The Trump / Russia Controversy

[nadde991]

Solid 5k

Nice xD

[AcidSpiral]

Solid 5k

Nice xD

Only about 10 of those were useful or made sense.

[Strakknuva225]

Solid 5k

Nice xD

Only about 10 of those were useful or made sense.

You're greatly overexagerating Claeyt's capibilities.

[nadde991]

Solid 5k

Nice xD

Only about 10 of those were useful or made sense.

You're greatly overexagerating Claeyt's capibilities.

lol i only meant it was 5k solid xD

[Claeyt]

U.S. Allies and members of NATO confirm their intelligence agencies have been tracking, monitoring and recording meetings between Trump's aides and Russian Intelligence since last year.

http://www.newsweek.com/allies-intercep ... ons-557283

Watch the rats scurry:

Carter Page, possibly one of the 6 members of Trump's campaign staff who were in "constant contact" with Russian intelligence, has written a bizarre letter to the Justice Department and the FBI blaming the HRC campaign for the leaks and for the accusations against him. He then leaked the letter to multiple news sources.

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/15/car ... y-clinton/

Flynn's son, who worked on Trump's campaign and on his transition teams and who ALSO may be one of the 6 people being investigated by the FBI and U.S. Intelligence agencies, who had passed on the bizarre conspiracy about HRC raping children at a pizza restaurant, tweeted that it is all a"disinformation campaign" by HRC and the CIA before then deleting it.

http://nypost.com/2017/02/14/flynns-son ... -campaign/

Flynn has had ALL of his security clearance pulled which normally a 3 star general would keep during his retirement.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-secu ... pended-cnn

Also, It has now been proven that Pence, Spicer and Trump himself have all stated falsely that there was never any contact between Russian Intelligence and the Trump campaign.

It took me 5 minutes to prove all of these are nut jobs, right wing bloggers and fake science. Come on Tmeow, you have to do better than that.

Do I? I thought you just wanted to know what I was referring to and I looked for a few simple, laymen termed stories so you could understand it easily. I can probably find the actual scientific papers if you really want, but you'll likely have to pay to read them.

The articles are all about the EXACT SAME collection of scientific data. They are about how the director of one agency rightly called out the director of a larger agency for sloppy protocol. The whistleblower then said the data wasn't wrong, it just didn't follow protocol.

This article does give examples of people involved in raising money, supporting and foiled terrorist attacks who were arrested but it debunks Miller's argument that 72 terrorists came in from these countries. Of course this is nowhere near the number of terrorists coming in from countries like Saudi Arabia, the gulf states and Pakistan.

Oh, so only a few dozen of them were terrorists planning to kill people. I guess that changes everything?

Compared to the number of all the terrorists from other non-banned countries, yes it does.

Meanwhile it's being reported that of the 27 terrorist attacks that took the lives that have happened in America since 9/11, 20 of them were by White Christian Nationalists.

All 7 of the countries have limited and irregular government control over info for vetting so greater vetting is justified. Outright denial is not. I disagree with the ban for these reasons:

1. It is based on the idea of a "Muslim ban" and not on any new information of a threat or increased terrorism coming from these countries.

2.Denying them access to [the international community] isn't the way to grow democracy.

So, it makes sense to try to vet them properly before letting them in? But with how bad their records are, it's almost impossible to vet them at all, which makes just denying them access the solution. The list was based on the threat of increased terrorism, as determined by the Obama administration. Perhaps you're right and the list should be expanded, but the countries on it certainly do deserve to be there. Your silly statement that Iran isn't a source of terrorism just shows how brainwashed you are, they're the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world.

The US does not comprise the entirety of the international community. If their society and government becomes more tolerant of ours, I say fine, let them come here. But the western world has been bending over backward for these refugees and it's gotten us nothing but pain. Time for some give to go with the take.

And no, it didn't break any laws.

It is not impossible to vet people from these countries. Especially Iran. The list was built because some of the countries were in civil war, not because they posed a greater threat of exporting terrorism. Iran is only a state sponsor of terrorism because they support Hezbollah and a ton of Shiite groups in Iraq who we once fought against who we now call terrorists. That is nothing compared to the terrorists supported by money flowing out of the gulf states.

The US actually has one of the smallest refugee populations from Syria in the Western World.

15 federal judges and federal appellate judges now say it is illegal.

None of this has been answered and all may lead to criminal charges.

Um.... all that stuff you've been posting says that a transcript of the phone call, possibly obtained illegally then illegally leaked to the press, showed Flynn only told Putin to be patient and wait for Trump to take office. Nothing about terms of the sanctions or about any of the other last-minute tricks Obama was playing to try to thrust his policies on the world. So, he really didn't need to know anything.

The only thing that really concerns me about the entire Flynn thing is that high ups in the intelligence community and/or other White House positions have been recording calls which they probably didn't have legal permission to record, AND have been leaking them and who knows what other potentially classified information to the press at a ridiculous rate. To me, that is the biggest sign of problems in the administration. Not from Trump and his team, but from people lower down who have decided to put their own opinions and politics ahead of their duties to the President and loyalty to the country. They would rather manufacture a scandal and do their best to harm the entire nation, than give Trump a chance to do his job well.

They record all calls to and from the Russian ambassador which is how Flynn's sanctions revealing call was recorded. They also record calls for anyone involved in a federal investigation or U.S. counter-intelligence investigation which is how they recorded and monitored Trump's campaign aides contacts with Russian Intelligence.

Flynn's call did much more than tell them to keep patient. He revealed that the Obama Administration was going to expel Russian embassy members and hand down sanctions THE NEXT DAY. He warned them. How do you not get that that is illegal. He also maybe lied to the FBI when they asked him about it after he became director of the NSA which is also a felony.

Why are you forgetting that there have been 4 ongoing investigations into Russia since last May or maybe earlier. There have been House and Senate congressional intelligence committee investigations into Russian hacking of the DNC and HRC campaigns since August. There has been an FBI investigation into the hacking charges since it first happened last spring. There has been a CIA, NSA and FBI counterintelligence investigation into ALL OF IT since last May.

Why would you think these 4 investigations wouldn't have the legal authority to record Trump's aides if they were contacting Russian Intelligence?

[Dallane]

Flynn has had ALL of his security clearance pulled which normally a 3 star general would keep during his retirement.

Actually anyone who is under investigation gets their clearance temporary pulled. You don't magically get to keep you clearance no matter what. I'm proof of this as I've worked closely around this area in my past and have a relative as a retired 3 star.

I'm confused as to why you use ALL in that way as a person doesn't hold multiple clearances. You are sponsored by a organization and they hold your clearance. If you go to another org then it gets transfered after a review of it. I've moved and worked in multiple 3 letter agencies and don't hold multiple clearances or levels. I have one clearance.

More proof that you have no idea wtf you are saying and just circle jerking from reddit.

Also clay is not posting a ton of information that breaks his narative.

[TotalyMeow]

The articles are all about the EXACT SAME collection of scientific data. They are about how the director of one agency rightly called out the director of a larger agency for sloppy protocol. The whistleblower then said the data wasn't wrong, it just didn't follow protocol.

For 'sloppy protocol' in which reliable buoy data was adjusted upward using ship data known to measure warmer than reality, in which data was collated using a beta program known to still have bugs, in which a lot of the original data was conveniently 'lost' so that it can no longer be analyzed by an outside agency.

Compared to the number of all the terrorists from other non-banned countries, yes it does.

Well then clearly the EO is not too extensive but rather is not extensive enough.

Meanwhile it's being reported that of the 27 terrorist attacks that took the lives that have happened in America since 9/11, 20 of them were by White Christian Nationalists.

Sure yeah, I bet someone is reporting that. The Onion, maybe, or the Weekly World News.

Flynn's call did much more than tell them to keep patient. He revealed that the Obama Administration was going to expel Russian embassy members and hand down sanctions THE NEXT DAY. He warned them. How do you not get that that is illegal. He also maybe lied to the FBI when they asked him about it after he became director of the NSA which is also a felony.

No, the articles you've been linking said that looking at the transcript, he did not do anything of the kind. He only said to wait for Trump. This was not illegal at all as the incoming administration often does these things as part of the transition. The Logan act has nothing to do with it as Flynn was about to become NSA and so did have authority to talk about future policy. Really, he had more authority than Obama did when Obama got caught on that hot mic promising he would have more room for negotiation after he won the election. He hadn't even won at that point.

A more important issue is why Flynn got fired at all. Logically, Trump should have backed him up, so why didn't he? Flynn certainly lied to Pence, making him look rather foolish, but is that really firing offense? Of the several theories I've seen, because no one knows why he was fired, the most likely seem to be that either Trump decided that Flynn just couldn't work well enough with the rest of his team and fired him, or Flynn did something else entirely that Trump found to be worthy of firing. Either way, there does need to be an investigation, even if the whole truth only comes out in the Senate.

[Claeyt]

The articles are all about the EXACT SAME collection of scientific data. They are about how the director of one agency rightly called out the director of a larger agency for sloppy protocol. The whistleblower then said the data wasn't wrong, it just didn't follow protocol.

For 'sloppy protocol' in which reliable buoy data was adjusted upward using ship data known to measure warmer than reality, in which data was collated using a beta program known to still have bugs, in which a lot of the original data was conveniently 'lost' so that it can no longer be analyzed by an outside agency.

This is all old numbers and data anyways. The whistleblower said the numbers though collected through sloppy protocol are real. We can go around and around with this but we're arguing about old numbers.

Compared to the number of all the terrorists from other non-banned countries, yes it does.

Well then clearly the EO is not too extensive but rather is not extensive enough.

Well then we might as well just have congress declare war on Islam and create a crusading force to take the oil.

Flynn's call did much more than tell them to keep patient. He revealed that the Obama Administration was going to expel Russian embassy members and hand down sanctions THE NEXT DAY. He warned them. How do you not get that that is illegal. He also maybe lied to the FBI when they asked him about it after he became director of the NSA which is also a felony.

No, the articles you've been linking said that looking at the transcript, he did not do anything of the kind. He only said to wait for Trump. This was not illegal at all as the incoming administration often does these things as part of the transition. The Logan act has nothing to do with it as Flynn was about to become NSA and so did have authority to talk about future policy. Really, he had more authority than Obama did when Obama got caught on that hot mic promising he would have more room for negotiation after he won the election. He hadn't even won at that point.

Nobody has seen the transcript, they just mentioned that he talked about the incoming sanctions. We're past the Logan act at this point, especially if they coordinated the DNC hacking in any way.

A more important issue is why Flynn got fired at all. Logically, Trump should have backed him up, so why didn't he? Flynn certainly lied to Pence, making him look rather foolish, but is that really firing offense? Of the several theories I've seen, because no one knows why he was fired, the most likely seem to be that either Trump decided that Flynn just couldn't work well enough with the rest of his team and fired him, or Flynn did something else entirely that Trump found to be worthy of firing. Either way, there does need to be an investigation, even if the whole truth only comes out in the Senate.

You're ignoring the reported contacts during the election so this also means that possibilities exists such as Flynn got caught acting as Trump's go between with the Russians, or Flynn and others in the administration and campaign were working with the Russians to use the hacked information and Trump fired Flynn to try and stop it from spreading.

Either way we need a non-partisan congressional investigation to look into it. The Dem's are calling for a Republican like Colin Powell or Sandra Day O'Conner to lead it. Hopefully Congressional Republicans stop protecting him and hiding his illegal actions.

[Dallane]

Notice as the shariablue clay picks and chooses what he replies to as to not break his precious narrative.

[Claeyt]

BAM

BREAKING

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 389f8821da

FLYNN ***** LIED TO THE FBI. HE DENIED TALKING ABOUT THE INCOMING SANCTIONS TO THE RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR WHILE BEING INTERVIEWED BY THE FBI.

FELONY. LOCK HIM UP. DONE. HEAD SHOT.

Flynn was interviewed by the FBI 5 days after Trump's inauguration within the ongoing FBI counter intelligence investigation concerning Russian hacking of our election. He lied to them. This is a felony. Did Flynn call the Russian Ambassador on Trump's orders? How long was Flynn in contact with the Russians?

Meanwhile:

Trump's absolutely bizarre 77 min press conference which ended 15 min before the Flynn bombshell is a study in psychological disorder. Trump rambles on about Fake news and the election and is called out on he fake numbers and misinformation live on TV. Trump refuses to deny his campaign had contact with Russia or that Flynn did anything bad except lie to Pence.

Fox News's response to Trump's refusal to answer about his campaign's contacts with Russian Intelligence for Tmeow's sensitive biased ears:

Shep Smith calls him Crazy. Fox news just called Trump insane and a liar on live TV.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... out-russia

Full Press Conference which CNN called "unhinged" and "an amazing moment in American History". A Republican Senator live tweeted while watching the press conference, "Trump should see a therapist instead of trying to work through his problems live on TV."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/us/p ... .html?_r=0

drip...

drip..

drip.