During Meeting With Putin Trump Surrenders Humiliating Himself And The Country

[tycho1572]

Putin looked scared of Trump. lol

After shooting down a Syrian jet, and bombing the airfield, he knows Trump isn't the pussy obama was.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

This Is What A Surrender Monkey Looks Like

After the Russians pwned Donald Trump once again, in public, and basically laid claim to the US while Trump rolled over and played dead, Morgan Finkelstein, the Press Secretary for the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, said that Trump just surrendered to Russia on election interference.

“Trump just unilaterally surrendered to Russia on election interference,” Finkelstein said in a memo send to PoliticusUSA, in which Finkelstein likened the meeting between the two leaders to a “good first Tinder date.”

“After a bilateral meeting that sounded like a good first Tinder date, based on the official readout, Trump is rewarding Putin’s egregious behavior by giving Putin the platform he so desperately craves without getting anything in return. Trump is unilaterally surrendering American sovereignty and the right to fair elections free of foreign interference.”

They highlighted this from the readout of the meeting (which, by the way, was just sent to PoliticusUSA, after the off-camera briefing and delayed audio demand by the Trump administration), in which Tillerson told the press that the President focused on moving forward since “it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now. And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward.”

Q: “On the US election, could you spell out any consequences the Russians will face?”

Tillerson: “The president took note of actions that have been discussed by the Congress, most recently additional sanctions that have been voted out of the Senate to make it clear as to the seriousness of the issue. But I think what the two presidents – I think rightly – focused on is how do we move forward, how do we move forward from here? Because it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now.

And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward. Not dismissing the issue in any way, and I don’t want to leave you with that impression. And that is why we agreed to continue engagement and discussion around how do we secure a commitment that the Russian government has no intention of and will not interfere in our affairs in the future, nor the affairs of others.

And how do we create a framework in which we have some capability to judge what is happening in the cyber world and who to hold accountable. And this is obviously an issue that’s broader than just U.S.-Russia, but we certainly see the manifestations of that in the events of last year. Again, I think the president is rightly focused on how do we move forward from what may be simply an intractable disagreement at this point.”

Note the question was what consequences will Russia face, and the answer is basically none unless Congress does it.

Sure, that might seem plausible, until we recall that President Obama left behind a good start on a time bomb Trump could deploy if he wished. Trump does not wish, it seems.

“It makes you wonder: what does Putin have on Trump that could make Trump act like a supplicant on the international stage? How deep in trouble is Trump that he couldn’t even perform the most basic task – asking Putin not to interfere in our elections?” Finkelstein asked, adding, “Trump’s unwillingness to put up a fight speaks volumes about what could be in Putin’s arsenal against him.”

The darkness surrounding the Trump administration’s trickle of information should be contrasted with the Russian foreign minister who talked on live TV about the meeting between the two leaders, claiming that Trump accepted Putin’s assertion that Moscow was not involved in the hacking of the 2016 election.

The Trump administration both forced the briefing to be off camera and put a delayed audio demand on the briefing. This is not normal. As I wrote earlier, this is called rolling over.

Finkelstein made a good point asking why, exactly, Trump would be willing to be humiliated like this on the international stage.

After "Good Tinder Date" with Putin, Trump "Unilaterally Surrendered" to Russia

you haters will say anything just because you hate

Yep.

I despise the right shitting on their own country, always attacking the constitution, agreeing trump when he does.

I hate that you're in favor of fascism now, openly saying it, defending Putin's attacks on the US and now, trump saying that the US owes Russia an explanation, apology.

Agent Orange is a traitor. So is anyone who agrees that we should do what Putin wants.

WTF is wrong with RWs?


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[jon_berzerk]

This Is What A Surrender Monkey Looks Like

After the Russians pwned Donald Trump once again, in public, and basically laid claim to the US while Trump rolled over and played dead, Morgan Finkelstein, the Press Secretary for the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, said that Trump just surrendered to Russia on election interference.

“Trump just unilaterally surrendered to Russia on election interference,” Finkelstein said in a memo send to PoliticusUSA, in which Finkelstein likened the meeting between the two leaders to a “good first Tinder date.”

“After a bilateral meeting that sounded like a good first Tinder date, based on the official readout, Trump is rewarding Putin’s egregious behavior by giving Putin the platform he so desperately craves without getting anything in return. Trump is unilaterally surrendering American sovereignty and the right to fair elections free of foreign interference.”

They highlighted this from the readout of the meeting (which, by the way, was just sent to PoliticusUSA, after the off-camera briefing and delayed audio demand by the Trump administration), in which Tillerson told the press that the President focused on moving forward since “it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now. And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward.”

Q: “On the US election, could you spell out any consequences the Russians will face?”

Tillerson: “The president took note of actions that have been discussed by the Congress, most recently additional sanctions that have been voted out of the Senate to make it clear as to the seriousness of the issue. But I think what the two presidents – I think rightly – focused on is how do we move forward, how do we move forward from here? Because it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now.

And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward. Not dismissing the issue in any way, and I don’t want to leave you with that impression. And that is why we agreed to continue engagement and discussion around how do we secure a commitment that the Russian government has no intention of and will not interfere in our affairs in the future, nor the affairs of others.

And how do we create a framework in which we have some capability to judge what is happening in the cyber world and who to hold accountable. And this is obviously an issue that’s broader than just U.S.-Russia, but we certainly see the manifestations of that in the events of last year. Again, I think the president is rightly focused on how do we move forward from what may be simply an intractable disagreement at this point.”

Note the question was what consequences will Russia face, and the answer is basically none unless Congress does it.

Sure, that might seem plausible, until we recall that President Obama left behind a good start on a time bomb Trump could deploy if he wished. Trump does not wish, it seems.

“It makes you wonder: what does Putin have on Trump that could make Trump act like a supplicant on the international stage? How deep in trouble is Trump that he couldn’t even perform the most basic task – asking Putin not to interfere in our elections?” Finkelstein asked, adding, “Trump’s unwillingness to put up a fight speaks volumes about what could be in Putin’s arsenal against him.”

The darkness surrounding the Trump administration’s trickle of information should be contrasted with the Russian foreign minister who talked on live TV about the meeting between the two leaders, claiming that Trump accepted Putin’s assertion that Moscow was not involved in the hacking of the 2016 election.

The Trump administration both forced the briefing to be off camera and put a delayed audio demand on the briefing. This is not normal. As I wrote earlier, this is called rolling over.

Finkelstein made a good point asking why, exactly, Trump would be willing to be humiliated like this on the international stage.

After "Good Tinder Date" with Putin, Trump "Unilaterally Surrendered" to Russia

you haters will say anything just because you hate

Yep.

I despise the right shitting on their own country, always attacking the constitution, agreeing trump when he does.

I hate that you're in favor of fascism now, openly saying it, defending Putin's attacks on the US and now, trump saying that the US owes Russia an explanation, apology.

Agent Orange is a traitor. So is anyone who agrees that we should do what Putin wants.

WTF is wrong with RWs?


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

no he is not

you are simply a hater

which is eating you alive

 

[Cellblock2429]

This Is What A Surrender Monkey Looks Like

After the Russians pwned Donald Trump once again, in public, and basically laid claim to the US while Trump rolled over and played dead, Morgan Finkelstein, the Press Secretary for the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, said that Trump just surrendered to Russia on election interference.

“Trump just unilaterally surrendered to Russia on election interference,” Finkelstein said in a memo send to PoliticusUSA, in which Finkelstein likened the meeting between the two leaders to a “good first Tinder date.”

“After a bilateral meeting that sounded like a good first Tinder date, based on the official readout, Trump is rewarding Putin’s egregious behavior by giving Putin the platform he so desperately craves without getting anything in return. Trump is unilaterally surrendering American sovereignty and the right to fair elections free of foreign interference.”

They highlighted this from the readout of the meeting (which, by the way, was just sent to PoliticusUSA, after the off-camera briefing and delayed audio demand by the Trump administration), in which Tillerson told the press that the President focused on moving forward since “it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now. And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward.”

Q: “On the US election, could you spell out any consequences the Russians will face?”

Tillerson: “The president took note of actions that have been discussed by the Congress, most recently additional sanctions that have been voted out of the Senate to make it clear as to the seriousness of the issue. But I think what the two presidents – I think rightly – focused on is how do we move forward, how do we move forward from here? Because it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now.

And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward. Not dismissing the issue in any way, and I don’t want to leave you with that impression. And that is why we agreed to continue engagement and discussion around how do we secure a commitment that the Russian government has no intention of and will not interfere in our affairs in the future, nor the affairs of others.

And how do we create a framework in which we have some capability to judge what is happening in the cyber world and who to hold accountable. And this is obviously an issue that’s broader than just U.S.-Russia, but we certainly see the manifestations of that in the events of last year. Again, I think the president is rightly focused on how do we move forward from what may be simply an intractable disagreement at this point.”

Note the question was what consequences will Russia face, and the answer is basically none unless Congress does it.

Sure, that might seem plausible, until we recall that President Obama left behind a good start on a time bomb Trump could deploy if he wished. Trump does not wish, it seems.

“It makes you wonder: what does Putin have on Trump that could make Trump act like a supplicant on the international stage? How deep in trouble is Trump that he couldn’t even perform the most basic task – asking Putin not to interfere in our elections?” Finkelstein asked, adding, “Trump’s unwillingness to put up a fight speaks volumes about what could be in Putin’s arsenal against him.”

The darkness surrounding the Trump administration’s trickle of information should be contrasted with the Russian foreign minister who talked on live TV about the meeting between the two leaders, claiming that Trump accepted Putin’s assertion that Moscow was not involved in the hacking of the 2016 election.

The Trump administration both forced the briefing to be off camera and put a delayed audio demand on the briefing. This is not normal. As I wrote earlier, this is called rolling over.

Finkelstein made a good point asking why, exactly, Trump would be willing to be humiliated like this on the international stage.

After "Good Tinder Date" with Putin, Trump "Unilaterally Surrendered" to Russia

/---- You are delusional. Go ask mommy for a fig newton


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Auld Phart]

This Is What A Surrender Monkey Looks Like

After the Russians pwned Donald Trump once again, in public, and basically laid claim to the US while Trump rolled over and played dead, Morgan Finkelstein, the Press Secretary for the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, said that Trump just surrendered to Russia on election interference.

“Trump just unilaterally surrendered to Russia on election interference,” Finkelstein said in a memo send to PoliticusUSA, in which Finkelstein likened the meeting between the two leaders to a “good first Tinder date.”

“After a bilateral meeting that sounded like a good first Tinder date, based on the official readout, Trump is rewarding Putin’s egregious behavior by giving Putin the platform he so desperately craves without getting anything in return. Trump is unilaterally surrendering American sovereignty and the right to fair elections free of foreign interference.”

They highlighted this from the readout of the meeting (which, by the way, was just sent to PoliticusUSA, after the off-camera briefing and delayed audio demand by the Trump administration), in which Tillerson told the press that the President focused on moving forward since “it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now. And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward.”

Q: “On the US election, could you spell out any consequences the Russians will face?”

Tillerson: “The president took note of actions that have been discussed by the Congress, most recently additional sanctions that have been voted out of the Senate to make it clear as to the seriousness of the issue. But I think what the two presidents – I think rightly – focused on is how do we move forward, how do we move forward from here? Because it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now.

And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward. Not dismissing the issue in any way, and I don’t want to leave you with that impression. And that is why we agreed to continue engagement and discussion around how do we secure a commitment that the Russian government has no intention of and will not interfere in our affairs in the future, nor the affairs of others.

And how do we create a framework in which we have some capability to judge what is happening in the cyber world and who to hold accountable. And this is obviously an issue that’s broader than just U.S.-Russia, but we certainly see the manifestations of that in the events of last year. Again, I think the president is rightly focused on how do we move forward from what may be simply an intractable disagreement at this point.”

Note the question was what consequences will Russia face, and the answer is basically none unless Congress does it.

Sure, that might seem plausible, until we recall that President Obama left behind a good start on a time bomb Trump could deploy if he wished. Trump does not wish, it seems.

“It makes you wonder: what does Putin have on Trump that could make Trump act like a supplicant on the international stage? How deep in trouble is Trump that he couldn’t even perform the most basic task – asking Putin not to interfere in our elections?” Finkelstein asked, adding, “Trump’s unwillingness to put up a fight speaks volumes about what could be in Putin’s arsenal against him.”

The darkness surrounding the Trump administration’s trickle of information should be contrasted with the Russian foreign minister who talked on live TV about the meeting between the two leaders, claiming that Trump accepted Putin’s assertion that Moscow was not involved in the hacking of the 2016 election.

The Trump administration both forced the briefing to be off camera and put a delayed audio demand on the briefing. This is not normal. As I wrote earlier, this is called rolling over.

Finkelstein made a good point asking why, exactly, Trump would be willing to be humiliated like this on the international stage.

After "Good Tinder Date" with Putin, Trump "Unilaterally Surrendered" to Russia

you haters will say anything just because you hate

Yep.

I despise the right shitting on their own country, always attacking the constitution, agreeing trump when he does.

I hate that you're in favor of fascism now, openly saying it, defending Putin's attacks on the US and now, trump saying that the US owes Russia an explanation, apology.

Agent Orange is a traitor. So is anyone who agrees that we should do what Putin wants.

WTF is wrong with RWs?


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

trump saying that the US owes Russia an explanation, apology

Link?

 

[miketx]

This Is What A Surrender Monkey Looks Like

After the Russians pwned Donald Trump once again, in public, and basically laid claim to the US while Trump rolled over and played dead, Morgan Finkelstein, the Press Secretary for the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, said that Trump just surrendered to Russia on election interference.

“Trump just unilaterally surrendered to Russia on election interference,” Finkelstein said in a memo send to PoliticusUSA, in which Finkelstein likened the meeting between the two leaders to a “good first Tinder date.”

“After a bilateral meeting that sounded like a good first Tinder date, based on the official readout, Trump is rewarding Putin’s egregious behavior by giving Putin the platform he so desperately craves without getting anything in return. Trump is unilaterally surrendering American sovereignty and the right to fair elections free of foreign interference.”

They highlighted this from the readout of the meeting (which, by the way, was just sent to PoliticusUSA, after the off-camera briefing and delayed audio demand by the Trump administration), in which Tillerson told the press that the President focused on moving forward since “it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now. And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward.”

Q: “On the US election, could you spell out any consequences the Russians will face?”

Tillerson: “The president took note of actions that have been discussed by the Congress, most recently additional sanctions that have been voted out of the Senate to make it clear as to the seriousness of the issue. But I think what the two presidents – I think rightly – focused on is how do we move forward, how do we move forward from here? Because it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now.

And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward. Not dismissing the issue in any way, and I don’t want to leave you with that impression. And that is why we agreed to continue engagement and discussion around how do we secure a commitment that the Russian government has no intention of and will not interfere in our affairs in the future, nor the affairs of others.

And how do we create a framework in which we have some capability to judge what is happening in the cyber world and who to hold accountable. And this is obviously an issue that’s broader than just U.S.-Russia, but we certainly see the manifestations of that in the events of last year. Again, I think the president is rightly focused on how do we move forward from what may be simply an intractable disagreement at this point.”

Note the question was what consequences will Russia face, and the answer is basically none unless Congress does it.

Sure, that might seem plausible, until we recall that President Obama left behind a good start on a time bomb Trump could deploy if he wished. Trump does not wish, it seems.

“It makes you wonder: what does Putin have on Trump that could make Trump act like a supplicant on the international stage? How deep in trouble is Trump that he couldn’t even perform the most basic task – asking Putin not to interfere in our elections?” Finkelstein asked, adding, “Trump’s unwillingness to put up a fight speaks volumes about what could be in Putin’s arsenal against him.”

The darkness surrounding the Trump administration’s trickle of information should be contrasted with the Russian foreign minister who talked on live TV about the meeting between the two leaders, claiming that Trump accepted Putin’s assertion that Moscow was not involved in the hacking of the 2016 election.

The Trump administration both forced the briefing to be off camera and put a delayed audio demand on the briefing. This is not normal. As I wrote earlier, this is called rolling over.

Finkelstein made a good point asking why, exactly, Trump would be willing to be humiliated like this on the international stage.

After "Good Tinder Date" with Putin, Trump "Unilaterally Surrendered" to Russia

you haters will say anything just because you hate

Yep.

I despise the right shitting on their own country, always attacking the constitution, agreeing trump when he does.

I hate that you're in favor of fascism now, openly saying it, defending Putin's attacks on the US and now, trump saying that the US owes Russia an explanation, apology.

Agent Orange is a traitor. So is anyone who agrees that we should do what Putin wants.

WTF is wrong with RWs?


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Correll]

1. "Documents" from an international hack? What kind of "documents" do you think is created by someone hacking a network?


2. Wow. Your lack of understanding what Communism is, is noted and laughed at.


3. It is a stated policy goal. It is also a bad idea, and one I strongly hope we do not strongly pursue. My point about not needing another power vacuum to be filled by islamo whack jobs stands.

Uh yeah, how the fuck do you think they keep records? Paintings? Sculptures? They write documents.

Please share evidence that Russia is not Communist.

You are arguing your opinion as fact, when I'm telling you what the fucking policy is. Do you understand how stupid your position is?

1. I think any documents on any alleged russian hacks would be safe in the archives of the Kremlin. If they even exist.


2.Russia - Wikipedia


Government Federal semi-presidentialconstitutional republic[2]


3. I am arguing the reality of the situation. Assad is not the problem, isis is. Regime change will not lead to rainbows and unicorns, or have you learned NOTHING from the last 15 years.

Policy does not trump reality.

YOUR position that it does, and/or that removing assad is a good idea is what if fucking stupid.

WTF are you talking about documents in the Kremlin? It's documents that were created within the intelligence communities of the United States government and viewed by the Intelligence Committee of Congress and the White House. Do you have the clearance to see them? Have you seen them so that you can make this statement that there is no evidence?

Wikipedia is not a credible source. It is written by anyone that has access to edit it. You can believe all you like that it isn't Communist but it is ruled by the Communist Political Party and Putin has said publicly that he likes Communism... so you don't think he doesn't rule it like a Communist country?

Communism gets a big endorsement from a certain world leader

You can argue the ISIS, Assad thing all you fucking want, but it doesn't change the fact that I'm right. Assad is a target of the U.S. government and has said by BOTH White Houses, under Obama and Trump, that the only solution for Syria involves Assad being removed from President.

1. Wow. Documents created by US intelligence officials looking as what? activity logs of hacked systems and guessing about who did what? LOL!!!! Talk about a waste of time. DId you learn NOTHING from Iraq WMDs?


2. Citing Putin saying some nice things about communism is not evidence that Russia is a communist nation.

3. You are citing America policy as though it defines reality. That is irrational. I am arguing my "opinion" of what is reality and I have supported it with several arguments, of which you have been able to challenge NONE.

You amaze me. You a Joe Blow anonymous person a political forum with absolutely no access to the investigation, thinks you know more than basically EVERYONE in the U.S. government that has seen the evidence. This includes the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

The Communist Political Party is the ruling party in Russia, and Putin is quoted as saying he believes in Communism.

American policy isn't reality?

You have lost a screw. Your opinion on all this no matter how much you wanted it to be, doesn't over rule facts.

1. I'm a joe blow who understands that hacking does not leave a paper trail, nor hard physical evidence.

2. What you describe is not a communist state. That you don't know that is hilarious. You obviously have zero clue about what the Cold War was about.

3. American policy is a statement of intent, it is not reality. As I said, Assad is not the problem, ISIS is. If American Policy is to depose Assad on the hope that his replacement will be some slightly browner version of George FUcking Washington, that is not reality but a dangerous delusion.

4. You are the one confused about the difference between opinion and facts.

 

[Correll]

This Is What A Surrender Monkey Looks Like

After the Russians pwned Donald Trump once again, in public, and basically laid claim to the US while Trump rolled over and played dead, Morgan Finkelstein, the Press Secretary for the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, said that Trump just surrendered to Russia on election interference.

“Trump just unilaterally surrendered to Russia on election interference,” Finkelstein said in a memo send to PoliticusUSA, in which Finkelstein likened the meeting between the two leaders to a “good first Tinder date.”

“After a bilateral meeting that sounded like a good first Tinder date, based on the official readout, Trump is rewarding Putin’s egregious behavior by giving Putin the platform he so desperately craves without getting anything in return. Trump is unilaterally surrendering American sovereignty and the right to fair elections free of foreign interference.”

They highlighted this from the readout of the meeting (which, by the way, was just sent to PoliticusUSA, after the off-camera briefing and delayed audio demand by the Trump administration), in which Tillerson told the press that the President focused on moving forward since “it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now. And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward.”

Q: “On the US election, could you spell out any consequences the Russians will face?”

Tillerson: “The president took note of actions that have been discussed by the Congress, most recently additional sanctions that have been voted out of the Senate to make it clear as to the seriousness of the issue. But I think what the two presidents – I think rightly – focused on is how do we move forward, how do we move forward from here? Because it’s not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed upon resolution of that question between the two nations so the question is what do we do now.

And I think the relationship – and the president made this clear as well – is too important and it’s too important to not find a way to move forward. Not dismissing the issue in any way, and I don’t want to leave you with that impression. And that is why we agreed to continue engagement and discussion around how do we secure a commitment that the Russian government has no intention of and will not interfere in our affairs in the future, nor the affairs of others.

And how do we create a framework in which we have some capability to judge what is happening in the cyber world and who to hold accountable. And this is obviously an issue that’s broader than just U.S.-Russia, but we certainly see the manifestations of that in the events of last year. Again, I think the president is rightly focused on how do we move forward from what may be simply an intractable disagreement at this point.”

Note the question was what consequences will Russia face, and the answer is basically none unless Congress does it.

Sure, that might seem plausible, until we recall that President Obama left behind a good start on a time bomb Trump could deploy if he wished. Trump does not wish, it seems.

“It makes you wonder: what does Putin have on Trump that could make Trump act like a supplicant on the international stage? How deep in trouble is Trump that he couldn’t even perform the most basic task – asking Putin not to interfere in our elections?” Finkelstein asked, adding, “Trump’s unwillingness to put up a fight speaks volumes about what could be in Putin’s arsenal against him.”

The darkness surrounding the Trump administration’s trickle of information should be contrasted with the Russian foreign minister who talked on live TV about the meeting between the two leaders, claiming that Trump accepted Putin’s assertion that Moscow was not involved in the hacking of the 2016 election.

The Trump administration both forced the briefing to be off camera and put a delayed audio demand on the briefing. This is not normal. As I wrote earlier, this is called rolling over.

Finkelstein made a good point asking why, exactly, Trump would be willing to be humiliated like this on the international stage.

After "Good Tinder Date" with Putin, Trump "Unilaterally Surrendered" to Russia

you haters will say anything just because you hate

Yep.

I despise the right shitting on their own country, always attacking the constitution, agreeing trump when he does.

I hate that you're in favor of fascism now, openly saying it, defending Putin's attacks on the US and now, trump saying that the US owes Russia an explanation, apology.

Agent Orange is a traitor. So is anyone who agrees that we should do what Putin wants.

WTF is wrong with RWs?


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Lewdog]

Uh yeah, how the fuck do you think they keep records? Paintings? Sculptures? They write documents.

Please share evidence that Russia is not Communist.

You are arguing your opinion as fact, when I'm telling you what the fucking policy is. Do you understand how stupid your position is?

1. I think any documents on any alleged russian hacks would be safe in the archives of the Kremlin. If they even exist.


2.Russia - Wikipedia


Government Federal semi-presidentialconstitutional republic[2]


3. I am arguing the reality of the situation. Assad is not the problem, isis is. Regime change will not lead to rainbows and unicorns, or have you learned NOTHING from the last 15 years.

Policy does not trump reality.

YOUR position that it does, and/or that removing assad is a good idea is what if fucking stupid.

WTF are you talking about documents in the Kremlin? It's documents that were created within the intelligence communities of the United States government and viewed by the Intelligence Committee of Congress and the White House. Do you have the clearance to see them? Have you seen them so that you can make this statement that there is no evidence?

Wikipedia is not a credible source. It is written by anyone that has access to edit it. You can believe all you like that it isn't Communist but it is ruled by the Communist Political Party and Putin has said publicly that he likes Communism... so you don't think he doesn't rule it like a Communist country?

Communism gets a big endorsement from a certain world leader

You can argue the ISIS, Assad thing all you fucking want, but it doesn't change the fact that I'm right. Assad is a target of the U.S. government and has said by BOTH White Houses, under Obama and Trump, that the only solution for Syria involves Assad being removed from President.

1. Wow. Documents created by US intelligence officials looking as what? activity logs of hacked systems and guessing about who did what? LOL!!!! Talk about a waste of time. DId you learn NOTHING from Iraq WMDs?


2. Citing Putin saying some nice things about communism is not evidence that Russia is a communist nation.

3. You are citing America policy as though it defines reality. That is irrational. I am arguing my "opinion" of what is reality and I have supported it with several arguments, of which you have been able to challenge NONE.

You amaze me. You a Joe Blow anonymous person a political forum with absolutely no access to the investigation, thinks you know more than basically EVERYONE in the U.S. government that has seen the evidence. This includes the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

The Communist Political Party is the ruling party in Russia, and Putin is quoted as saying he believes in Communism.

American policy isn't reality?

You have lost a screw. Your opinion on all this no matter how much you wanted it to be, doesn't over rule facts.

1. I'm a joe blow who understands that hacking does not leave a paper trail, nor hard physical evidence.

2. What you describe is not a communist state. That you don't know that is hilarious. You obviously have zero clue about what the Cold War was about.

3. American policy is a statement of intent, it is not reality. As I said, Assad is not the problem, ISIS is. If American Policy is to depose Assad on the hope that his replacement will be some slightly browner version of George FUcking Washington, that is not reality but a dangerous delusion.

4. You are the one confused about the difference between opinion and facts.

You have presented zero facts and only opinions. You have even contradicted yourself several times here.

"Hacking the DNC and spreading facts about Clinton is ok by the Russians... but the Russians didn't hack anyone and there is no evidence."

Do you even realize what you are saying?

You disagree with U.S. policy. I get it, but it is their policy and that is fact. Get over it and accept it.

 

[Correll]

1. I think any documents on any alleged russian hacks would be safe in the archives of the Kremlin. If they even exist.


2.Russia - Wikipedia


Government Federal semi-presidentialconstitutional republic[2]


3. I am arguing the reality of the situation. Assad is not the problem, isis is. Regime change will not lead to rainbows and unicorns, or have you learned NOTHING from the last 15 years.

Policy does not trump reality.

YOUR position that it does, and/or that removing assad is a good idea is what if fucking stupid.

WTF are you talking about documents in the Kremlin? It's documents that were created within the intelligence communities of the United States government and viewed by the Intelligence Committee of Congress and the White House. Do you have the clearance to see them? Have you seen them so that you can make this statement that there is no evidence?

Wikipedia is not a credible source. It is written by anyone that has access to edit it. You can believe all you like that it isn't Communist but it is ruled by the Communist Political Party and Putin has said publicly that he likes Communism... so you don't think he doesn't rule it like a Communist country?

Communism gets a big endorsement from a certain world leader

You can argue the ISIS, Assad thing all you fucking want, but it doesn't change the fact that I'm right. Assad is a target of the U.S. government and has said by BOTH White Houses, under Obama and Trump, that the only solution for Syria involves Assad being removed from President.

1. Wow. Documents created by US intelligence officials looking as what? activity logs of hacked systems and guessing about who did what? LOL!!!! Talk about a waste of time. DId you learn NOTHING from Iraq WMDs?


2. Citing Putin saying some nice things about communism is not evidence that Russia is a communist nation.

3. You are citing America policy as though it defines reality. That is irrational. I am arguing my "opinion" of what is reality and I have supported it with several arguments, of which you have been able to challenge NONE.

You amaze me. You a Joe Blow anonymous person a political forum with absolutely no access to the investigation, thinks you know more than basically EVERYONE in the U.S. government that has seen the evidence. This includes the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

The Communist Political Party is the ruling party in Russia, and Putin is quoted as saying he believes in Communism.

American policy isn't reality?

You have lost a screw. Your opinion on all this no matter how much you wanted it to be, doesn't over rule facts.

1. I'm a joe blow who understands that hacking does not leave a paper trail, nor hard physical evidence.

2. What you describe is not a communist state. That you don't know that is hilarious. You obviously have zero clue about what the Cold War was about.

3. American policy is a statement of intent, it is not reality. As I said, Assad is not the problem, ISIS is. If American Policy is to depose Assad on the hope that his replacement will be some slightly browner version of George FUcking Washington, that is not reality but a dangerous delusion.

4. You are the one confused about the difference between opinion and facts.

You have presented zero facts and only opinions. You have even contradicted yourself several times here.

"Hacking the DNC and spreading facts about Clinton is ok by the Russians... but the Russians didn't hack anyone and there is no evidence."

Do you even realize what you are saying?

You disagree with U.S. policy. I get it, but it is their policy and that is fact. Get over it and accept it.

Nothing you said, really was a response to my points, which thus still stand.



1. I'm a joe blow who understands that hacking does not leave a paper trail, nor hard physical evidence.

2. What you describe is not a communist state. That you don't know that is hilarious. You obviously have zero clue about what the Cold War was about.

3. American policy is a statement of intent, it is not reality. As I said, Assad is not the problem, ISIS is. If American Policy is to depose Assad on the hope that his replacement will be some slightly browner version of George FUcking Washington, that is not reality but a dangerous delusion.

4. You are the one confused about the difference between opinion and facts.

 

[Lewdog]

WTF are you talking about documents in the Kremlin? It's documents that were created within the intelligence communities of the United States government and viewed by the Intelligence Committee of Congress and the White House. Do you have the clearance to see them? Have you seen them so that you can make this statement that there is no evidence?

Wikipedia is not a credible source. It is written by anyone that has access to edit it. You can believe all you like that it isn't Communist but it is ruled by the Communist Political Party and Putin has said publicly that he likes Communism... so you don't think he doesn't rule it like a Communist country?

Communism gets a big endorsement from a certain world leader

You can argue the ISIS, Assad thing all you fucking want, but it doesn't change the fact that I'm right. Assad is a target of the U.S. government and has said by BOTH White Houses, under Obama and Trump, that the only solution for Syria involves Assad being removed from President.

1. Wow. Documents created by US intelligence officials looking as what? activity logs of hacked systems and guessing about who did what? LOL!!!! Talk about a waste of time. DId you learn NOTHING from Iraq WMDs?


2. Citing Putin saying some nice things about communism is not evidence that Russia is a communist nation.

3. You are citing America policy as though it defines reality. That is irrational. I am arguing my "opinion" of what is reality and I have supported it with several arguments, of which you have been able to challenge NONE.

You amaze me. You a Joe Blow anonymous person a political forum with absolutely no access to the investigation, thinks you know more than basically EVERYONE in the U.S. government that has seen the evidence. This includes the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

The Communist Political Party is the ruling party in Russia, and Putin is quoted as saying he believes in Communism.

American policy isn't reality?

You have lost a screw. Your opinion on all this no matter how much you wanted it to be, doesn't over rule facts.

1. I'm a joe blow who understands that hacking does not leave a paper trail, nor hard physical evidence.

2. What you describe is not a communist state. That you don't know that is hilarious. You obviously have zero clue about what the Cold War was about.

3. American policy is a statement of intent, it is not reality. As I said, Assad is not the problem, ISIS is. If American Policy is to depose Assad on the hope that his replacement will be some slightly browner version of George FUcking Washington, that is not reality but a dangerous delusion.

4. You are the one confused about the difference between opinion and facts.

You have presented zero facts and only opinions. You have even contradicted yourself several times here.

"Hacking the DNC and spreading facts about Clinton is ok by the Russians... but the Russians didn't hack anyone and there is no evidence."

Do you even realize what you are saying?

You disagree with U.S. policy. I get it, but it is their policy and that is fact. Get over it and accept it.

Nothing you said, really was a response to my points, which thus still stand.



1. I'm a joe blow who understands that hacking does not leave a paper trail, nor hard physical evidence.

2. What you describe is not a communist state. That you don't know that is hilarious. You obviously have zero clue about what the Cold War was about.

3. American policy is a statement of intent, it is not reality. As I said, Assad is not the problem, ISIS is. If American Policy is to depose Assad on the hope that his replacement will be some slightly browner version of George FUcking Washington, that is not reality but a dangerous delusion.

4. You are the one confused about the difference between opinion and facts.

1. You are dense as fuck. Hacking leaves a digital trail. The intelligence community has to write documents of what they discover. You can't understand this simple thing, so why would anyone in their right mind listen to anything you say after that? The same people that hacked the DNC also hacked several state voting offices and some of the Republicans running against Trump... Seth Rich did not have access to those other places.

2. Russia is ruled by the Communist Political Party and Putin has admitted he is a Communist and likes Communism... he specifically says he was not a Communist out of pressure but because he wanted to be. So Russia is ruled by a Communist Political Party and a President that identifies as Communist. Fact.

3. Assad being removed from power is a requisite of the Trump Presidential Cabinet, just the same as it was under Obama. Fact.

4. You have said zero facts, and you continue to argue your point. Are you a Bassman sock? You two are like peas in a pod argue the same shit over and over even in the face of facts.

 

[Lewdog]

 

[cnelsen]

Trump once again has slapped the faces of the U.S. intelligence community .

That's what we elected him to do. The constitution doesn't say anywhere that the president must do the bidding of rogue factions at the CIA whose first loyalties are to Israel. Why not give the warmongering a break for the next 7 /2 years?

You aren't paying attention. Trump first said he believed Russia didn't hack the DNC or do any hacking on the election. Then last week or so the White House admitted that after seeing the evidence it was clear the Russians did it. Now today Trump tells Putin he believes the Russians weren't responsible.

Will the real Trump lease stand up.

You do realize, of course, that this whole Russia business is complete hogwash, right? A bullshit story made up out of whole cloth? If there were actually a story there, there would be some shred somewhere of evidence.

 

[cnelsen]

Putin owns him hook line and sinker.

Trump is now Putins Governor.

Russia wins.

Good. I'd rather Christian Russia rules us than Jewish Israel. At least Russia never purposely attacked one of our military ships, then strafed the lifeboats. USS Liberty Veterans Association

 

[cnelsen]

Nonsense nonsense and more nonsense. Trump is doing his job, and you America haters cannot stand it. I sense some SEVERE butthurt.

Trump only mentioned how our citizens are concerned about Russian interference in our elections, and made it clear that it wasn't a concern for him. Trump is not doing his job.

Actually, you said precisely why he IS doing his job. He let Putin know that they were two adults in the room ready to talk about adult things but, to keep the squalling children at the Washington Post quiet, he needed to bring it up because the kiddies will throw a tantrum if I don't.

Notice how at the end when the American reporters started shrieking their nonsensical questions out and braying at the two heads of state like shoppers at a clerk in an Orchard St gefilte fish store, the two Russians looked at each other and laughingly rolled their eyes?

Got it. Trump made it clear that he doesn't care about the sanctity of our election process, or how important it is to maintain the sovereignty of our nation. He, and those like you that support him are traitors.

You are a blithering nut case. Russia did not "hack" our election, idiot.

 

[cnelsen]

Trump only mentioned how our citizens are concerned about Russian interference in our elections, and made it clear that it wasn't a concern for him. Trump is not doing his job.

Actually, you said precisely why he IS doing his job. He let Putin know that they were two adults in the room ready to talk about adult things but, to keep the squalling children at the Washington Post quiet, he needed to bring it up because the kiddies will throw a tantrum if I don't.

Notice how at the end when the American reporters started shrieking their nonsensical questions out and braying at the two heads of state like shoppers at a clerk in an Orchard St gefilte fish store, the two Russians looked at each other and laughingly rolled their eyes?

Got it. Trump made it clear that he doesn't care about the sanctity of our election process, or how important it is to maintain the sovereignty of our nation. He, and those like you that support him are traitors.

No, Trump made it clear today he is Putin's bitch.

I think you are mistaking Trump for Obama.

The President of the United States of America takes the word of the Russian president over his own government.

Game over/

Yes, he should, if the president of Russia is telling the truth and rogue Israel-first elements at the CIA are whet you call "our government".

 

[cnelsen]

Nonsense nonsense and more nonsense. Trump is doing his job, and you America haters cannot stand it. I sense some SEVERE butthurt.

Wow, that completely ignored everything in the OP just to say "nonsense" 3 times and complete the thought with "Trump is doing his job"

Apparently his job is showing Putin his belly like a beta dog.

Maybe Russia will stop after Trump kissed his ass. That'll teach 'em!

Typical warmongering bullshit. Tantamount to elementary school children taunting on the playground, What's next? You gonna call him a sissy?

 

[Iceweasel]

You aren't paying attention. Trump first said he believed Russia didn't hack the DNC or do any hacking on the election. Then last week or so the White House admitted that after seeing the evidence it was clear the Russians did it. Now today Trump tells Putin he believes the Russians weren't responsible.

Will the real Trump lease stand up.

What did he say they did, can you be specific? They got into the DNC server?

 

[rightwinger]

Actually, you said precisely why he IS doing his job. He let Putin know that they were two adults in the room ready to talk about adult things but, to keep the squalling children at the Washington Post quiet, he needed to bring it up because the kiddies will throw a tantrum if I don't.

Notice how at the end when the American reporters started shrieking their nonsensical questions out and braying at the two heads of state like shoppers at a clerk in an Orchard St gefilte fish store, the two Russians looked at each other and laughingly rolled their eyes?

Got it. Trump made it clear that he doesn't care about the sanctity of our election process, or how important it is to maintain the sovereignty of our nation. He, and those like you that support him are traitors.

No, Trump made it clear today he is Putin's bitch.

I think you are mistaking Trump for Obama.

The President of the United States of America takes the word of the Russian president over his own government.

Game over/

The Russian President is more credible that the whiny representatives of the Deep State leaking shit to the press.

Game very close to over.

Deep State?

What ever happened to NWO?

 

[Doc1]

Got it. Trump made it clear that he doesn't care about the sanctity of our election process, or how important it is to maintain the sovereignty of our nation. He, and those like you that support him are traitors.

No, Trump made it clear today he is Putin's bitch.

I think you are mistaking Trump for Obama.

The President of the United States of America takes the word of the Russian president over his own government.

Game over/

The Russian President is more credible that the whiny representatives of the Deep State leaking shit to the press.

Game very close to over.

Deep State?

What ever happened to NWO?

If you only had the balls and integrity to actually do some research, unfortunately you have neither so you will remain an ignorant lemming.