Jump to content
Mohamed1993

Trump did indeed collude with Russia it seems

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I was wrong about the Russian stuff just being all just democrats inability to cope with the fact that they lost, it turns out there was some attempt at collusion to help Donald Trump win the election. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/us/politics/trump-russia-email-clinton.html. I don't trust the NY times almost all of the time, but the physical emails released are pretty solid evidence.

However, I will say that the media's incessant focus on this issue has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that it interfered with "democracy", its because they didn't have a candidate of their choice in power, even though Trump is bad in other ways, he's not a typical politician, and its also because it was Russia that interfered. You could have bet had this issue been about a US ally like Israel, it would have been buried long ago. I recall in January, there was a leaked video from someone that pretended to be a lobbyist for UK labor party's Israel lobby that showed an Israeli lobbyist for the UK conservative party meeting with an Israeli official from the embassy. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/israel-embassy-scandal-shai-masot-resigns-threat-take-down-mps-labour-nus-critical-pro-palestinian-a7524446.html. The official was trying to convince the lobbyist to take down and delegitimise ministers that were critical of Israel, and opposed its settlement policies in the West Bank. The Israeli govt. was quick to say they would remove this official from his position and they stated that he was not a person in a high position and he wasn't really relevant and his views did not reflect the views of the govt. Well needless to say, that was a political move, and if you looked at this official's linkedin profile, it contradicted what the Israeli govt. said about him not being a senior official and also, unsurprisingly there was no investigation even held to investigate this meeting. Can you imagine the same response if it was a Russian official doing the same? The media would eat it all up. How pathetic is it that the opposition to an illegal act comes from neocon warmongers who seem to want to bring back the cold war, not anyone with any genuine concerns about "democracy". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mohamed1993 said:

ut the physical emails released are pretty solid evidence.

moh! there is an email between his son n law and a random russian lawyer.... doesnt equate that russians colluded with Trump! You should know better bro -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, kirtc said:

moh! there is an email between his son n law and a random russian lawyer.... doesnt equate that russians colluded with Trump! You should know better bro -_-

No I know but if you look at the law, it classifies any attempt at collusion with any foreign national, not necessarily a government, there was an attempt, not necessarily saying collusion happened. There are no details about the meeting either so there is no evidence to suggest there was anything valuable even discussed, but I think it's still regarded as a breach. Of course the law is practically meaningless on these issues, like I said it's less about the issue more about Trump/Russia but that wasn't my argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colluded?

Reagan's team in the 1980 Election cycle "colluded" with the lranians.

Nixon working through Madame Chiang Kai-shek "colluded" with the South Vietnamese to stall the Paris Peace Talks (1968).

Johnson "colluded" with Taiwan in relation to Quemoy island to influence the 1964 Election.

l can think of only one other, off-hand. These are solid evidences of collusion with foreign gov'ts to influence American elections.

l need to see something tangible. You noted NYT emails. Which emails didn't they publish? Think of all the Snowden stuff that hasn't been published.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone surprised?

I predict Donald Jr. is going to be offered up as a scapegoat then saved by his money. 

A man isn't legally liable for the crimes of his adult sons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

You noted NYT emails

Well tbf, they were tweeted by Trump's son, I wouldn't believe the NYT just quoting emails without verification, but in this case his son did tweet them. A lot of people though are pushing the link that there is evidence of a link between this meeting and all the Hillary emails that were leaked, but there's no evidence to confirm that. All this seems to suggest is that Trump's son attended a meeting with a Russian lawyer after she had offered to reveal information to him that would incriminate Hillary. Of course there's no evidence that any information was provided in the meeting, but I think they say its still an attempt to collude, which is the problem. But nothing will come of this, I'm sure, they'll still be investigating and Trump's term will be gone. These things never get anywhere.

I do wonder though how is this any different to a foreign government hiring a lobbyist to do its bidding? I remember, prior to the Iran deal, the emergency group for Israel committee paid about a million dollars to Tom Cotton's campaign, immediately after which he signed a letter with 47 other congressmen to oppose the deal. Not to mention Netanyahu explicitly came to congress to undermine the president. Isn't this also attempting to collude with a foreign power to undermine the president and the national security interests of the country? So there are apparently rules with a whole lot of loopholes for how a foreign government can hire lobbyists to do its bidding, they get around it and no questions get asked and people pretend everything's fine, but supposedly this was a similar attempt to supposedly sabotage a political opponent, and everyone's flipping over it. The problem is obviously not anything but the fact that its Russia being accused, for some reason everyone in the establishment seems keen to reignite a cold war. I even have people I know thinking Mike Pence will be a better option because he would reaffirm the US allegiance to article 5 of NATO. You only need to take a look at NATO's expansion and imperialism and compare it to Russia to see where the problem lies. Article 5 is meaningless, the Soviet Union does not exist, but NATO's expansion will cause Russia to become more aggressive, somehow people miss this and think Russia is the reason to blame for everything. 

Edited by Mohamed1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

l believe you are ruminating.

A link to a link to a leak to an email with no evidence.

"The Big Lie" is getting to you.

Maybe I am wrong, I am not home so I can't access twitter, but I'll link the actual twitter feed later. I think the issue is overblown but I don't see why his son would actually release emails of his conversation himself when it wouldn't really help his case? What makes you think otherwise? 

Edited by Mohamed1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

Maybe I am wrong, I am not home so I can't access twitter, but I'll link the actual twitter feed later. I think the issue is overblown but I don't see why his son would actually release emails of his conversation himself when it wouldn't really help his case? What makes you think otherwise? 

Don't you think they deliberately create such controversies and dramas to grape attention for these good for nothing characters of the world. These things just give media hype to unimportant issues and important issues never get highlighted. 

Edited by Syed Irtiza Ali Rizvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Syed Irtiza Ali Rizvi said:

Don't you think they deliberately create such controversies and dramas to grape attention for these good for nothing characters of the world.

Its an unimportant issue for sure, I just made this post because I was frankly surprised that the issue went beyond just liberal hysteria crying about their corrupt warmongering queen losing, so I was wrong in that regard. But I think it makes the US look like a laughing stock to expel so much energy on this one issue and ignore everything else Trump has done since becoming president. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

Its an unimportant issue for sure, I just made this post because I was frankly surprised that the issue went beyond just liberal hysteria crying about their corrupt warmongering queen losing, so I was wrong in that regard. But I think it makes the US look like a laughing stock to expel so much energy on this one issue and ignore everything else Trump has done since becoming president. 

Brother they are smart people, they only make others fools. On media they might look stupid but behind the scene they know how to destroy nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mohamed1993.

Syed is right, they are smart people and smart enough to do collusion between foreign powers. Problem is that they are arrogant and stupid enough to spout off about it in social media. It is by any means, a confession of guilt and is strengthening the Democrats' and Supreme court's case for impeachment and perhaps treason if more severe findings/info comes about.

Personally, I pray that Trump gets the boot; the man is clearly not fit for the job of POTUS. Although Hasan will disagree with me big time, we would have been better off with Clinton or Sanders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

Personally, I pray that Trump gets the boot; the man is clearly not fit for the job of POTUS. Although Hasan will disagree with me big time, we would have been better off with Clinton or Sanders.

I disagree too, his loud mouth is doing a good job of exposing what has been obvious for years. 

Edited by Mohamed1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mohamed1993 said:

I was wrong about the Russian stuff just being all just democrats inability to cope with the fact that they lost, it turns out there was some attempt at collusion to help Donald Trump win the election.

Then people should question the democratic and electorial systems if the now crippled cold war US opponent can influence it decisively from across the globe. But, they won't. That is beside the point.

 

Quote

Trump did indeed collude with Russia it seems

 

Awww

 

/violin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Darth Vader said:

Then people should question the democratic and electorial systems

Careful, you're only supposed to villify Russia not question the whole system because the moment you do, the Zionist neocons and globalist shills have to be drained, don't want to go there, that would make too much sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mohamed1993 said:

I disagree too, his loud mouth is doing a good job of exposing what has been obvious for years. 

I vehemently disagree and with the utmost passion on Trump doing a "good job"; The only thing he has exposed is how incompetent he is and how oblivious to he is to anyone or anything but himself. Plus, I think his outbursts on Twitter show an immature adult unable to use reason. 

Now if you mean that he is doing a good job of exposing himself as a vile and self-centered business man, then I agree wholeheartedly with you, Mohamed. Mr. Trump is absolutely without a doubt, doing an amazing job showing his true colors to the world.

Edited by Gaius I. Caesar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

I vehemently disagree and with the utmost passion on Trump doing a "good job"; The only thing he has exposed is how incompetent he is and how oblivious to he is to anyone or anything but himself. Plus, I think his outbursts on Twitter show an immature adult unable to use reason. 

 

I didn't say he was doing a good job, I said his stupidity is good because it exposes a lot of stuff. His loud mouth is spewing stuff that a politician would never say, which is exposing things about the system that perhaps would've never happened under a Clinton/Sanders presidency.  

Edited by Mohamed1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

@Mohamed1993.

Syed is right, they are smart people and smart enough to do collusion between foreign powers. Problem is that they are arrogant and stupid enough to spout off about it in social media. It is by any means, a confession of guilt and is strengthening the Democrats' and Supreme court's case for impeachment and perhaps treason if more severe findings/info comes about.

Personally, I pray that Trump gets the boot; the man is clearly not fit for the job of POTUS. Although Hasan will disagree with me big time, we would have been better off with Clinton or Sanders.

There is a news article tonight that is partially entitled, "Putin Critic: Russian Lawyer..."  and would not be in the US without a Kremlin OK.  Huh? Russian Lawyer would not be in US without an Obama Visa !

The Clintoni and Bushie families hate Trump so they are all out to get him.

What makes "Trump unfit" ?  lf people thought he was truly unfit Trump would not have won both the Republican nomination nor the General Election.

"...better off with Clinton ..."  :dwarf:"Blaspheme !"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mohamed1993 said:

Its an unimportant issue for sure, I just made this post because I was frankly surprised that the issue went beyond just liberal hysteria crying about their corrupt warmongering queen losing, so I was wrong in that regard.

But I think it makes the US look like a laughing stock to expel so much energy on this one issue and.. apparently, this is true in diplomatic circles.

... ignore everything else Trump has done since becoming president. This part below...

l was watching foreign broadcasts Tuesday night and on two of them the commentators said the reason Mosul is now nearly a success is because there have been "no White House conferences" nor "belt way studies" nor "State Dept" memos or some such description, lt is because Trump only told the Pentagon to do it and did not interfere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasanhh said:

There is a news article tonight that is partially entitled, "Putin Critic: Russian Lawyer..."  and would not be in the US without a Kremlin OK.  Huh? Russian Lawyer would not be in US without an Obama Visa !

 

There is still no evidence to show the lawyer is linked to the Russian government, they're using this story of the Magnitsky act to link the lawyer to the Russian government, there is still no evidence for this other than lots of assumptions and desperate attempts to try and link Trump to Putin, I am curious to see what stories they'll come up with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mohamed1993  l did some reviewing.

l do not find where the Magnitsky Act (2012) comes into this.

Prompted by a radio comment:

What l did find is that in June 2016 there were attempts to organize a delegate revolt to deny Trump the nomination in JULY. Trump ended up with 1700+ delegates, well above the 1237 he needed. Don Jr. met in June 2016. There was no guarantee that Trump would win at the Convention, while it was a fore-gone conclusion that Adorable Hiller would win a couple of days later.

True, the Russians had an ABC -Anybody But Clinton- attitude, but contriving a meeting to discus adoptions, which Russia had all but banned a few years ago because of problems(like the disturbed child sent back to Russia alone on a plane) does not seem to hold water either.

We can expect the Clintoni and Bushies to keep at this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In written comments to the Guardian early on Wednesday, Veselnitskaya insisted the meeting was purely about the Magnitsky Act, which placed US sanctions on Russian officials accused of human rights abuses – and was in turn countered by Moscow with a ban on US adoptions of Russian children.

She was the defence lawyer for Denis Katsyv, a Russian businessman accused of laundering a portion of the proceeds from a $230m tax fraud uncovered by the lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, who later died in jail and whose name was used in the sanctions act.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/12/who-is-natalia-veselnitskaya-low-level-lawyer-or-kremlin-power-broker.

So the link "they say" is she was the defence lawyer for this Russian businessman who laundered a portion of the proceeds from the tax fraud committed by Russian officials that Magnitsky exposed, in response Magnitsky was jailed and died in prison (an "independent" human rights group claimed he was beaten, the independence of the group is very doubtful, the Russians said it was a heart attack) which then led to the Magnitsky act being passed, which sanctions Russian officials for human rights abuses, and in response there was the countermove which prevented Americans from adopting Russian children. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hasanhh said:

There is a news article tonight that is partially entitled, "Putin Critic: Russian Lawyer..."  and would not be in the US without a Kremlin OK.  Huh? Russian Lawyer would not be in US without an Obama Visa !

Wrong ! See below, it is new.

"...better off with Clinton ..."  :dwarf:"Blaspheme !"

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/341788-exclusive-doj-let-russian-lawyer-into-us-before-she-met-with-trump 

Lorretta Lynch again

The lawyer entered WITHOUT a visa.

Edited by hasanhh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Alaikis Salaam sister,  Why don't you refer the book called 'Mafatih al-Jinan'. It has Aa'mal and duas for every month.  Search Google, play store or App store. 
    • Salaam Aleikum, Let say there is period of time where a born Muslim live in west and have no idea of anything about God, Islam, Prayer, Islamic laws and the person lives only according his desires and have ignorance about the matters of Islam. If the person realize God, and realize Islam and start to practice Islam, will the past sins be all forgiven?  Second, what happens to the Salaat and Fasting of that time, does it need to do Qada?
    • “... there will be there all that the souls could desire, all that the eyes could delight in …” (Quran 43:71) “Eat and drink at ease for that which you have sent forth (good deeds) in days past!” (Quran 69:24) “… They will be adorned therein with bracelets of gold, and they will wear green garments of fine silk and heavy brocade.  They will recline therein on raised thrones.  How good [is] the recompense!  How beautiful a couch [is there] to recline on!” (Quran 18:31) not hear therein ill speech or commission of sin.  But only the saying of: Peace! Peace!” (Quran 56:25-26) There will be no enmity between people nor ill-feelings: “And We shall remove from their breasts any (mutual) hatred or sense of injury (which they had, if at all, in the life of this world)…” (Quran 7:43)   “And whoever obeys God and the Messenger – those will be with the ones upon whom God has bestowed favor – of the prophets, the steadfast affirmers of truth, the martyrs and the righteous.  And excellent are those as companions!” (Quran 4:69) “Crystal-white, delicious to those who drink (thereof), free from intoxication, nor will they suffer intoxication therefrom” (Quran 37:46-47)   “...rivers of water incorruptible; rivers of milk of which the taste never changes...” (Quran 47:15)   they shall have therein purified mates…” (Quran 2:25) “And when you look there (in Paradise) you will see a delight (that cannot be imagined), and a great dominion.” (Quran 76:20) 
    • A penny for your thoughts!  Come on people.
    • ^ Added to OP "some" western Muslims, to avoid generalization, because that was not the OP intention to generalize. And let's calm down please.
×