Who Meddled more Putin or Trump? The Collusion Thread visits Venezuela
For real news and analysis, you can't beat Tucker Carlson. His coverage this evening --
Uh Oh. The Russians are meddling in the 2018 election:
. . . . and it looks like they've been taking videotaping lessons from the White Helmets.
paulsurovell said:
Lots of anti-Putin stuff on that Moscow-based website.
It’s just enough to create the illusion of a free press, isn’t it?
paulsurovell said:
Uh Oh. The Russians are meddling in the 2018 election:
https://thinkprogress.org/fake-viral-manspreading-video-points-to-new-turn-in-russian-disinformation-689c3023b940/
. . . . and it looks like they've been taking videotaping lessons from the White Helmets.
Another successful Russian insertion of the "White Helmets fake video footage" smear into political discussions in the United States.
[Edited to add] The "White Helmets fake" is smear is, of course, tied to the issue of Russian disinformation AND the smearing of George Soros, as discussed on this thread back in December 2017.
And just in case, before you say it, I'm NOT saying Scott Ritter is part of that, since he doesn't make the accusations you do.
paulsurovell said:
Flash!
https://www.thedailybeast.com/researchers-no-evidence-that-russia-is-messing-with-campaign-2018yet
Not surprising that Russia may not be spending money to spread their disinformation in the United States. It looks like there are lots of people who are glad to do it for free.
As of tonight, this thread has earned a "MAGA" hat.
President Donald Trump directly accused Hillary Clinton of engaging in a conspiracy with Russia to affect the 2016 election during a campaign rally here Wednesday night.
"There was collusion between Hillary, the Democrats and Russia," Trump said, just after his supporters had chanted "lock her up" about Clinton. "There was a lot of collusion with them and Russia and lots of other people."
Trump has discussed that theory publicly and on Twitter, but his remarks Wednesday night amounted to an unusually direct allegation that Clinton herself conspired with the Russian government to influence the election. He offered no evidence of his claim.
South_Mountaineer said:
As of tonight, this thread has earned a "MAGA" hat.
President Donald Trump directly accused Hillary Clinton of engaging in a conspiracy with Russia to affect the 2016 election during a campaign rally here Wednesday night."There was collusion between Hillary, the Democrats and Russia," Trump said, just after his supporters had chanted "lock her up" about Clinton. "There was a lot of collusion with them and Russia and lots of other people."Trump has discussed that theory publicly and on Twitter, but his remarks Wednesday night amounted to an unusually direct allegation that Clinton herself conspired with the Russian government to influence the election. He offered no evidence of his claim.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-accuses-hillary-clinton-colluding-russia-crowd-chants-lock-her-n918836?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma
Does every Democrat who voted for Trump's obscene military budget get a "Maga" hat too?
A gallopin' we go! A gallopin' we go!
Hi Ho (Silver!) the derry-o, a gallopin' we go!
paulsurovell said:
South_Mountaineer said:Does every Democrat who voted for Trump's obscene military budget get a "Maga" hat too?
As of tonight, this thread has earned a "MAGA" hat.
President Donald Trump directly accused Hillary Clinton of engaging in a conspiracy with Russia to affect the 2016 election during a campaign rally here Wednesday night."There was collusion between Hillary, the Democrats and Russia," Trump said, just after his supporters had chanted "lock her up" about Clinton. "There was a lot of collusion with them and Russia and lots of other people."Trump has discussed that theory publicly and on Twitter, but his remarks Wednesday night amounted to an unusually direct allegation that Clinton herself conspired with the Russian government to influence the election. He offered no evidence of his claim.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-accuses-hillary-clinton-colluding-russia-crowd-chants-lock-her-n918836?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma
Depends. Which ones are on the "Hillary Colluded" Trump train?
South_Mountaineer said:
paulsurovell said:Depends. Which ones are on the "Hillary Colluded" Trump train?
South_Mountaineer said:Does every Democrat who voted for Trump's obscene military budget get a "Maga" hat too?
As of tonight, this thread has earned a "MAGA" hat.
President Donald Trump directly accused Hillary Clinton of engaging in a conspiracy with Russia to affect the 2016 election during a campaign rally here Wednesday night."There was collusion between Hillary, the Democrats and Russia," Trump said, just after his supporters had chanted "lock her up" about Clinton. "There was a lot of collusion with them and Russia and lots of other people."Trump has discussed that theory publicly and on Twitter, but his remarks Wednesday night amounted to an unusually direct allegation that Clinton herself conspired with the Russian government to influence the election. He offered no evidence of his claim.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-accuses-hillary-clinton-colluding-russia-crowd-chants-lock-her-n918836?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma
So only agreement with Trump on the collusion issue is what rates a Maga hat? Agreement with Trump on military spending or the Iran nuclear deal doesn't rate a Maga hat?
paulsurovell said:
South_Mountaineer said:So only agreement with Trump on the collusion issue is what rates a Maga hat? Agreement with Trump on military spending or the Iran nuclear deal doesn't rate a Maga hat?
paulsurovell said:Depends. Which ones are on the "Hillary Colluded" Trump train?
South_Mountaineer said:Does every Democrat who voted for Trump's obscene military budget get a "Maga" hat too?
As of tonight, this thread has earned a "MAGA" hat.
President Donald Trump directly accused Hillary Clinton of engaging in a conspiracy with Russia to affect the 2016 election during a campaign rally here Wednesday night."There was collusion between Hillary, the Democrats and Russia," Trump said, just after his supporters had chanted "lock her up" about Clinton. "There was a lot of collusion with them and Russia and lots of other people."Trump has discussed that theory publicly and on Twitter, but his remarks Wednesday night amounted to an unusually direct allegation that Clinton herself conspired with the Russian government to influence the election. He offered no evidence of his claim.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-accuses-hillary-clinton-colluding-russia-crowd-chants-lock-her-n918836?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma
Being with Trump on "Who Colluded" is more than enough to earn a MAGA hat without adding more conditions like that.
South_Mountaineer said:
paulsurovell said:Being with Trump on "Who Colluded" is more than enough to earn a MAGA hat without adding more conditions like that.
South_Mountaineer said:So only agreement with Trump on the collusion issue is what rates a Maga hat? Agreement with Trump on military spending or the Iran nuclear deal doesn't rate a Maga hat?
paulsurovell said:Depends. Which ones are on the "Hillary Colluded" Trump train?
South_Mountaineer said:Does every Democrat who voted for Trump's obscene military budget get a "Maga" hat too?
As of tonight, this thread has earned a "MAGA" hat.
President Donald Trump directly accused Hillary Clinton of engaging in a conspiracy with Russia to affect the 2016 election during a campaign rally here Wednesday night."There was collusion between Hillary, the Democrats and Russia," Trump said, just after his supporters had chanted "lock her up" about Clinton. "There was a lot of collusion with them and Russia and lots of other people."Trump has discussed that theory publicly and on Twitter, but his remarks Wednesday night amounted to an unusually direct allegation that Clinton herself conspired with the Russian government to influence the election. He offered no evidence of his claim.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-accuses-hillary-clinton-colluding-russia-crowd-chants-lock-her-n918836?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma
But you're excluding so many deserving people who are in lockstep with Trump on the biggest part of the Federal disecretionary budget.
paulsurovell said:
South_Mountaineer said:But you're excluding so many deserving people who are in lockstep with Trump on the biggest part of the Federal disecretionary budget.
Being with Trump on "Who Colluded" is more than enough to earn a MAGA hat without adding more conditions like that.
Define "lockstep". There's an awful lot of stuff in a military budget, which is bundled into one up-or-down vote. Some good (for example, pay raises), some not so good and some obscene.
If people didn't know better, they'd think you were trying to "whatabout" the discussion away from the "MAGA-ness" of your "Hillary Colluded" thread.
Here, you can watch it -
South_Mountaineer said:
paulsurovell said:Define "lockstep". There's an awful lot of stuff in a military budget, which is bundled into one up-or-down vote. Some good (for example, pay raises), some not so good and some obscene.
South_Mountaineer said:But you're excluding so many deserving people who are in lockstep with Trump on the biggest part of the Federal disecretionary budget.
Being with Trump on "Who Colluded" is more than enough to earn a MAGA hat without adding more conditions like that.
If people didn't know better, they'd think you were trying to "whatabout" the discussion away from the "MAGA-ness" of your "Hillary Colluded" thread.
Here, you can watch it -
40 Democrats get the MAGA hat for voting with Trump, but not this Senator:
"Voting with Trump" is a meaningless description. I wouldn't justify or criticize when we're talking about one of those enormous pieces of legislation that they love to pass. What went on in the process, who supported or opposed amendments, how much can the minority party do on legislation like this? Bernie could cast a symbolic vote, good for him, he runs for office from Vermont.
If you're okay with some Democratic Senator in a "redder" state being attacked and defeated in an election over "HE VOTED AGAINST A PAY RAISE FOR OUR TROOPS!" then you're probably okay with people who claim to be progressive but who didn't care if Trump was elected in the first place. Oh, wait ...
On the other hand, "Hillary Colluded, not Trump" has a clear meaning. I wouldn't vote for anyone who pushed that line of thinking.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/10/politics/steele-dossier-letter/index.html
It's funny how a loyal intelligence ally like Steele is having his reputation destroyed by the likes of Trump AND Surovell. (Russia is loving this!)
If Hillary did indeed pay for the dossier directly - we'll owe her a big debt of gratitude down the road for doing so. Time will tell.
I've lost track - Paul can you remind me where Steele has given bad intel to the US in the past?
jamie said:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/10/politics/steele-dossier-letter/index.html
It's funny how a loyal intelligence ally like Steele is having his reputation destroyed by the likes of Trump AND Surovell. (Russia is loving this!)
If Hillary did indeed pay for the dossier directly - we'll owe her a big debt of gratitude down the road for doing so. Time will tell.
I've lost track - Paul can you remind me where Steele has given bad intel to the US in the past?
I can tell you when Mueller gave us bad intel. And when he obstructed an investigation of Saudi involvement in 9/11.
With regard to Steele, I'm not familiar with his intel prior to the dirty dossier, and -- I've lost track -- can you remind me where Steele has given us good intel in his dossier?
"dirty" very Trumpy of you - using this descriptor.
It's very hard to explain to you what is true in the dossier since you won't believe anything the Intelligence Community says. You only believe Greenwald and the retired VIPs guys apparently.
You also demand that the intelligence community give up our sources and methods which will put peoples lives at risk who have been assisting us.
Would it be worth it if sources were exposed, people died and no one in the future would want to assist our intelligence agencies?
South_Mountaineer said:
"Voting with Trump" is a meaningless description. I wouldn't justify or criticize when we're talking about one of those enormous pieces of legislation that they love to pass. What went on in the process, who supported or opposed amendments, how much can the minority party do on legislation like this? Bernie could cast a symbolic vote, good for him, he runs for office from Vermont.
If you're okay with some Democratic Senator in a "redder" state being attacked and defeated in an election over "HE VOTED AGAINST A PAY RAISE FOR OUR TROOPS!" then you're probably okay with people who claim to be progressive but who didn't care if Trump was elected in the first place. Oh, wait ...
On the other hand, "Hillary Colluded, not Trump" has a clear meaning. I wouldn't vote for anyone who pushed that line of thinking.
"Hillary Colluded, not Trump" is a true statement. The basic explanation appears in the OP.
Your position is that if one says what Trump says about collusion that is being "pro-Trump" -- even if what Trump says is true.
But actually your position is hypocritical, because you say that Democrats who say what Trump says about the defense bill are not being "pro-Trump." And you justify this by saying that they really didn't support the bill but they were "forced" to by "politics."
You can't have it both ways. Unless you want to continue being hypocritical.
jamie said:
"dirty" very Trumpy of you - using this descriptor.
It's very hard to explain to you what is true in the dossier since you won't believe anything the Intelligence Community says. You only believe Greenwald and the retired VIPs guys apparently.
You also demand that the intelligence community give up our sources and methods which will put peoples lives at risk who have been assisting us.
Would it be worth it if sources were exposed, people died and no one in the future would want to assist our intelligence agencies?
I'm not aware that the intelligence community has alleged collusion. Have they?
paulsurovell said:With regard to Steele, I'm not familiar with his intel prior to the dirty dossier, and -- I've lost track -- can you remind me where Steele has given us good intel in his dossier?
A sensible thing to do is familiarize yourself with easily-accessible facts, before adopting President Trump's position on Mr. Steele. The great thing about the internet is that you can use The Google or other search tools to find things out, without having to ask someone else to do it for you.
paulsurovell said:"Hillary Colluded, not Trump" is a true statement.
Lol
ridski said:
paulsurovell said:Lol
"Hillary Colluded, not Trump" is a true statement.
How dare you scoff.
Paul thinks the Fusion GPS hiring = Russia collusion. This beyond ridiculous. Had Bernie won - this discussion wouldn't exist - Bernie and then Dems would have taken over the Fusion intel and Paul would be in 100% support of the dossier.
Has Bernie ever denounced the dossier and claimed that Hillary colluded with Russia?
jamie said:
Paul thinks the Fusion GPS hiring = Russia collusion. This beyond ridiculous. Had Bernie won - this discussion wouldn't exist - Bernie and then Dems would have taken over the Fusion intel and Paul would be in 100% support of the dossier.
Has Bernie ever denounced the dossier and claimed that Hillary colluded with Russia?
I think we're long past the time when logical arguments make a difference to Mr. Surovell.
[Edited to add] Jamie, I have a suggestion for swapping out an avatar.
jamie said:
Paul thinks the Fusion GPS hiring = Russia collusion. This beyond ridiculous. Had Bernie won - this discussion wouldn't exist - Bernie and then Dems would have taken over the Fusion intel and Paul would be in 100% support of the dossier.
Has Bernie ever denounced the dossier and claimed that Hillary colluded with Russia?
Did I say that?
The office of Russia’s infamous troll factory believed to be at the vanguard of Russia’s information war has been set on fire in St. Petersburg overnight.
An investigation revealed last year that the secretive troll factory had rebranded itself as a media conglomerate with 16 news websites generating more than 30 million pageviews every month. Its operational hub, a website called FAN (Federal News Agency), is based a stone’s throw from the troll farm’s original location in northern St. Petersburg.
The Fontanka.ru news website cited police as saying that an unknown suspect broke the agency’s ground-floor window and threw a Molotov cocktail inside at around 3 a.m. on Tuesday.
Surveillance footage published by FAN showed flames erupting at one of the empty workstations and a female staffer stationed on the opposite end quickly exiting the office.
“I believe this is tied to FAN’s activities,” its chief editor Yevgeny Zubarev said. “We’re most often attacked online, but these types of attacks have already taken place offline.”
FAN said its office came under another arson attack on the eve of the 2018 presidential elections in March.
The troll farm is believed to be run by billionaire restaurateur Yevgeny Prigozhin, known as President Vladimir Putin’s “cook.” A U.S. special counsel indicted Prigozhin and 12 other Russians this year on charges of defrauding the U.S. government by interfering with its political process.
St. Petersburg police told the RBC news website that they were looking for the culprit and planned to launch criminal proceedings.