It'd be inappropriate of me to go in to depth as to which of USB is truely stupid. For that individual's sake, I'll bow out.
I think it was the Post that posited that the paid interviews by RT is enough to seek immunity against the emoluments clause. I don't think he'll sell out the President on an impeachable level, but whatever he snitches will garner some Twitter stitches...
He's a career soldier who got elevated by the only politician who was crazy enough to listen to his ramblings for the past 2+ years. On a deeper level, their interests still align, whatever the **** that is.
Trump & Co didn't just fire him, they disgraced him. Flynn clearly committed a serious crime or he wouldn't have sought immunity. A career soldier who has gotten his hands dirty and has been disgraced by the very people who made him get his hands dirty in the first place only wants one thing - revenge. You can bet your nobbins Flynn is going to tell the world that he didn't lie to Pence but that he was the fall guy in a cover-up. It's pretty obvious to me what's going on from day one back when I posted the article about the Russian server communicating with Trump's server. Trump is a traitor, and we need to get rid of him and all the cancerous people around him before they do real damage.
I guess I'm used to the greasy discipline of past political posses, but they usually coordinate their stories well enough to scrub up a scandal. Impeachments are difficult to get through even without the partisan sideshow. As much as I want this hell in Washington to die, I don't see it getting any better anytime soon. We're still in the media frenzy that gripped and distorted the latter half of last year. Instead of being punished for it, the Trump circus is bolstering subscriptions and viewership. I'm a bit more guarded of what's being reported and what will happen even when I'm reading what you're reading, if only because the signs are there to be fooled yet again.
To me, it's not what is being reported, it's what's been happening for the past 8 or 9 months. When you take all of this smoke and suspicions and consider that Eric Trump once claimed that Russia has invested a lot into Trump, and that Trump has been cozy with Russia for years, that his cabinet is filled with pro-Russia members, his asking Russia to hack his opponents, his bizarre criticism of NATO, his unawareness of Russia annexing parts of the Ukraine, and then latter support, and other things...forget about what it being reported - pay attention to the facts right and I think it's pretty obvious what's going.
It's true there's smoke, but our intelligence agencies haven't come forth with a smoking gun. Cue the oxymoron joke about calling it an intelligence agency. I think this is a gut wound that the world has to suffer for another 2-3 years...like a beached fat and old orange whale. I hope I'm wrong, but that's how it looks. You know, with the facts and all.
Pro tip #1: carefully proofread any post in which you call someone else "stupid." Pro tip #2: "truely" is correctly spelled truly (unless you are truly ancient, at best it is an archaic spelling of the word) Pro tip #3: I don't think you meant to question the intelligence of USBs. Perhaps you meant "which of us?"
Somehow I don't think the Senate Committee investigation will go the same way as the House version... here's the Senator Mark Warner, republican Senate committee leader's opening statement:
If all this is is a beached fat crazy old orange whale then we'll have dodged a bullet. I think our intelligence agencies already know the truth (which is why the CIA has not been sharing intelligence with the White House), but they are waiting until they can be overwhelmingly decisive. You don't take down a president for treason easily. It will be the first time in our nation's history. They understand that the repercussions are immense. Not only that, they will want to understand the whole network and everyone who was involved and complicit. I think when they act it will be with overwhelming evidence in a way that no politician can resist or push back or spin. They will not be making their case to Intelligence Committees, they will be making their case to the entire country and they will have to get Trump supporters to see Trump as a traitor.
In the end, I honestly don't think there will be a smoking gun. I think Russia wanted like hell to get Trump elected, (for all sorts of reasons that would be obvious to anyone with the ability to criticize Trump and his ways). But I don't give the Trump campaign enough credit for being organized enough to knowingly collude with the Russians. It seems there will probably be evidence of inappropriate contact with high-level Russians but know evidence tying Trump himself, or an organizational *decision* to Russian interference. It's like... what's the cliche? Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to incompetence? But just figuring out exactly how the Russian interference works is really worthwhile, and for that I thank our Senate for having public hearings with bipartisan support of such.
Obviously Russia wants Trump elected due to his insistence that NATO spend more money in their military to counter act Russia, and Trump's proposal to spend more money on the Us military ($50 billion extra as of now). Makes sense.
I know you're being flippant, but you've conveniently not mentioned sanctions. Sanctions placed on the Putin regime after the annexation of Crimea have been an important destabilizing force. You can't freeze the assets of a kleptocracy for long before the kleptocrats get restless and the people get angry. Everything Russia does is about self-preservation. Things like NATO and the dissolution of the EU are just gravy.
No they take their jokes seriously. Comey even mentioned a few days ago how the house questions weren't impartial. It was house members fishing for information to support their own views. They should just cancel it. I don't believe we need an independent unit. I trust the senate and the FBI to do the job.
Sanctions? Ok, let's discuss sanctions. The Obama administration appears have valued "sanctions" as mere bargaining tools. However, if Trump were to have such plans - traitor? Obama sought to hit the "Reset Button" with Russia a year after its illegal invasion of Georgia rather than sanctioning Russia for its aggression. However, if Trump attempts to set the diplomatic tone differently than what Obama had set it at and does not attempt to levy new sanctions - traitor? Yes, Putin is a dictator who posses a threat to Easter Europe, but how exactly is strengthening NATO's military spending going to hurt NATO? It seems it would only, well, strengthen NATO.
I think Trump's Russia ties have been going on for a long time - many years most likely. His son talked about the depthness of their relationship inadvertently. I am not sure what a smoking gun even is at this point. The question is, if Trump indeed met with Russian intelligence officials about how to win the U.S. election - what does that mean? Is that a crime? Is that grounds for impeachment? I don't know anymore. He gets away with so much
What an obnoxious take. -Claims that NATO is obsolete -changes RNC platform to soften stance on Russia -Praises Putin (while demeaning Obama, Merkel, etc.) -repeats fake propaganda on the campaign trail put out by Russian outlets -publicly supporting spread of Nationalism at CPAC -Flynn discussing Sanctions before coming in office -etc etc etc Yes... now that he is President our support of NATO has remained from our Ambassador, Sec. of State (kinda), Pence, and to some extent Trump. However.... JUST YESTERDAY, Tillerson makes an incredibly controversial statement about Assad who Russia backs that signals again..a Pro-Russia agenda. And Trump spending money on the military signals NOTHING regarding pro or anti Russia. It means he's going to pump money to Boeing, and Lockheed to build tanks, and planes. However what his budget did do was signal a GUT JOB to the State department. That gut to the State department is the biggest red flag in our countries sense of pulling back in our spread of democracy, support of our allies, and our footprint in using foreign policy to protect Europe, Asia, and the Middle East from players like Russia dismantling democracies globally in order to pursue their agenda. Can't disagree with your stance here any more & your flippant sarcastic remarks.
Don't give him the time of day. He's just trying as hard as possible to be irritating. That's it. But your list forgot fighting green energy tooth and nail which is really the only type of globe where Russia can remain economically alive in the foreseeable future.
I know but I don't want people to start buying into this notion that all the sudden the Trump admin has turned away from their pro-Russia stance and that things have drastically changed in their stance & appeal to Russia, and any support for NATO etc. somehow counters the notion that he was a puppet for Russia during the election. The lack of their ability to remove sanctions & forced support of NATO are obviously good things though, but they still have a watchful eye from many both in our govt (the Dems, and the John McCains, etc) and around the world with how Trump & co. support Russia in back channel type of ways... like how McCain & Graham blasted Tillerson for his comments on Assad. Their stance on Russia is still something to watch, and there are still many many things they are doing that are questionable in this realm of foreign policy.
