor activists by these agencies. And neither does Trump.
I guess you missed the Republican party turning on the intelligence community as just another example of the corrupt deep state.
You should pay better attention.
As I said, they are turning against the intelligence community for one matter only -- the abuses against the Trump campaign. Other than that, they fully support the intelligence community's traditional abuses against civil rights, anti-war and labor activists, and its role in providing propaganda for regime-change foreign policy.
STANV said:
paulsurovell said:
Then show my posts when you attempt to rebut them.
That's what drives some of s nuts, the repeated posting of posts. I try to edit to focus only on the specific point I am addressing. Anyone who wants to read the whole thing can scroll up, as I do.
It was a three or four sentence post.
paulsurovell said:
jamie said:
and what has their security clearance level been in the past 20 years?
What has Rachel Maddow's security clearance level ever been?
Good one! 
jamie said:
it's the VIPs retirees claiming they have all the info - not Rachel.
Oh please, Rachel is constantly claiming to know all the details on the nefarious Russians who seek global domination at all costs. That's how she earns her 30K a day.
nan said:
jamie said:
it's the VIPs retirees claiming they have all the info - not Rachel.
Oh please, Rachel is constantly claiming to know all the details on the nefarious Russians who seek global domination at all costs. That's how she earns her 30K a day.
Yeah - you know she does research, right? That's how journalists find out stuff, without having security clearances.
You have no problem believing your cadre of truth tellers like Greenwald, Mate , Dore, Taibbi, etc. who have no security clearances either.
So drop the hypocritical double standard.
drummerboy said:
nan said:
jamie said:
it's the VIPs retirees claiming they have all the info - not Rachel.
Oh please, Rachel is constantly claiming to know all the details on the nefarious Russians who seek global domination at all costs. That's how she earns her 30K a day.
Yeah - you know she does research, right? That's how journalists find out stuff, without having security clearances.
You have no problem believing your cadre of truth tellers like Greenwald, Mate , Dore, Taibbi, etc. who have no security clearances either.
So drop the hypocritical double standard.
Is this addressed to Jamie?
paulsurovell said:
drummerboy said:
nan said:
jamie said:
it's the VIPs retirees claiming they have all the info - not Rachel.
Oh please, Rachel is constantly claiming to know all the details on the nefarious Russians who seek global domination at all costs. That's how she earns her 30K a day.
Yeah - you know she does research, right? That's how journalists find out stuff, without having security clearances.
You have no problem believing your cadre of truth tellers like Greenwald, Mate , Dore, Taibbi, etc. who have no security clearances either.
So drop the hypocritical double standard.
Is this addressed to Jamie?
Clearly not. It's not Jamie with the double standard.
drummerboy said:
paulsurovell said:
drummerboy said:
nan said:
jamie said:
it's the VIPs retirees claiming they have all the info - not Rachel.
Oh please, Rachel is constantly claiming to know all the details on the nefarious Russians who seek global domination at all costs. That's how she earns her 30K a day.
Yeah - you know she does research, right? That's how journalists find out stuff, without having security clearances.
You have no problem believing your cadre of truth tellers like Greenwald, Mate , Dore, Taibbi, etc. who have no security clearances either.
So drop the hypocritical double standard.
Is this addressed to Jamie?
Clearly not. It's not Jamie with the double standard.
You apparently didn't see the first post in this exchange when the issue of security clearances was invoked.
Trump's tweet from last night reads just like some posts here.
The Democrats and Crooked Hillary paid for & provided a Fake Dossier, with phony information gotten from foreign sources, pushed it to the corrupt media & Dirty Cops, & have now been caught. They spied on my campaign, then tried to cover it up - Just Like Watergate, but bigger!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) december"="" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1208873492025925632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 22, 2019
And this response gets to the point succinctly.
This makes sense if you believe that the FBI aggressively backed Trump: made Clinton’s IT Security top issue of 2016, leaked tons of anti-Clinton crap to Rudy, covered-up Trump’s relationship with Russia with media, to get him elected, just so they could undermine his presidency.
— David Rothschild (@DavMicRot) december"="" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://twitter.com/DavMicRot/status/1208874912406003715?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 22, 2019
ml1 said:
Trump's tweet from last night reads just like some posts here.
The Democrats and Crooked Hillary paid for & provided a Fake Dossier, with phony information gotten from foreign sources, pushed it to the corrupt media & Dirty Cops, & have now been caught. They spied on my campaign, then tried to cover it up - Just Like Watergate, but bigger!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) december"="" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1208873492025925632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 22, 2019
"Some" posts? That's the whole "HILLARY COLLUDED, NOT TRUMP" thread in a nutshell.
nohero said:
"Some" posts? That's the whole "HILLARY COLLUDED, NOT TRUMP" thread in a nutshell.
I stay out of that one.
drummerboy said:
No I don't think I missed anything.
Then your logic is flawed.
nohero said:
ml1 said:
Trump's tweet from last night reads just like some posts here.
The Democrats and Crooked Hillary paid for & provided a Fake Dossier, with phony information gotten from foreign sources, pushed it to the corrupt media & Dirty Cops, & have now been caught. They spied on my campaign, then tried to cover it up - Just Like Watergate, but bigger!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) december"="" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1208873492025925632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 22, 2019"Some" posts? That's the whole "HILLARY COLLUDED, NOT TRUMP" thread in a nutshell.
If Trump says something that is true, it doesn't make what he said untrue.
And in this case, Yes:
:: The Democrats and Hillary paid for & provided a Fake Dossier -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: with phony information gotten from foreign sources -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: pushed it to the corrupt media & Dirty Cops (FBI) -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: & have now been caught -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: They spied on my campaign -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: then tried to cover it up -- thru countless denials of the above
paulsurovell said:
If Trump says something that is true, it doesn't make what he said untrue.
And in this case, Yes:
:: The Democrats and Hillary paid for & provided a Fake Dossier -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: with phony information gotten from foreign sources -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: pushed it to the corrupt media & Dirty Cops (FBI) -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: & have now been caught -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: They spied on my campaign -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: then tried to cover it up -- thru countless denials of the above
I didn't read the Hannity annotated version of the IG report, so know what the written conclusions actually are.
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
If Trump says something that is true, it doesn't make what he said untrue.
And in this case, Yes:
:: The Democrats and Hillary paid for & provided a Fake Dossier -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: with phony information gotten from foreign sources -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: pushed it to the corrupt media & Dirty Cops (FBI) -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: & have now been caught -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: They spied on my campaign -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: then tried to cover it up -- thru countless denials of the above
I didn't read the Hannity annotated version of the IG report, so know what the written conclusions actually are.
You seem to be denying that what I wrote is true.
This is a good opportunity for you and the prove-one-thing-that-Paul-said-that-was-untrue crowd to work on.
Here's my source:
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6571534-OIG-Russia-Investigation-Report
paulsurovell said:
You apparently didn't see the first post in this exchange when the issue of security clearances was invoked.
If [STRAWMAN], then why isn't [RED HERRING]?
Could it be that [NON-SEQUITUR]?
paulsurovell said:
You seem to be denying that what I wrote is true.
This is a good opportunity for you and the prove-one-thing-that-Paul-said-that-was-untrue crowd to work on.
Here's my source:
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6571534-OIG-Russia-Investigation-Report
What Paul has written is misleading. The example of his most tiresome misleading is the "Hillary paid for the fake Dossier", which has been hashed and rehashed in the "Hillary Colluded" thread so won't be re-rehashed here.
sbenois said:
Have to wonder why he insists on doing that.
Why does a moth fly towards the flame?
Why does a cat push things off of tables?
Why does a dog … well, you get the idea.
sbenois said:
Have to wonder why he insists on doing that.
maybe he thinks sufficient repetition will make it true.
nohero said:
What Paul has written is misleading. The example of his most tiresome misleading is the "Hillary paid for the fake Dossier", which has been hashed and rehashed in the "Hillary Colluded" thread so won't be re-rehashed here.
It's Paul's version of "Lock her up" - it's not a paul thread (rally) until he utters that line. It truly unites trumpers and the alt-left crowd.
paulsurovell said:
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
If Trump says something that is true, it doesn't make what he said untrue.
And in this case, Yes:
:: The Democrats and Hillary paid for & provided a Fake Dossier -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: with phony information gotten from foreign sources -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: pushed it to the corrupt media & Dirty Cops (FBI) -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: & have now been caught -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: They spied on my campaign -- confirmed by Horowitz
:: then tried to cover it up -- thru countless denials of the above
I didn't read the Hannity annotated version of the IG report, so know what the written conclusions actually are.
You seem to be denying that what I wrote is true.
This is a good opportunity for you and the prove-one-thing-that-Paul-said-that-was-untrue crowd to work on.
Here's my source:
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6571534-OIG-Russia-Investigation-Report
Looks truthful to me. Can Jamie, nohero, et al, please give the facts that disprove these points? Hannity did not write the IG report, so it can't be anything he said.
Rentals
-
Huge Brand New construction Apartment in 2 family home with 4 bedrooms 3 bathrooms
4 Bd | 3Full Ba
$4,500
Featured Events
-
Stephen Whitty Presents - Hometown Movie Stars: The Celebrated Actors Of CHS
May 6, 2024 at 7:00pm
Even if they originated in the White House — here’s an early 2019 Fortune article about a warning to Germany from the U.S. ambassador — this is one of those policy arenas where different interests intersect. Pro-Putin would also be pro-E.U. and anti-U.S. fossil fuel production, presenting competing motivations.