BREAKING NEWS...BREAKING NEWS...a campaign member says yes to meeting

[depotoo]

Yes, they have.

Question: Does America try to influence foreign elections? If so, sould this come to an end?

 

[JoeMoma]

The problem isn't that anyone met with foreign officials. The problem comes in meeting with foreign officials and doing so for the express purpose of receiving opposition-impairing political resources and information. Doing that is tantamount to giving one's benediction to the foreign actor's inserting themselves into what is not their nation's political process.

One should not be surprised that foreign powers and agents attempt to exert whatever influence they can in another nation's political process, but one must not endorse their doing so by, as a candidate for office, by both accepting and/or allowing to be deployed direct political aid (physical resources or information) they may offer to advance one's campaign goal(s) and diminish those of one's opponents.

After all, in what country's interest is a foreign national going to make "dirt" available? Unless the individual is a defector or traitor, it's certainly not their own country.

Now tell us how the DNC were heavily involved with funding the fake 'dossier' against Trump.
If the shoe had been on the other foot do you seriously believe Hillary and the DNC wouldn't have happily attended ANY meeting if there was any chance to dig up dirt on Trump?
Ya ******* right!
When that little *** BONOBO looked into the camera and claimed he was the President and Trump would never be and then he dropped his cellphone ALL bets were off as far as having any respect for him.
The DNC got what they richly deserved.
Now they are nothing more than crybabies.

I would be surprised if HRC didn't have many contacts/meetings with foreigners for the purposes of opposition research.

 

[JoeMoma]

Yes, they have.

Question: Does America try to influence foreign elections? If so, sould this come to an end?

Of course, and most everyone knows. Should America stop this practice of trying to influence foreign elections?

 

[usmbguest5318]

The problem isn't that anyone met with foreign officials. The problem comes in meeting with foreign officials and doing so for the express purpose of receiving opposition-impairing political resources and information. Doing that is tantamount to giving one's benediction to the foreign actor's inserting themselves into what is not their nation's political process.

One should not be surprised that foreign powers and agents attempt to exert whatever influence they can in another nation's political process, but one must not endorse their doing so by, as a candidate for office, by both accepting and/or allowing to be deployed direct political aid (physical resources or information) they may offer to advance one's campaign goal(s) and diminish those of one's opponents.

After all, in what country's interest is a foreign national going to make "dirt" available? Unless the individual is a defector or traitor, it's certainly not their own country.

To win a presidential campaign a candidate has to play hardball. Like it or not the winner of the campaign is going to be the one that slings the mudd the most effectively. People say they don't like the mudd slinging, but the best mudd slinger usually wins. That being said, all legal ways of obtaining the mudd is fair game. Since foreign policy is a major part of a presidential campaign, ignoring useful information because it's from a foreign source is a good way to spell "looser".

BREAKING NEWS...BREAKING NEWS...a campaign member says yes to meeting

Circular reasoning?

How so? What do you see me as having written that follows the form

X is true because of Y.
Y is true because of X.​

I'm not saying you're mistaken, for that thought crossed my mind as I wrote the post. I determined that it was not, but I may be mistaken.

In this thread, you posted a link to this thread. So I asked the question "circular reasoning"? I really don't know what you were trying to accomplish by doing that!

Oh. Part of content in the linked post contains my response to your comments.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The problem isn't that anyone met with foreign officials. The problem comes in meeting with foreign officials and doing so for the express purpose of receiving opposition-impairing political resources and information. Doing that is tantamount to giving one's benediction to the foreign actor's inserting themselves into what is not their nation's political process.

One should not be surprised that foreign powers and agents attempt to exert whatever influence they can in another nation's political process, but one must not endorse their doing so by, as a candidate for office, by both accepting and/or allowing to be deployed direct political aid (physical resources or information) they may offer to advance one's campaign goal(s) and diminish those of one's opponents.

After all, in what country's interest is a foreign national going to make "dirt" available? Unless the individual is a defector or traitor, it's certainly not their own country.

Now tell us how the DNC were heavily involved with funding the fake 'dossier' against Trump.
If the shoe had been on the other foot do you seriously believe Hillary and the DNC wouldn't have happily attended ANY meeting if there was any chance to dig up dirt on Trump?
Ya ******* right!
When that little *** BONOBO looked into the camera and claimed he was the President and Trump would never be and then he dropped his cellphone ALL bets were off as far as having any respect for him.
The DNC got what they richly deserved.
Now they are nothing more than crybabies.

I would be surprised if HRC didn't have many contacts/meetings with foreigners for the purposes of opposition research.

Again, I refer to the remarks of the "circular" link.

 

[JBond]

Oh....and Obama's campaign manager met with Iranian leaders in 2008....

Obama personally campaigned for a vicious brutal war lord called Odinga. Family friend.

 

[JoeMoma]

To win a presidential campaign a candidate has to play hardball. Like it or not the winner of the campaign is going to be the one that slings the mudd the most effectively. People say they don't like the mudd slinging, but the best mudd slinger usually wins. That being said, all legal ways of obtaining the mudd is fair game. Since foreign policy is a major part of a presidential campaign, ignoring useful information because it's from a foreign source is a good way to spell "looser".

BREAKING NEWS...BREAKING NEWS...a campaign member says yes to meeting

Circular reasoning?

How so? What do you see me as having written that follows the form

X is true because of Y.
Y is true because of X.​

I'm not saying you're mistaken, for that thought crossed my mind as I wrote the post. I determined that it was not, but I may be mistaken.

In this thread, you posted a link to this thread. So I asked the question "circular reasoning"? I really don't know what you were trying to accomplish by doing that!

Oh. Part of content in the linked post contains my response to your comments.

And that post was the one I was responding to, thus we are back to "Circular Reasoning". Since that post had already been "entered into evidenc

The problem isn't that anyone met with foreign officials. The problem comes in meeting with foreign officials and doing so for the express purpose of receiving opposition-impairing political resources and information. Doing that is tantamount to giving one's benediction to the foreign actor's inserting themselves into what is not their nation's political process.

One should not be surprised that foreign powers and agents attempt to exert whatever influence they can in another nation's political process, but one must not endorse their doing so by, as a candidate for office, by both accepting and/or allowing to be deployed direct political aid (physical resources or information) they may offer to advance one's campaign goal(s) and diminish those of one's opponents.

After all, in what country's interest is a foreign national going to make "dirt" available? Unless the individual is a defector or traitor, it's certainly not their own country.

Now tell us how the DNC were heavily involved with funding the fake 'dossier' against Trump.
If the shoe had been on the other foot do you seriously believe Hillary and the DNC wouldn't have happily attended ANY meeting if there was any chance to dig up dirt on Trump?
Ya ******* right!
When that little *** BONOBO looked into the camera and claimed he was the President and Trump would never be and then he dropped his cellphone ALL bets were off as far as having any respect for him.
The DNC got what they richly deserved.
Now they are nothing more than crybabies.

I would be surprised if HRC didn't have many contacts/meetings with foreigners for the purposes of opposition research.

Again, I refer to the remarks of the "circular" link.

So you disagree with this practice which all major presidential campaigns have been legally doing over many different election cycles! Your disagreement with this practice is noted

 

[usmbguest5318]

BREAKING NEWS...BREAKING NEWS...a campaign member says yes to meeting

Circular reasoning?

How so? What do you see me as having written that follows the form

X is true because of Y.
Y is true because of X.​

I'm not saying you're mistaken, for that thought crossed my mind as I wrote the post. I determined that it was not, but I may be mistaken.

In this thread, you posted a link to this thread. So I asked the question "circular reasoning"? I really don't know what you were trying to accomplish by doing that!

Oh. Part of content in the linked post contains my response to your comments.

And that post was the one I was responding to, thus we are back to "Circular Reasoning". Since that post had already been "entered into evidenc

The problem isn't that anyone met with foreign officials. The problem comes in meeting with foreign officials and doing so for the express purpose of receiving opposition-impairing political resources and information. Doing that is tantamount to giving one's benediction to the foreign actor's inserting themselves into what is not their nation's political process.

One should not be surprised that foreign powers and agents attempt to exert whatever influence they can in another nation's political process, but one must not endorse their doing so by, as a candidate for office, by both accepting and/or allowing to be deployed direct political aid (physical resources or information) they may offer to advance one's campaign goal(s) and diminish those of one's opponents.

After all, in what country's interest is a foreign national going to make "dirt" available? Unless the individual is a defector or traitor, it's certainly not their own country.

Now tell us how the DNC were heavily involved with funding the fake 'dossier' against Trump.
If the shoe had been on the other foot do you seriously believe Hillary and the DNC wouldn't have happily attended ANY meeting if there was any chance to dig up dirt on Trump?
Ya ******* right!
When that little *** BONOBO looked into the camera and claimed he was the President and Trump would never be and then he dropped his cellphone ALL bets were off as far as having any respect for him.
The DNC got what they richly deserved.
Now they are nothing more than crybabies.

I would be surprised if HRC didn't have many contacts/meetings with foreigners for the purposes of opposition research.

Again, I refer to the remarks of the "circular" link.

So you disagree with this practice which all major presidential campaigns have been legally doing over many different election cycles! Your disagreement with this practice is noted

Okay.

I take exception with what a candidate may discuss and how they handle the matter after having had the discussion. That they merely speak with foreign actors does not disconcert me.

 

[depotoo]

Depends.

Yes, they have.

Question: Does America try to influence foreign elections? If so, sould this come to an end?

Of course, and most everyone knows. Should America stop this practice of trying to influence foreign elections?