Russia and the 2016 Election

by **steveschneider** 2016-11-17, 15:58

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-gop-sen-lindsey-graham-wants-congress-1479254194-htmlstory.html

Here's a voice of reason from the other side, Sen Lindsey Graham:

"Here's what I would tell Republicans: We cannot sit on the sidelines as a party and let allegations against a foreign government interfering in our election process go unanswered because it may have been beneficial to our cause," Graham added.

I can't believe the russian influence on this election isn't a bigger story. And my question is why isn't it.

Evidence shows Russia hacks into the DNC emails, dumps them to Wikileaks. Trump has been in contact with Putin during his campaign. State department confirms russia has been attempting to tamper with this years election.

Right after Trump wins the election Putin comes forth and says the election's results will normalize the US and Russian relations.

So what's the deal with Trump and Putin?

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2016-11-17, 16:07

steveschneider wrote:http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-gop-sen-lindsey-graham-wants-congress-1479254194-htmlstory.html

Here's a voice of reason from the other side, Sen Lindsey Graham:

"Here's what I would tell Republicans: We cannot sit on the sidelines as a party and let allegations against a foreign government interfering in our election process go unanswered because it may have been beneficial to our cause," Graham added.

I can't believe the russian influence on this election isn't a bigger story. And my question is why isn't it.

Evidence shows Russia hacks into the DNC emails, dumps them to Wikileaks. Trump has been in contact with Putin during his campaign. State department confirms russia has been attempting to tamper with this years election.

Right after Trump wins the election Putin comes forth and says the election's results will normalize the US and Russian relations.

So what's the deal with Trump and Putin?

Basically it's, "Don't care, our team won." This is my biggest concern over everything else Steve.

by **steveschneider** 2016-11-17, 16:18

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
steveschneider wrote:http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-gop-sen-lindsey-graham-wants-congress-1479254194-htmlstory.html

Here's a voice of reason from the other side, Sen Lindsey Graham:

"Here's what I would tell Republicans: We cannot sit on the sidelines as a party and let allegations against a foreign government interfering in our election process go unanswered because it may have been beneficial to our cause," Graham added.

I can't believe the russian influence on this election isn't a bigger story. And my question is why isn't it.

Evidence shows Russia hacks into the DNC emails, dumps them to Wikileaks. Trump has been in contact with Putin during his campaign. State department confirms russia has been attempting to tamper with this years election.

Right after Trump wins the election Putin comes forth and says the election's results will normalize the US and Russian relations.

So what's the deal with Trump and Putin?

Basically it's, "Don't care, our team won." This is my biggest concern over everything else Steve.

Well its pretty encouraging that Lindsey Graham is calling for further investigation into this.

The Democrats are accusing Comey of holding back info on Trump and Putin -

“In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisers, and the Russian government — a foreign interest openly hostile to the United States, which Trump praises at every opportunity,” Reid said in a Sunday letter to Comey.

The incendiary — and unproven — claim by the Senate minority leader came in a letter in which Reid attacked Comey for his disclosure that the FBI is reviewing new information on the Clinton e-mail case, less than two weeks before Election Day. Reid and other Democrats accused Comey of a "double standard" with regard to the presidential election candidates.

--

An unproven claim for sure, but we need answers.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2016-11-17, 18:32

steveschneider wrote:
Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Basically it's, "Don't care, our team won." This is my biggest concern over everything else Steve.

Well its pretty encouraging that Lindsey Graham is calling for further investigation into this.

The Democrats are accusing Comey of holding back info on Trump and Putin -

“In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisers, and the Russian government — a foreign interest openly hostile to the United States, which Trump praises at every opportunity,” Reid said in a Sunday letter to Comey.

The incendiary — and unproven — claim by the Senate minority leader came in a letter in which Reid attacked Comey for his disclosure that the FBI is reviewing new information on the Clinton e-mail case, less than two weeks before Election Day. Reid and other Democrats accused Comey of a "double standard" with regard to the presidential election candidates.

--

An unproven claim for sure, but we need answers.

Clinton fucked up by not making this a bigger deal. We're obviously not the only ones that were worried about Trump's ties with Russia. Guess we get to sit back and see how it all plays out now.

by **GRR Spartan** 2016-11-17, 19:08

I was concerned about this stuff when Trump was forced to replace Manafort.

Once Trump's new AG gets sworn in this whole mess will go away like a morning fog.

by **steveschneider** 2016-11-17, 19:27

GRR Spartan wrote:I was concerned about this stuff when Trump was forced to replace Manafort.

Once Trump's new AG gets sworn in this whole mess will go away like a morning fog.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/15/us/politics/paul-manafort-ukraine-donald-trump.html

"Handwritten ledgers show $12.7 million in undisclosed cash payments designated for Mr. Manafort from Mr. Yanukovych’s pro-Russian political party from 2007 to 2012, according to Ukraine’s newly formed National Anti-Corruption Bureau. Investigators assert that the disbursements were part of an illegal off-the-books system whose recipients also included election officials."

Then there's this

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-campaign-guts-gops-anti-russia-stance-on-ukraine/2016/07/18/98adb3b0-4cf3-11e6-a7d8-13d06b37f256_story.html?utm_term=.ce2bf4ae4d0c

"The Trump campaign worked behind the scenes last week to make sure the new Republican platform won’t call for giving weapons to Ukraine to fight Russian and rebel forces, contradicting the view of almost all Republican foreign policy leaders in Washington."

--------

Listen to the money talk!

by **Other Teams Pursuing That** 2016-11-17, 20:59

by **DWags** 2016-11-17, 22:06

We've been ruskied. Bend over.

by Guest 2016-11-17, 22:13

DWags wrote:We've been ruskied. Bend over.

I remember the good old days when Dems mocked Romney for calling the Russians our #1 geopolitical enemy. Good times.

5 Times Liberals Mocked Mitt Romney For Warning About Russia

by **NigelUno** 2016-11-17, 22:22

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:We've been ruskied. Bend over.

I remember the good old days when Dems mocked Romney for calling the Russians our #1 geopolitical enemy. Good times.

5 Times Liberals Mocked Mitt Romney For Warning About Russia

But in this example isn't Trump basically mocking Republican foreign policy leaders? Whose side are you taking in that fight?

by **Turtleneck** 2016-11-17, 22:23

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:We've been ruskied. Bend over.

I remember the good old days when Dems mocked Romney for calling the Russians our #1 geopolitical enemy. Good times.

5 Times Liberals Mocked Mitt Romney For Warning About Russia

Great point, Loose!

https://spartanswill.forumotion.com/t11463p120-never-any-media-bias-well-maybe-just-a-little-all-the-time#316776

by Guest 2016-11-17, 22:40

NigelUno wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

I remember the good old days when Dems mocked Romney for calling the Russians our #1 geopolitical enemy. Good times.

5 Times Liberals Mocked Mitt Romney For Warning About Russia

But in this example isn't Trump basically mocking Republican foreign policy leaders? Whose side are you taking in that fight?

Which "leaders" are you referring to?

by Guest 2016-11-17, 22:42

I think it's too bad the DNC emulated Hills and had piss poor security on their emails. More evidence they shouldn't be in power.

by **NigelUno** 2016-11-17, 22:47

LooseGoose wrote:I think it's too bad the DNC emulated Hills and had piss poor security on their emails. More evidence they shouldn't be in power.

Huh.

Just curious...what do you make of this apparent recent change in policy? Probably just a coincidence?

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2016-11-17, 22:47

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:We've been ruskied. Bend over.

I remember the good old days when Dems mocked Romney for calling the Russians our #1 geopolitical enemy. Good times.

5 Times Liberals Mocked Mitt Romney For Warning About Russia

Speaking for myself I don't give a flying fuck about what Mitt Romney said and how Democrats took it. Care to weigh in on the topic of this thread or is it your continual goal to devolve every thread into a "my team vs. your team" pissing match?

by Guest 2016-11-17, 22:48

NigelUno wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:I think it's too bad the DNC emulated Hills and had piss poor security on their emails. More evidence they shouldn't be in power.

Huh.

Just curious...what do you make of this apparent recent change in policy? Probably just a coincidence?

What "change in policy"?? Still waiting on which "leaders" you're referring to. Your questions as posed are nonsensical.

by **NigelUno** 2016-11-17, 22:50

LooseGoose wrote:
NigelUno wrote:

Huh.

Just curious...what do you make of this apparent recent change in policy? Probably just a coincidence?

What "change in policy"?? Still waiting on which "leaders" you're referring to. Your questions as posed are nonsensical.

My bad. That article was made up. Nothing has changed. Nothing to see here.

Trump...Manafort...Russia...Ukraine...

False flag. Mainstream media.

Hillary. Emails. Servers.

by Guest 2016-11-17, 22:51

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

I remember the good old days when Dems mocked Romney for calling the Russians our #1 geopolitical enemy. Good times.

5 Times Liberals Mocked Mitt Romney For Warning About Russia

Speaking for myself I don't give a flying fuck about what Mitt Romney said and how Democrats took it. Care to weigh in on the topic of this thread or is it your continual goal to devolve every thread into a "my team vs. your team" pissing match?

lol, I'm glad no one else does that. Join reality - the two "teams" is American Politics. Has been for 200+ years and will be for the foreseeable future.

My point was that Romney warned about the Russians, the know it all Dems mocked him - now 4 years later all of a sudden the Dems are demonizing the Russians. And yet people swallow all the shit from the know it alls.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2016-11-17, 22:52

LooseGoose wrote:
Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Speaking for myself I don't give a flying fuck about what Mitt Romney said and how Democrats took it. Care to weigh in on the topic of this thread or is it your continual goal to devolve every thread into a "my team vs. your team" pissing match?

lol, I'm glad no one else does that. Join reality - the two "teams" is American Politics. Has been for 200+ years and will be for the foreseeable future.

My point was that Romney warned about the Russians, the know it all Dems mocked him - now 4 years later all of a sudden the Dems are demonizing the Russians. And yet people swallow all the shit from the know it alls.

So your answer is no, you don't want to stay on topic. Good to know.

by Guest 2016-11-17, 22:54

NigelUno wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

What "change in policy"?? Still waiting on which "leaders" you're referring to. Your questions as posed are nonsensical.

My bad. That article was made up. Nothing has changed. Nothing to see here.

Trump...Manafort...Russia...Ukraine...

False flag. Mainstream media.

Hillary. Emails. Servers.

And once again you fail to name the leaders you're referring to unless you seriously consider Manafort a "Republican foreign policy leader" which would be laughable.

And I don't see your explanation of what "change in policy" you're referencing.

Seriously you're approaching Blanch level here.

by Guest 2016-11-17, 22:55

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

lol, I'm glad no one else does that. Join reality - the two "teams" is American Politics. Has been for 200+ years and will be for the foreseeable future.

My point was that Romney warned about the Russians, the know it all Dems mocked him - now 4 years later all of a sudden the Dems are demonizing the Russians. And yet people swallow all the shit from the know it alls.

So your answer is no, you don't want to stay on topic. Good to know.

I'm talking about Romney and the Russians. The title of the thread is Russia and the 2016 election. You're chiding me for tribes.
Which of us is more on topic?? Mirror.

My point if you missed it was that one party has always recognized the Russians as a threat. The other party mocked them for it.
Good to see that party rejoin the reality of the world we live in.

by **NigelUno** 2016-11-17, 22:59

LooseGoose wrote:
NigelUno wrote:

My bad. That article was made up. Nothing has changed. Nothing to see here.

Trump...Manafort...Russia...Ukraine...

False flag. Mainstream media.

Hillary. Emails. Servers.

And once again you fail to name the leaders you're referring to unless you seriously consider Manafort a "Republican foreign policy leader" which would be laughable.

And I don't see your explanation of what "change in policy" you're referencing.

Seriously you're approaching Blanch level here.

It's cool. You don't have to read the article. Just play it off. That's fine. Mainstream media and all.

by **NigelUno** 2016-11-17, 23:01

LooseGoose wrote:
Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

So your answer is no, you don't want to stay on topic. Good to know.

I'm talking about Romney and the Russians. The title of the thread is Russia and the 2016 election. You're chiding me for tribes.
Which of us is more on topic?? Mirror.

My point if you missed it was that one party has always recognized the Russians as a threat. The other party mocked them for it.
Good to see that party rejoin the reality of the world we live in.

But the link wasn't about Dems. It was about Trump vs. other Republicans.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2016-11-17, 23:05

LooseGoose wrote:
Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

So your answer is no, you don't want to stay on topic. Good to know.

I'm talking about Romney and the Russians. The title of the thread is Russia and the 2016 election. You're chiding me for tribes.
Which of us is more on topic?? Mirror.

My point if you missed it was that one party has always recognized the Russians as a threat. The other party mocked them for it.
Good to see that party rejoin the reality of the world we live in.

Please, continue being disingenuous. It really adds to this thread.

by **Other Teams Pursuing That** 2016-11-17, 23:16

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

I remember the good old days when Dems mocked Romney for calling the Russians our #1 geopolitical enemy. Good times.

5 Times Liberals Mocked Mitt Romney For Warning About Russia

Speaking for myself I don't give a flying fuck about what Mitt Romney said and how Democrats took it. Care to weigh in on the topic of this thread or is it your continual goal to devolve every thread into a "my team vs. your team" pissing match?

Russia and the 2016 Election Officeagreeyesboommichael-scottpointing

by Guest 2016-11-17, 23:18

NigelUno wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

And once again you fail to name the leaders you're referring to unless you seriously consider Manafort a "Republican foreign policy leader" which would be laughable.

And I don't see your explanation of what "change in policy" you're referencing.

Seriously you're approaching Blanch level here.

It's cool. You don't have to read the article. Just play it off. That's fine. Mainstream media and all.

IOW you can't answer either one of my questions.

by **GRR Spartan** 2016-11-17, 23:22

So Goose thinks investigating possible Russian involvement in a US Presidential election can be brushed off because of previous statements made by Democrats.

Incredible what some US citizens will tolerate at any price if they think Roe v Wade will be overturned.

I also think the FBI has Trump's back to the extent that members of the New York office created faux drama less than two weeks before the election that effectively helped Trump's campaign regained momentum.

Until that hapened I thought the US was immune to the FBI or Secret helping one candidate win an election. Now we know the FBI's NYC office that wanted to have a judge start a new investigation was rejected bcause the basis of their request was a book with previously debunked accusations.

Its like the FBI's office was working for Trump.

by **NigelUno** 2016-11-17, 23:28

LooseGoose wrote:
NigelUno wrote:

It's cool. You don't have to read the article. Just play it off. That's fine. Mainstream media and all.

IOW you can't answer either one of my questions.

Hypothetically, if Trump has taken a position contrary to other Republican leaders regarding Russia/Ukraine...whose side will you take?

Is that vague enough for you?

Is this really that difficult for you...that you have to find a Dem boogeyman angle in everything?

by Guest 2016-11-17, 23:45

NigelUno wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

IOW you can't answer either one of my questions.

Hypothetically, if Trump has taken a position contrary to other Republican leaders regarding Russia/Ukraine...whose side will you take?

Is that vague enough for you?

Is this really that difficult for you...that you have to find a Dem boogeyman angle in everything?

Nah, their stupidity is usually so apparent it stands out so I don't need to "find" anything.

Now to answer your question I don't trust Trump nor your unnamed "Republican Leaders" so without knowing the specific situation or question I'm not taking a "side". If I knew the situation then I could tell you what I thought and you can decide who I line up with. In the Ukraine only a fool thinks the Russians aren't leading the attacks, fuck they're decorating the returning soldiers.

by Guest 2016-11-17, 23:48

GRR Spartan wrote:So Goose thinks investigating possible Russian involvement in a US Presidential election can be brushed off because of previous statements made by Democrats.

And of course you have a quote to back this bullshit? I said it displayed that the DNC didn't know shit about cyber-security like Hills. Somehow you're leaping from there to be absolving them? Nope.

But if you leave your cash sitting on your desk when you leave for lunch don't be shocked if it's gone when you get back. Doesn't absolve the thief but it does bring your judgement into question.

by **GRR Spartan** 2016-11-17, 23:49

For what ever reasons Goose thinks he needs to defend by referring to past events and Democrats curren or previous statements.

Justifying the Trump campaign's constant use of stolen and leaked emails by saying the DNC or John Podesta should have been more careful? That logic means I can steal your car/boat/guns/computers
and justify my theft(s) because I figured out a way to get away with it.

Right now I hope Mike Pence's emails he's trying to get sealed are hacked by the Chinese and leaked to see how the people who decided to use hacked / leaked emails as part of a Presidential election react and if they are as cavalier as they apoear. The Trump campaign opened a gate to a very slippery slope and I would be saying the same if the Clinton campaign had used hacked emails from Trump.

We have no clue about a lot of things with President elct Trump. We don't know how much wealth he really has and we don't know who's financed his real estate. We don't know about relationships with individuals, foreign or domestic with whom he may have entered into business relationship(s).

Lots of questions and Trump doesn't seem to be inclined to answer any of them but in less than 60 days he'll be handed nuclear codes.

by **NigelUno** 2016-11-17, 23:49

LooseGoose wrote:
NigelUno wrote:

Hypothetically, if Trump has taken a position contrary to other Republican leaders regarding Russia/Ukraine...whose side will you take?

Is that vague enough for you?

Is this really that difficult for you...that you have to find a Dem boogeyman angle in everything?

Nah, their stupidity is usually so apparent it stands out so I don't need to "find" anything.

Now to answer your question I don't trust Trump nor your unnamed "Republican Leaders" so without knowing the specific situation or question I'm not taking a "side". If I knew the situation then I could tell you what I thought and you can decide who I line up with. In the Ukraine only a fool thinks the Russians aren't leading the attacks, fuck they're decorating the returning soldiers.

But, in this instance...you did have to find a Dem boogeyman where there was none. It was an article that had nothing to do with Dems, but you still had to deflect. I apologize for confusing you with language in the article that you clearly can't read or assume is just mainstream media Dems bashing Trump.

by Guest 2016-11-18, 00:07

GRR Spartan wrote:For what ever reasons Goose thinks he needs to defend by referring to past events and Democrats curren or previous statements.

Justifying the Trump campaign's constant use of stolen and leaked emails by saying the DNC or John Podesta should have been more careful?

Pot? Kettle?

Could you link me to your post criticizing the Clinton campaign for using Trump's stolen tax returns?

I'll wait.

If you can't link me then can we agree you're being a hypocrite here?

by **GRR Spartan** 2016-11-18, 02:31

After months of denial you can admit you are pleased that Trump won.

You got your wish. A GOP President and a GOP Senate that will probably overturn Roe v Wade.

Now you want to play gotcha.

No pot kettle .

You just justified involvement of a foreign government to win a Presidential election.

We are just dfferent politically. You have no issue with foreign hacking of US political parties and candidates.

You immeadiately act outraged about tax returns as a response because you think what Trump and his campaign's use of foreign hacked emails was acceptable.

thats one thing that makes us dfferent. Before the partial tax forms showed up at the NY Times I was already concerned about Trump's secrecy about his finances and his hiring of Paul Manafort and posted about it.

You will never accept a statement questioning Trump's finances, his lenders or the people he's surrounding himself with because somewhere on a twitter feed you can post some photos with a Yeah but excuse.

No Yeah But that we have elected a person to be President that we know very little about compared to anyone elected since WW2.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2016-11-18, 08:47

LooseGoose wrote:
GRR Spartan wrote:For what ever reasons Goose thinks he needs to defend by referring to past events and Democrats curren or previous statements.

Justifying the Trump campaign's constant use of stolen and leaked emails by saying the DNC or John Podesta should have been more careful?

Pot? Kettle?

Could you link me to your post criticizing the Clinton campaign for using Trump's stolen tax returns?

I'll wait.

If you can't link me then can we agree you're being a hypocrite here?

Still spinning this thread further away from OP's topic I see. Typical.

by Guest 2016-11-18, 09:48

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Pot? Kettle?

Could you link me to your post criticizing the Clinton campaign for using Trump's stolen tax returns?

I'll wait.

If you can't link me then can we agree you're being a hypocrite here?

Still spinning this thread further away from OP's topic I see. Typical.

Tribes, man. Tribes.

Do you seriously think millions of rust belt voters waited for signals from Russia to vote Trump?

I'm laughing at the D's "outrage" because I saw the opposite reaction when it was disclosed that the Chinese had illegally donated millions to the Clinton campaign in '96. Back then it was the R's supposedly making a mountain out of a molehill. There's nothing new politics, just different ways of reporting and spinning the same old shit.

by **GRR Spartan** 2016-11-18, 10:09

Goose, are you going to be in the Yeah But brigade for the next 4 years?

The huge numbers of voters in the rust belt were motivated by believing in American Exceptionalism and being isolationists.

You aren't so naive to believe the typical Trump voter would ever admit a foreign government would have the power to sway an American electorate.

They still believe good paying factory jobs that don't require more than a HS diploma and general labor jobs will be coming back to their blighted communities. I spoke to a few this week who truly believe Trump will do something to get an employer into a factory that used to employ 350-400 people that closed in 2005.

by **steveschneider** 2016-11-18, 10:32

Putin is extremely dangerous. Lets all agree on this.

Trumps complete lack of foreign policy experience is coming out right now and its not funny.
Putin stands to gain a stronger foothold in the middle east, the Ukraine and potentially eastern Europe. Trumps deep admiration of Putin is a sign of how naive he is and that is very troubling for the US and our allies.

Lets also not forget, Trump called upon the Russians to hack Hillary's emails on his campaign, he disrespected the office of the Presidency by saying he respected Putin more than Obama and he's been in contact with Putin during his campaign. The whole russian angle to this election and the Trump presidency is very concerning. Not something to be brushed aside as partisan politics.

by **Other Teams Pursuing That** 2016-11-18, 10:35

Goose is not republican.

Russia and the 2016 Election 502811600

by **steveschneider** 2016-11-18, 10:45

GRR Spartan wrote:Goose, are you going to be in the Yeah But brigade for the next 4 years?

The huge numbers of voters in the rust belt were motivated by believing in American Exceptionalism and being isolationists.

You aren't so naive to believe the typical Trump voter would ever admit a foreign government would have the power to sway an American electorate.

They still believe good paying factory jobs that don't require more than a HS diploma and general labor jobs will be coming back to their blighted communities. I spoke to a few this week who truly believe Trump will do something to get an employer into a factory that used to employ 350-400 people that closed in 2005.

Head of the NSA says Russia is behind the hacks.

by Sponsored content