Moose & Squirrel v Boris & Natasha: what's the deal with the rooskies and trumpland?

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

[visionary]

 

[LadySkinsFan]

Lies, obfuscation, collusion. It's a LOC!

[visionary]

 

 

 

[visionary]

 

[FanboyOf91]

Edited September 10, 2017 by FanboyOf91

[visionary]

 

 

 

Edited September 10, 2017 by visionary

[visionary]

 

 

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

Edited September 11, 2017 by visionary

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

Edited September 12, 2017 by visionary

[FanboyOf91]

Didn't expect this to result from the Euromaidan.

[gbear]

Does this thread crash/lag more than any other thread on the board or is it just me?

 

I was thinking about this thread last night.  Let's assume some of what we think we know.  Trump's business has had some previous dealings in Russia, and they had hopes of doing many more.  Trump's business has likely sold many properties to Russian elites which were used to legitimize money from sources they would never claim.  None of this would seem to be illegal even if shady. 

 

Now my question is what would should Trump have done during the election about these contacts, and what would  need to be shown to get a Republican congress to act?

 

If it is shown Russia offered help and Trump and his campaign did not turn them away and tell them to stay out of our politics is that enough to show collusion?  I think in my grandparents generation that would have been enough, but the waters are muddier now and our political tribalism is a stronger motivator than nationalism.  With the age of our congressmen and congresswomen, I have a harder time predicting.  John Mcain for all his maverick perception was predictable on such matters, but how much of that is age and time of service related? 

 

So go a step further.  If Trump asked Russia to release emails at strategic times to damage Clinton, is that enough?  I could certainly see a defense of "I accept all the help I can get.  I mean who wouldn't take free help."  If  this is the case would people and or Congress blame him?  I honestly don't know.  I would, but I have that tribal influence goading me.

 

What if Russia decided to goad nativist movements in the U.S. for the general purpose of destabilizing us?  Trump benefited and continues to benefit from them, but where does one assign blame on our home front for this? 

 

What would be an appropriate and legal outcome for any of these scenarios, and do we have a reasonable hope for that outcome?

[LadySkinsFan]

Another short answer: Because foreign nationals not to mention foreign governments are barred from participating in our elections, period. 

 

Having any other response than "No Thanks" is collusion.

30 minutes ago, gbear said:

Trump's business has likely sold many properties to Russian elites which were used to legitimize money from sources they would never claim. 

 

This is the definition of money laundering, and if Trump had been prosecuted back in the 80s and further, he couldn't have run for president at all.

[gbear]

I agree on the collusion, but what is a reasonable outcome now?  We elected the guy, warts and all.  Collusion and levels of it are where I question out political willingness as a country to reassert our independence from outside influences in our elections. We are closely enough balanced R to D that a small influence can have huge impacts.  How small an infraction are we willing to address as a nation?  What should our answer be to Russian facebook posting organizational ads for the purpose of organizing groups who would destabilize us?  How would you feel if you participated in such an event because of your beliefs?  Racist beliefs are not illegal, just the acts they spawn.   How should we deal with outside provocateurs? 

 

I dislike the results of our presidential election, but how do we stop the bleeding?  How do we make the winners realize the potential internal hemorrhaging we are experiencing?  I don't think we have it in us to go full out McCarthy, and having a family who lived through FBI investigations in that time, I include myself in that " having reservations about possible steps to prevent future destabilizing attempts."  What would it take to prevent this from happening again?

[Llevron]

11 hours ago, visionary said:

 

 

This **** right here is exactly why I wont use Facebook anymore unless it relates to business in the future. It was obvious to me before this information that something wasn't right. I just thought of it as a dependence that the world was developing that I really didn't need in my life. It was directing my flow of thought a little too much for me to be comfortable. 

 

Now this ****? Boy. I will never let my kids on FB and I am considering confronting the GF about it. If the Russians have this capability why wouldn't any other group? 

[LadySkinsFan]

How about making it a felony to accept advertising from foreign entities? 

 

How about reinstating the Fairness Doctrine?

 

How about going after people who collude, and make a presidential pardon illegal? That won't help now, Mueller's investigation should show that we aren't messing around, even if Trump ends up pardoning the current crop. 

 

This will take a bipartisan effort, if the Republicans become the patriots they claim they are.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]