Now we learn that our own FBI believed the ample fetid ‘ASSet’ was working for the Russians.
In their last debate, Hillary Clinton nailed the co-conspirator : “It is pretty clear you won’t admit that the Russians have engaged in espionage against the United States of America. That you encouraged espionage against our people. That you are willing to spout the Putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do. And that you continue to get help from him because he has a very clear favorite in this race. So I think that this is such an unprecedented situation. We’ve never had a foreign government trying to interfere in our election. We have 17, 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyber attacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin and they are designed to influence our election. I find that deeply disturbing.”
This mad autocrat must either resign, undergo 25th amendment scrutiny, face criminal indictment or be impeached now!
“I used to say that Trump was treason adjacent. Now I say that he’s just neck-deep in treachery.” Counterterrorism expert Malcolm Nance
Security officials say that the investigation reported in the blockbuster New York Times report could not have been initiated unless the FBI had intercepts and other “actionable evidence” that confirmed their suspicions. None of the reporting addresses the result of that investigation or whether it is still on-going.
Mr. Trump is behaving as if he is following a script written in Moscow for doing the maximum damage to America.
I remain doubtful that our constitutional processes will remove an entire administration that was put in power by a hostile nation and is now being controlled by that hostile nation. I hope my doubts are proven wrong by swift and decisive action by our elected officials.
I do not yet see any indication of that.
“no puppet, no puppet; you’re the puppet”
Indeed, one of those many times when Ms. Clinton nailed it.
This pretty much nails it.
“The core problem is that we have a president without shame who is backed by a party without spine that is supported by a network called Fox News without integrity.” Thomas Friedman
But – HER EMAILS!:(
“You should build a wall out of my emails. No one can get over those.” HRC to Stump
Is that quote real? If so it is awesome!
The ignorance of most contributors to this site is almost laughable. Tell the nonsense here to the 200-300 Russian families who received their sons’ remains in body bags after their “Wagner” division was wiped out by American forces who received at last battlefield control because of new rules of combat put into effect by Trump. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khasham Reuters did report on this massacre of Russian mercenaries at the time, but US media was either ignorant or uninterested. I suggest you actually talk with some real, live Russians to understand how much Trump has hurt their economy the past year or so. Your community organizer did absolutely nothing while Russia annexed the Crimea and started mini rebellions in Eastern Ukraine.
Why do you assume that we are unaware of the hundreds of Russians slaughtered in that incident?
More importantly, why do you assume that because the ‘President’ changed those rules of engagement; or helped cause crude prices to plunge (the immediate reason for the Russian economic near-collapse; or – I’m surprised you didn’t throw in that he sent heavy weapons to Kiev – why do you assume that these things in any way negate the growing and already extensive public record of kowtows and corrupt financial ties to Putin oligarchs? (Not to mention the bizarre choice of Manafort, the bizarre and inexplicable altering of the platform on sanctions and Ukraine, among scores of other bizarre obsequious nods to Putin?)
The contrast with the way he speaks of Putin’s international rivals like the EU is stark indeed.
An absurd, and contentless attack.
I’m struggling to understand your “argument”.
Let me see if I’ve got it right — we contributors are “ignorant”, because Barack Obama did “absolutely nothing” while Russia annexed the Crimea, and because new rules of engagement under Donald Trump caused 200-300 Russian battlefield deaths.
Assuming for the moment that this argument is even true (which I do only for the sake of this comment), I fail to see how it is relevant to the question of whether Donald Trump is or is not Mr. Putin’s puppet.
I think you’ve offered an irrelevant distraction. Sort of like Mr. Trump’s endless bluster about illegal immigrants.
I feel compelled to ask, as well, how you characterize the US response to the 2018 Russian naval blockade of the Sea of Ukraine. According to recent reports, Ukrainian sailors are still in Russian custody. You complained that “[my] community organizer did absolutely nothing” in 2014.
What, exactly, is Mr. Trump doing about the blockade and seizure of Ukrainian ships and personnel in 2018 that Mr. Obama failed to do in 2014?
I have to agree in general with Edgar. I’m willing to wait for the results of the Mueller investigation, but it seems to me that the Trump administration has been pretty tough on Russia. In addition to the examples Edgar cites, there are are the appointment of Bolton and Pompeo, two of the most extreme Russia hawks around.
You still have the kowtowing in your favor. But let’s suppose that instead that, Trump shook his fist at Putin and got red in the face. Let’s also suppose that instead of Bolton and Pompeo, Trump appointed two Russian apologists, and that American troops backed away from any confrontation with the Russians in Syria, instead of killing 200 Russians. And took special care to keep oil prices high so as to prop up the Russian economy.
There would be a stronger case for Trump being Putin’s puppet than there is now.
In my view, Mr. Putin is a more nuanced puppeteer than your theory suggests.
It appears to me that the strategy being pursued by Mr, Putin is to paralyze America by seeding chaos and dysfunction. I think the key word in your characterization of Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Bolton is “extreme” — I think that’s what Mr. Putin seeks. Each of those appointments has demoralized the agencies they lead and the allies that we rely on. The fibrillation of our “policy” in Syria is precisely what Mr. Putin seeks regardless of whose name is on the masthead of the various agencies.
In my view, the reporting over the weekend of the extreme steps taken by the White House to seize and destroy the notes and records of five meetings between Mr. Putin and Mr. Trump is far more compelling than any of the speculation we’re engaged in here.
Mr. Trump is a Russian asset. Mr. Pence is a knowing accomplice. I think that’s the story.
You could turn out to be right. But “nuance” is the key term here. Is there in your mind anything that could happen that would disprove your assertion?
@ Is there in your mind anything that could happen that would disprove your assertion?:
Sure. If the full results of the Mueller investigation, with all supporting evidence, are completed and published, and those results show that there is no evidence that Mr. Trump was or is compromised, then I will accept that. An aspect of that is the inclusion, in the official record, of solid and believable alternative explanations (supported by evidence) for the long and growing list of actions that so far strongly suggest Mr. Trump’s guilt.
Meanwhile, the New York Times reported yesterday that Mr. Trump privately told senior administration officials that he wanted to withdraw the United States from NATO (emphasis mine):
The cited report uses the term “mistake” to describe such a move. I suggest “betrayal” is more appropriate.
Do you dispute that Russia has been attempting to dismantle NATO for most of the last 70 years? Do you agree that Mr. Trump’s desire to withdraw America from NATO is tantamount to destroying it?
The 29 nations of NATO have kept the peace in Europe since 1949 and now Putin and his ASSet want to destroy it. Over our dead bodies they will. RESIST!
Mostly the United States, so if we leave NATO is toast, but I’m pretty sure it would take Congressional action to withdraw us. After all, we entered NATO by treaty and the Constitution includes “all treaties made” as part of the supreme law of the land.
According to various sources, the Constitution specifies only that Congressional approval is required to enter a treaty. It is silent about whether or not the executive can terminate an existing treaty.
Jimmy Carter unilaterally terminated the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty (between the US and Taiwan). Barry Goldwater and others filed a lawsuit (“Goldwater v. Carter, 444 U.S. 996 (1979) attempting to nullify that action. The Supreme Court rejected the lawsuit, and Mr. Carter’s action prevailed.
Various sources suggest that had Congress passed a formal resolution opposing Mr. Carter’s action, the lawsuit might have gone forward (Justice Powell argued this in his concurring opinion).
It appears to me that it is very much an open question.
Trump / Putin alliance is a trans national crime syndicate masquerading as government.