ImageImageImageImageImage

OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump

Moderators: j4remi, NoLayupRule, HerSports85, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23, Deeeez Knicks, mpharris36

User avatar
Dave DaButcher
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,698
And1: 4,301
Joined: May 16, 2017
     

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#121 » by Dave DaButcher » Sat Aug 4, 2018 7:52 pm

HarthorneWingo wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
They, apparently, have what's called "alternative facts."

Image

My proudest moment of 2016 was making this evil crone storm out of a conference room after I challenged her on her ridiculous assertion that Trump's offensive insults of Judge Curiel were not racist. (This was at a lunch I attended where she was supposed to give an "unbiased" pollster's view of the then upcoming presidential election, not long before she joined the Trump campaign.)

In any case, 93 days until the midterms. You know what to do people!


You the man. More details, please.

Thank you sir. We are clients of a DC consulting firm that hosts meetings from time to time with DC-types, such as pollsters, members of Congress, and other experts who (ostensibly) have expertise in matters of interest to clients. These include the election outlook and the legislative/regulatory landscape for certain areas of focus (healthcare, taxation, trade, etc.).

Leading up to the 2016 election, they hosted a series of meetings with a number of pollsters and election experts (like Charlie Cook). KA Conway was the featured presenter at one such meeting I attended during the summer of 2016. These are informal affairs, with maybe a dozen of us in a conference room, where we are supposed to engage in an open Q&A with the presenter.

Well, it was obvious from the start that Kellyanne didn't get the memo, and was there simply to spin and shill for Trump. I have little tolerance for that when I see it on TV, and am free to change the channel. But when trapped in a conference room during a busy day, I was not going to let her get away with it.

It started badly, when the polling data she presented was very obviously based on "alternative facts" before she coined the term. For example, she claimed that Trump was polling better at a similar stage among various minority groups than any of the previous Republican nominees (Romney, McCain, and Bush 2). It took me 10 seconds to do a google search to find data to refute her. I then raised my hand and showed her the data. She gave me that icey evil b^tch glare and faux smile we have all seen her give countless times on TV, while trying to quickly move on to some other bullet point on her spin sheet.

That pissed me off, so I asked her how Trump's then recent offensive comments about Judge Curiel's Mexican ancestry would possibly serve to build support among Latinos, the group that the Republican 2012 election post mortem concluded the party needed to attract if it hoped to be sustainably competitive in the future.

She then tried to make the ludicrous claim that his remarks were in no way racist, but legitimate. I responded that what she just said was patently absurd, that we were under the impression that she was there to give an objective view of the state of the race, and that this was an inappropriate forum to blatantly shill for a candidate, let alone one as heinous as Trump.

At that point, she collected her things, grabbed her Louis Vuitton bag, and left without saying a word.

Half the room high-fived me, half were aghast. I laughed out loud when a week or so later it was announced that Conway was appointed Trump's campaign manager.
User avatar
Jalen Bluntson
RealGM
Posts: 25,416
And1: 27,096
Joined: Nov 07, 2012
       

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#122 » by Jalen Bluntson » Sat Aug 4, 2018 8:08 pm

Dave DaButcher wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:My proudest moment of 2016 was making this evil crone storm out of a conference room after I challenged her on her ridiculous assertion that Trump's offensive insults of Judge Curiel were not racist. (This was at a lunch I attended where she was supposed to give an "unbiased" pollster's view of the then upcoming presidential election, not long before she joined the Trump campaign.)

In any case, 93 days until the midterms. You know what to do people!


You the man. More details, please.

Thank you sir. We are clients of a DC consulting firm that hosts meetings from time to time with DC-types, such as pollsters, members of Congress, and other experts who (ostensibly) have expertise in matters of interest to clients. These include the election outlook and the legislative/regulatory landscape for certain areas of focus (healthcare, taxation, trade, etc.).

Leading up to the 2016 election, they hosted a series of meetings with a number of pollsters and election experts (like Charlie Cook). KA Conway was the featured presenter at one such meeting I attended during the summer of 2016. These are informal affairs, with maybe a dozen of us in a conference room, where we are supposed to engage in an open Q&A with the presenter.

Well, it was obvious from the start that Kellyanne didn't get the memo, and was there simply to spin and shill for Trump. I have little tolerance for that when I see it on TV, and am free to change the channel. But when trapped in a conference room during a busy day, I was not going to let her get away with it.

It started badly, when the polling data she presented was very obviously based on "alternative facts" before she coined the term. For example, she claimed that Trump was polling better at a similar stage among various minority groups than any of the previous Republican nominees (Romney, McCain, and Bush 2). It took me 10 seconds to do a google search to find data to refute her. I then raised my hand and showed her the data. She gave me that icey evil b^tch glare and faux smile we have all seen her give countless times on TV, while trying to quickly move on to some other bullet point on her spin sheet.

That pissed me off, so I asked her how Trump's then recent offensive comments about Judge Curiel's Mexican ancestry would possibly serve to build support among Latinos, the group that the Republican 2012 election post mortem concluded the party needed to attract if it hoped to be sustainably competitive in the future.

She then tried to make the ludicrous claim that his remarks were in no way racist, but legitimate. I responded that what she just said was patently absurd, that we were under the impression that she was there to give an objective view of the state of the race, and that this was an inappropriate forum to blatantly shill for a candidate, let alone one as heinous as Trump.

At that point, she collected her things, grabbed her Louis Vuitton bag, and left without saying a word.

Half the room high-fived me, half were aghast. I laughed out loud when a week or so later it was announced that Conway was appointed Trump's campaign manager.


My new best poster. I change them up every month or so but, still. :lol: Awesome story.
:beer: RIP mags
User avatar
Dave DaButcher
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,698
And1: 4,301
Joined: May 16, 2017
     

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#123 » by Dave DaButcher » Sat Aug 4, 2018 8:11 pm

Are We Ther Yet wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
You the man. More details, please.

Thank you sir. We are clients of a DC consulting firm that hosts meetings from time to time with DC-types, such as pollsters, members of Congress, and other experts who (ostensibly) have expertise in matters of interest to clients. These include the election outlook and the legislative/regulatory landscape for certain areas of focus (healthcare, taxation, trade, etc.).

Leading up to the 2016 election, they hosted a series of meetings with a number of pollsters and election experts (like Charlie Cook). KA Conway was the featured presenter at one such meeting I attended during the summer of 2016. These are informal affairs, with maybe a dozen of us in a conference room, where we are supposed to engage in an open Q&A with the presenter.

Well, it was obvious from the start that Kellyanne didn't get the memo, and was there simply to spin and shill for Trump. I have little tolerance for that when I see it on TV, and am free to change the channel. But when trapped in a conference room during a busy day, I was not going to let her get away with it.

It started badly, when the polling data she presented was very obviously based on "alternative facts" before she coined the term. For example, she claimed that Trump was polling better at a similar stage among various minority groups than any of the previous Republican nominees (Romney, McCain, and Bush 2). It took me 10 seconds to do a google search to find data to refute her. I then raised my hand and showed her the data. She gave me that icey evil b^tch glare and faux smile we have all seen her give countless times on TV, while trying to quickly move on to some other bullet point on her spin sheet.

That pissed me off, so I asked her how Trump's then recent offensive comments about Judge Curiel's Mexican ancestry would possibly serve to build support among Latinos, the group that the Republican 2012 election post mortem concluded the party needed to attract if it hoped to be sustainably competitive in the future.

She then tried to make the ludicrous claim that his remarks were in no way racist, but legitimate. I responded that what she just said was patently absurd, that we were under the impression that she was there to give an objective view of the state of the race, and that this was an inappropriate forum to blatantly shill for a candidate, let alone one as heinous as Trump.

At that point, she collected her things, grabbed her Louis Vuitton bag, and left without saying a word.

Half the room high-fived me, half were aghast. I laughed out loud when a week or so later it was announced that Conway was appointed Trump's campaign manager.


My new best poster. I change them up every month or so but, still. :lol: Awesome story.

Haha, thanks!
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
RealGM
Posts: 97,387
And1: 62,517
Joined: May 16, 2005
Location: In Your Head, USA
   

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#124 » by HarthorneWingo » Sat Aug 4, 2018 8:23 pm

Dave DaButcher wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:My proudest moment of 2016 was making this evil crone storm out of a conference room after I challenged her on her ridiculous assertion that Trump's offensive insults of Judge Curiel were not racist. (This was at a lunch I attended where she was supposed to give an "unbiased" pollster's view of the then upcoming presidential election, not long before she joined the Trump campaign.)

In any case, 93 days until the midterms. You know what to do people!


You the man. More details, please.

Thank you sir. We are clients of a DC consulting firm that hosts meetings from time to time with DC-types, such as pollsters, members of Congress, and other experts who (ostensibly) have expertise in matters of interest to clients. These include the election outlook and the legislative/regulatory landscape for certain areas of focus (healthcare, taxation, trade, etc.).

Leading up to the 2016 election, they hosted a series of meetings with a number of pollsters and election experts (like Charlie Cook). KA Conway was the featured presenter at one such meeting I attended during the summer of 2016. These are informal affairs, with maybe a dozen of us in a conference room, where we are supposed to engage in an open Q&A with the presenter.

Well, it was obvious from the start that Kellyanne didn't get the memo, and was there simply to spin and shill for Trump. I have little tolerance for that when I see it on TV, and am free to change the channel. But when trapped in a conference room during a busy day, I was not going to let her get away with it.

It started badly, when the polling data she presented was very obviously based on "alternative facts" before she coined the term. For example, she claimed that Trump was polling better at a similar stage among various minority groups than any of the previous Republican nominees (Romney, McCain, and Bush 2). It took me 10 seconds to do a google search to find data to refute her. I then raised my hand and showed her the data. She gave me that icey evil b^tch glare and faux smile we have all seen her give countless times on TV, while trying to quickly move on to some other bullet point on her spin sheet.

That pissed me off, so I asked her how Trump's then recent offensive comments about Judge Curiel's Mexican ancestry would possibly serve to build support among Latinos, the group that the Republican 2012 election post mortem concluded the party needed to attract if it hoped to be sustainably competitive in the future.

She then tried to make the ludicrous claim that his remarks were in no way racist, but legitimate. I responded that what she just said was patently absurd, that we were under the impression that she was there to give an objective view of the state of the race, and that this was an inappropriate forum to blatantly shill for a candidate, let alone one as heinous as Trump.

At that point, she collected her things, grabbed her Louis Vuitton bag, and left without saying a word.

Half the room high-fived me, half were aghast. I laughed out loud when a week or so later it was announced that Conway was appointed Trump's campaign manager.


Wow. You're a hero! Count me in the "high-five" group. Well done.

So are you still doing this kind of work? What's your view on the upcoming mid-terms?
Free Palestine
User avatar
Dave DaButcher
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,698
And1: 4,301
Joined: May 16, 2017
     

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#125 » by Dave DaButcher » Sat Aug 4, 2018 8:45 pm

HarthorneWingo wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
You the man. More details, please.

Thank you sir. We are clients of a DC consulting firm that hosts meetings from time to time with DC-types, such as pollsters, members of Congress, and other experts who (ostensibly) have expertise in matters of interest to clients. These include the election outlook and the legislative/regulatory landscape for certain areas of focus (healthcare, taxation, trade, etc.).

Leading up to the 2016 election, they hosted a series of meetings with a number of pollsters and election experts (like Charlie Cook). KA Conway was the featured presenter at one such meeting I attended during the summer of 2016. These are informal affairs, with maybe a dozen of us in a conference room, where we are supposed to engage in an open Q&A with the presenter.

Well, it was obvious from the start that Kellyanne didn't get the memo, and was there simply to spin and shill for Trump. I have little tolerance for that when I see it on TV, and am free to change the channel. But when trapped in a conference room during a busy day, I was not going to let her get away with it.

It started badly, when the polling data she presented was very obviously based on "alternative facts" before she coined the term. For example, she claimed that Trump was polling better at a similar stage among various minority groups than any of the previous Republican nominees (Romney, McCain, and Bush 2). It took me 10 seconds to do a google search to find data to refute her. I then raised my hand and showed her the data. She gave me that icey evil b^tch glare and faux smile we have all seen her give countless times on TV, while trying to quickly move on to some other bullet point on her spin sheet.

That pissed me off, so I asked her how Trump's then recent offensive comments about Judge Curiel's Mexican ancestry would possibly serve to build support among Latinos, the group that the Republican 2012 election post mortem concluded the party needed to attract if it hoped to be sustainably competitive in the future.

She then tried to make the ludicrous claim that his remarks were in no way racist, but legitimate. I responded that what she just said was patently absurd, that we were under the impression that she was there to give an objective view of the state of the race, and that this was an inappropriate forum to blatantly shill for a candidate, let alone one as heinous as Trump.

At that point, she collected her things, grabbed her Louis Vuitton bag, and left without saying a word.

Half the room high-fived me, half were aghast. I laughed out loud when a week or so later it was announced that Conway was appointed Trump's campaign manager.


Wow. You're a hero! Count me in the "high-five" group. Well done.

So are you still doing this kind of work? What's your view on the upcoming mid-terms?

Thanks Wingo!

Yes, given its relevance to what I do, I still follow the elections closely and meet with pollsters, others from time to time. With the giant disclaimer that elections are, by definition, highly fluid, and the shocking 2016 outcome makes me a lot more cautious about making predictions with any sort of conviction, my view as of today is that the House will flip Democrat (the consensus view), while the Senate will be very close, with odds favoring the Republicans to maintain a razor thin majority.

There are 45 Democratic seats that are either not up for election, safe D, or lean D. Meanwhile, there are 48 such seats in the Republican column as of now. So, there are 7 toss-up races, and the Democrats need to win 6 to retake control of the Senate. Note, the Cruz-Beto race in Texas is getting closer, and if trends continue, then the safe Republican count will drop to 47, and there will then be 8 toss-ups.

Those toss-ups are AZ, FL, MO, IN, NV, ND and TN. The state polling data is spotty, especially this far out. But based on the data I've seen, the Democrat is up in 3, the Republican is ahead in one (FL), while the other 3 are either tied or no polling has been done. All these races are within the margin for error.

So net-net, retaking the Senate is still a long shot for the Democrats primarily because they have so many more seats up for election this cycle. But the data is encouraging, and if a blue wave actually emerges, its possible.

Still, simply re-taking the House, which will give new Democratic committee chairmen/women subpoena power and the ability to reassert Congress' traditional oversight authority that the craven Republican leadership has completely abdicated, could begin to turn the tide.
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
RealGM
Posts: 97,387
And1: 62,517
Joined: May 16, 2005
Location: In Your Head, USA
   

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#126 » by HarthorneWingo » Sun Aug 5, 2018 2:38 am

Dave DaButcher wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:Thank you sir. We are clients of a DC consulting firm that hosts meetings from time to time with DC-types, such as pollsters, members of Congress, and other experts who (ostensibly) have expertise in matters of interest to clients. These include the election outlook and the legislative/regulatory landscape for certain areas of focus (healthcare, taxation, trade, etc.).

Leading up to the 2016 election, they hosted a series of meetings with a number of pollsters and election experts (like Charlie Cook). KA Conway was the featured presenter at one such meeting I attended during the summer of 2016. These are informal affairs, with maybe a dozen of us in a conference room, where we are supposed to engage in an open Q&A with the presenter.

Well, it was obvious from the start that Kellyanne didn't get the memo, and was there simply to spin and shill for Trump. I have little tolerance for that when I see it on TV, and am free to change the channel. But when trapped in a conference room during a busy day, I was not going to let her get away with it.

It started badly, when the polling data she presented was very obviously based on "alternative facts" before she coined the term. For example, she claimed that Trump was polling better at a similar stage among various minority groups than any of the previous Republican nominees (Romney, McCain, and Bush 2). It took me 10 seconds to do a google search to find data to refute her. I then raised my hand and showed her the data. She gave me that icey evil b^tch glare and faux smile we have all seen her give countless times on TV, while trying to quickly move on to some other bullet point on her spin sheet.

That pissed me off, so I asked her how Trump's then recent offensive comments about Judge Curiel's Mexican ancestry would possibly serve to build support among Latinos, the group that the Republican 2012 election post mortem concluded the party needed to attract if it hoped to be sustainably competitive in the future.

She then tried to make the ludicrous claim that his remarks were in no way racist, but legitimate. I responded that what she just said was patently absurd, that we were under the impression that she was there to give an objective view of the state of the race, and that this was an inappropriate forum to blatantly shill for a candidate, let alone one as heinous as Trump.

At that point, she collected her things, grabbed her Louis Vuitton bag, and left without saying a word.

Half the room high-fived me, half were aghast. I laughed out loud when a week or so later it was announced that Conway was appointed Trump's campaign manager.


Wow. You're a hero! Count me in the "high-five" group. Well done.

So are you still doing this kind of work? What's your view on the upcoming mid-terms?

Thanks Wingo!

Yes, given its relevance to what I do, I still follow the elections closely and meet with pollsters, others from time to time. With the giant disclaimer that elections are, by definition, highly fluid, and the shocking 2016 outcome makes me a lot more cautious about making predictions with any sort of conviction, my view as of today is that the House will flip Democrat (the consensus view), while the Senate will be very close, with odds favoring the Republicans to maintain a razor thin majority.

There are 45 Democratic seats that are either not up for election, safe D, or lean D. Meanwhile, there are 48 such seats in the Republican column as of now. So, there are 7 toss-up races, and the Democrats need to win 6 to retake control of the Senate. Note, the Cruz-Beto race in Texas is getting closer, and if trends continue, then the safe Republican count will drop to 47, and there will then be 8 toss-ups.

Those toss-ups are AZ, FL, MO, IN, NV, ND and TN. The state polling data is spotty, especially this far out. But based on the data I've seen, the Democrat is up in 3, the Republican is ahead in one (FL), while the other 3 are either tied or no polling has been done. All these races are within the margin for error.

So net-net, retaking the Senate is still a long shot for the Democrats primarily because they have so many more seats up for election this cycle. But the data is encouraging, and if a blue wave actually emerges, its possible.

Still, simply re-taking the House, which will give new Democratic committee chairmen/women subpoena power and the ability to reassert Congress' traditional oversight authority that the craven Republican leadership has completely abdicated, could begin to turn the tide.


Agreed. Taking back the House is more important. In the Senate, we still have two Dems there (Heidkamp and Manchin) who are unreliable when we're in the minority. I'm not sure what to do about them but they are a hindrance. As you say, these things are fluid and can still sway in either direction, though it looks like nothing but rough waters ahead for the GOP as we lead up to November. And I don't see them finding religion in between now and then. Should be very interesting.

Thanks Dave for the all the insight.
Free Palestine
User avatar
Dave DaButcher
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,698
And1: 4,301
Joined: May 16, 2017
     

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#127 » by Dave DaButcher » Sun Aug 5, 2018 11:46 am

HarthorneWingo wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
Wow. You're a hero! Count me in the "high-five" group. Well done.

So are you still doing this kind of work? What's your view on the upcoming mid-terms?

Thanks Wingo!

Yes, given its relevance to what I do, I still follow the elections closely and meet with pollsters, others from time to time. With the giant disclaimer that elections are, by definition, highly fluid, and the shocking 2016 outcome makes me a lot more cautious about making predictions with any sort of conviction, my view as of today is that the House will flip Democrat (the consensus view), while the Senate will be very close, with odds favoring the Republicans to maintain a razor thin majority.

There are 45 Democratic seats that are either not up for election, safe D, or lean D. Meanwhile, there are 48 such seats in the Republican column as of now. So, there are 7 toss-up races, and the Democrats need to win 6 to retake control of the Senate. Note, the Cruz-Beto race in Texas is getting closer, and if trends continue, then the safe Republican count will drop to 47, and there will then be 8 toss-ups.

Those toss-ups are AZ, FL, MO, IN, NV, ND and TN. The state polling data is spotty, especially this far out. But based on the data I've seen, the Democrat is up in 3, the Republican is ahead in one (FL), while the other 3 are either tied or no polling has been done. All these races are within the margin for error.

So net-net, retaking the Senate is still a long shot for the Democrats primarily because they have so many more seats up for election this cycle. But the data is encouraging, and if a blue wave actually emerges, its possible.

Still, simply re-taking the House, which will give new Democratic committee chairmen/women subpoena power and the ability to reassert Congress' traditional oversight authority that the craven Republican leadership has completely abdicated, could begin to turn the tide.


Agreed. Taking back the House is more important. In the Senate, we still have two Dems there (Heidkamp and Manchin) who are unreliable when we're in the minority. I'm not sure what to do about them but they are a hindrance. As you say, these things are fluid and can still sway in either direction, though it looks like nothing but rough waters ahead for the GOP as we lead up to November. And I don't see them finding religion in between now and then. Should be very interesting.

Thanks Dave for the all the insight.

Absolutely Wingo. Let’s all continue to monitor and share insights and developments of particular note as we approach November 6. Though it sounds cliche, given what’s at stake and the fundamental danger Trump and his minions represent, this will obviously be among the most important elections of our lifetimes.

It will also provide a window into the even more consequential 2020 election, which, at the risk of hyperbole, could determine whether this grand (and flawed) experiment will continue or not.

Best, Dave
blanko
Starter
Posts: 2,438
And1: 1,143
Joined: Mar 14, 2015

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#128 » by blanko » Sun Aug 5, 2018 2:08 pm

Of course trump has been linked to the mob, he was in construction during 70s-90s. The mafia, the union, and the democratic party were a holy trinity in nYc construction. The mafia and democratic party contaminated the construction unions. It is probably the reason he was a Democrat for so long.

There was a time when Democrats were blue color corrupt and Republicans were big corporation corrupt. Since the signing of NAFTA and free trade deals by the Bush and clinton administration's, both parties are big corporation corrupt now. A shame really.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
blanko
Starter
Posts: 2,438
And1: 1,143
Joined: Mar 14, 2015

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#129 » by blanko » Sun Aug 5, 2018 2:12 pm

The democratic party needs to free itself from the chains of the clinton machine. Use this opportunity to truly reform, reorganize, and bring much needed new blood into its leadership.

The Republican party is lost. Not because of trump, trump won the nomination because they were lost. The Republican party has given to much power to its religious minority. Even if they lose votes and seats in the short term, they need to cut those people or tame them.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
RealGM
Posts: 97,387
And1: 62,517
Joined: May 16, 2005
Location: In Your Head, USA
   

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#130 » by HarthorneWingo » Sun Aug 5, 2018 6:20 pm

blanko wrote:The democratic party needs to free itself from the chains of the clinton machine. Use this opportunity to truly reform, reorganize, and bring much needed new blood into its leadership.

The Republican party is lost. Not because of trump, trump won the nomination because they were lost. The Republican party has given to much power to its religious minority. Even if they lose votes and seats in the short term, they need to cut those people or tame them.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Trump is their Frankenstein. They created him. For the republican party to change, we'd need campaign finance reform. They could not survive without dark money funding, e.g. NRA.
Free Palestine
Clyde_Style
RealGM
Posts: 71,855
And1: 69,930
Joined: Jul 12, 2009

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#131 » by Clyde_Style » Sun Aug 5, 2018 7:05 pm

Dave DaButcher wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:Thanks Wingo!

Yes, given its relevance to what I do, I still follow the elections closely and meet with pollsters, others from time to time. With the giant disclaimer that elections are, by definition, highly fluid, and the shocking 2016 outcome makes me a lot more cautious about making predictions with any sort of conviction, my view as of today is that the House will flip Democrat (the consensus view), while the Senate will be very close, with odds favoring the Republicans to maintain a razor thin majority.

There are 45 Democratic seats that are either not up for election, safe D, or lean D. Meanwhile, there are 48 such seats in the Republican column as of now. So, there are 7 toss-up races, and the Democrats need to win 6 to retake control of the Senate. Note, the Cruz-Beto race in Texas is getting closer, and if trends continue, then the safe Republican count will drop to 47, and there will then be 8 toss-ups.

Those toss-ups are AZ, FL, MO, IN, NV, ND and TN. The state polling data is spotty, especially this far out. But based on the data I've seen, the Democrat is up in 3, the Republican is ahead in one (FL), while the other 3 are either tied or no polling has been done. All these races are within the margin for error.

So net-net, retaking the Senate is still a long shot for the Democrats primarily because they have so many more seats up for election this cycle. But the data is encouraging, and if a blue wave actually emerges, its possible.

Still, simply re-taking the House, which will give new Democratic committee chairmen/women subpoena power and the ability to reassert Congress' traditional oversight authority that the craven Republican leadership has completely abdicated, could begin to turn the tide.


Agreed. Taking back the House is more important. In the Senate, we still have two Dems there (Heidkamp and Manchin) who are unreliable when we're in the minority. I'm not sure what to do about them but they are a hindrance. As you say, these things are fluid and can still sway in either direction, though it looks like nothing but rough waters ahead for the GOP as we lead up to November. And I don't see them finding religion in between now and then. Should be very interesting.

Thanks Dave for the all the insight.

Absolutely Wingo. Let’s all continue to monitor and share insights and developments of particular note as we approach November 6. Though it sounds cliche, given what’s at stake and the fundamental danger Trump and his minions represent, this will obviously be among the most important elections of our lifetimes.

It will also provide a window into the even more consequential 2020 election, which, at the risk of hyperbole, could determine whether this grand (and flawed) experiment will continue or not.

Best, Dave


Just caught up with this thread and read your posts Dave. Thanks. Good on ya for sticking it to the Sea Hag. There's something about her in particular that screams "opportunist" every time she opens her mouth.

She's some mutation of D.C. careerism devoid of partisanship. This was her shot to be the face of an administration and if you had told her she'd have to put babies in a meat grinder on live television, she'd ask "but I still get to be the face of the administration, right?".

People like her and SH Sanders give political hacks a bad name.

In your daily work and encounters, is Mueller's investigation a common topic of conversation or do most in your sphere tend to consume their news on their own and keep their POV under wraps?
User avatar
Dave DaButcher
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,698
And1: 4,301
Joined: May 16, 2017
     

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#132 » by Dave DaButcher » Sun Aug 5, 2018 9:03 pm

Clyde_Style wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
Agreed. Taking back the House is more important. In the Senate, we still have two Dems there (Heidkamp and Manchin) who are unreliable when we're in the minority. I'm not sure what to do about them but they are a hindrance. As you say, these things are fluid and can still sway in either direction, though it looks like nothing but rough waters ahead for the GOP as we lead up to November. And I don't see them finding religion in between now and then. Should be very interesting.

Thanks Dave for the all the insight.

Absolutely Wingo. Let’s all continue to monitor and share insights and developments of particular note as we approach November 6. Though it sounds cliche, given what’s at stake and the fundamental danger Trump and his minions represent, this will obviously be among the most important elections of our lifetimes.

It will also provide a window into the even more consequential 2020 election, which, at the risk of hyperbole, could determine whether this grand (and flawed) experiment will continue or not.

Best, Dave


Just caught up with this thread and read your posts Dave. Thanks. Good on ya for sticking it to the Sea Hag. There's something about her in particular that screams "opportunist" every time she opens her mouth.

She's some mutation of D.C. careerism devoid of partisanship. This was her shot to be the face of an administration and if you had told her she'd have to put babies in a meat grinder on live television, she'd ask "but I still get to be the face of the administration, right?".

People like her and SH Sanders give political hacks a bad name.

In your daily work and encounters, is Mueller's investigation a common topic of conversation or do most in your sphere tend to consume their news on their own and keep their POV under wraps?

Thanks Clyde, and I agree of course with your sentiments.

In my line of work, while this is not universally true, I've been disappointed that people are not concerned enough by what has been happening, and tend to ignore the day to day developments. Indeed, as long as markets go up and the economy is doing well, the latest Trump shock-inducing incident or comment tends to be no more than a temporary topic of conversation, to be quickly forgotten or, by the worst among us, excused.

I think this is a sad reflection of the broader body politic that has become extremely short-sighted, and degraded by the debased behavior of Trump. Policy positions are important, and merit rigorous debate. But over time, they are insignificant relative to the values we all do (or should) share, such as liberty, free speech, a free press, inclusion, tolerance, and compassion, to name just a few.

I fear that if Trumpism is not stopped by well meaning people of every political persuasion, those values will recede and be subsumed by the worst elements that have always existed in the underbelly of America.
Clyde_Style
RealGM
Posts: 71,855
And1: 69,930
Joined: Jul 12, 2009

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#133 » by Clyde_Style » Sun Aug 5, 2018 10:02 pm

Dave DaButcher wrote:
Clyde_Style wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:Absolutely Wingo. Let’s all continue to monitor and share insights and developments of particular note as we approach November 6. Though it sounds cliche, given what’s at stake and the fundamental danger Trump and his minions represent, this will obviously be among the most important elections of our lifetimes.

It will also provide a window into the even more consequential 2020 election, which, at the risk of hyperbole, could determine whether this grand (and flawed) experiment will continue or not.

Best, Dave


Just caught up with this thread and read your posts Dave. Thanks. Good on ya for sticking it to the Sea Hag. There's something about her in particular that screams "opportunist" every time she opens her mouth.

She's some mutation of D.C. careerism devoid of partisanship. This was her shot to be the face of an administration and if you had told her she'd have to put babies in a meat grinder on live television, she'd ask "but I still get to be the face of the administration, right?".

People like her and SH Sanders give political hacks a bad name.

In your daily work and encounters, is Mueller's investigation a common topic of conversation or do most in your sphere tend to consume their news on their own and keep their POV under wraps?

Thanks Clyde, and I agree of course with your sentiments.

In my line of work, while this is not universally true, I've been disappointed that people are not concerned enough by what has been happening, and tend to ignore the day to day developments. Indeed, as long as markets go up and the economy is doing well, the latest Trump shock-inducing incident or comment tends to be no more than a temporary topic of conversation, to be quickly forgotten or, by the worst among us, excused.

I think this is a sad reflection of the broader body politic that has become extremely short-sighted, and degraded by the debased behavior of Trump. Policy positions are important, and merit rigorous debate. But over time, they are insignificant relative to the values we all do (or should) share, such as liberty, free speech, a free press, inclusion, tolerance, and compassion, to name just a few.

I fear that if Trumpism is not stopped by well meaning people of every political persuasion, those values will recede and be subsumed by the worst elements that have always existed in the underbelly of America.


Yes, I couldn't agree more. We are definitely in the midst of an historical inflection point on the political fulcrum that could tip either way.

On the one hand, you could see a descent into the passive acceptance of the dismantling of democratic functions as you're describing and all that requires is for people who should know better to stand by idly, because the aggression of fascistic elements will always plow ahead forcefully unless they are stopped by civilians forcing the system to use its checks and balances.

On the other hand, the outcome of the investigations could result in a reset button that washes away the worst aspects of government corruption for the first time in decades. If that coincides with a renewed impulse for actual justice for the average Joe within the Democratic party then there would be a sliver of a chance for actual reforms to be institutionalized on the campaign finance level while addressing the issues of executive branch criminality more effectively than foreseen by the original framers.

It appears Mueller is addressing this systemically which I've done my best to convey repeatedly. This is why I pointed out the RICO approach he is deploying. By RICO-style I mean following the money, nailing the lower tertiary players to flip on those above them in the food chain until you get a domino effect where your paper trail is buttressed by incontrovertible testimonies from the bottom all the way to the top of the criminal enterprise. And the GOP has functioned like a criminal enterprise, thus Mueller is pursuing this in a grand manner. This is not just about Trump, though in the end he is the ultimate objective.

Mueller took down the Gambinos in the same way he is dissecting the GOP. But I must add Mueller is not only a registered Republican when this started (can't blame him if he changes affiliations after this though :wink:), he also just referred Democrats like Podesta to State level investigators as part of his investigation:

Robert Mueller referred lobbyists, including Tony Podesta, to Manhattan prosecutors

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/31/17637426/robert-mueller-ukraine-lobbyists-tony-podesta-vin-weber-greg-craig

This is a critical point, because Mueller is basically probing anything that crosses his path, regardless of party. If one wants to cynicalize everything you could say he's throwing a few democrats on to the bonfire as a calculated display of neutrality, but that's the kind of BS explanation you'll hear from apologists. The truth is Mueller is not sparing the rod for anyone he discovers broke the law.

Mueller is not a partisan, but he is a patriot. And that is why Mueller's investigation is critical for saving democratic institutions.

The system of three branch checks and balances are now essentially dependent on Mueller succeeding.

The Executive Branch is obviously rogue and co-opted by Russia.

The congressional branch on the Republican side has also gone rogue and been co-opted by Russian influence. But there are major cracks in the GOP and they are no longer backing Trump like before.

(on a side note to everyone here, anytime someone is countered by What About Hillary? rebuttals in the future, just ask "Why hasn't a GOP controlled White House and Congress not launched new investigations into the Clintons?" We know the answer is because the accusations are just vapor meant to incite their base, but then you'll probably get deranged answers that the Clintons run the world.)

The judicial branch at the federal level has been effectively backing Mueller as I showed with a previous post link. He cannot be shut down now as new precedents were established this week in a 92 page ruling in response to a challenge by Roger Stone during his grand jury inquiry:

This Major Mueller Court Victory Means Trump is Doomed

https://www.politicususa.com/2018/08/05/this-major-mueller-court-victory-means-trump-is-doomed.html

That ruling will go a long way towards pre-empting some possible constitutional challenges that could decided by the SCOTUS. For instance, if Trump is subpoenaed for an interview by Mueller, it probably will not reach SCOTUS and he will be compelled to comply much more rapidly now. And we know a Trump interview with Mueller is the cherry on top and a fait accompli as Trump would not survive an interview without repeatedly perjuring himself.

In sum, the ability of a Trump or someone else stonewalling themselves in the WH and evading justice while attempting to behave like a king and not an elected representative of the people should be mitigated soon.

The challenges to this kind of incipient despotism are:

The two branches vs. the executive branch
The electoral public
The Fifth Estate (journalism)

As a significant portion of our public is intellectually challenged to put it politely, all of the above will be for naught if the combined direction of the November mid-terms and 2020 does not deliver a civilian vote that decisively demands actual reforms of the corruption that allowed this to happen.

And the media I've written about before, but as a whole they have swallowed the hit parade of daily travesties like a treadmill and have not as a general rule provided a consistent overview for the public to maintain the mental framework of everything happening.

As a result, the back and forth of social media usually descends into pissing matches over single bullet points and it is rare to find people either online or in the MSM capable of maintaining the big picture. I've done my best to connect the dots for folks on RealGM, but it is generally sorely lacking in the Fifth Estate as a whole.

There is good journalism, but the biggest outlets are OK, but not good enough to provide actual resistance to the foreign takeover we have witnessed.

Moreover, Obama dropped the ball big time and that's a whole other subject, but he knew what was going on with Trump and the Russians, but he was too much of a coward to soil his precious legacy by going out on his sword amidst what would have been the inevitable accusations of Clinton favoritism if he clamped down and blew the whistle. Obama really crapped the bed on that one.

So it boils down to:

1) Getting out the vote;

and

2) Mueller removing a good amount of the swamp across the political spectrum.

Those are the two things that will hold the dam in place and give us another decade to get this right. If either of those fail, then its Goodnight Gracie for democracy in America.
User avatar
Fat Kat
RealGM
Posts: 35,008
And1: 35,865
Joined: Apr 19, 2004
     

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#134 » by Fat Kat » Sun Aug 5, 2018 10:44 pm

Fat Kat wrote:
ChilledAlex wrote:
Clyde_Style wrote:Just dropping by for a second, but yeah, the dossier was initiated by Republicans (and Earthman knows better and have been told the facts about the dossier in other threads multiple times, yet they continue to lie about it, so............)


It's always the same, they believe **** insane conspiracy theories which makes no sense and have been debunked over and over again, but they refuse to believe something thats ****ing obvious to a 5year old.

I don't understand what has gone wrong and how is that possible but theres just prime example of that in this thread. :noway:


Read on Twitter


Read on Twitter
All comments made by Fat Kat are given as opinion, which may or may not be derived from facts, and not made to personally attack anyone on Realgm. All rights reserved.®
Clyde_Style
RealGM
Posts: 71,855
And1: 69,930
Joined: Jul 12, 2009

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#135 » by Clyde_Style » Sun Aug 5, 2018 10:46 pm

Fat Kat wrote:
Fat Kat wrote:
ChilledAlex wrote:
It's always the same, they believe **** insane conspiracy theories which makes no sense and have been debunked over and over again, but they refuse to believe something thats ****ing obvious to a 5year old.

I don't understand what has gone wrong and how is that possible but theres just prime example of that in this thread. :noway:


Read on Twitter


Read on Twitter


Image

I think we can arrange cheap one-way charter flights for these Russophiles
User avatar
Dave DaButcher
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,698
And1: 4,301
Joined: May 16, 2017
     

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#136 » by Dave DaButcher » Sun Aug 5, 2018 11:00 pm

Clyde_Style wrote:
Dave DaButcher wrote:
Clyde_Style wrote:
Just caught up with this thread and read your posts Dave. Thanks. Good on ya for sticking it to the Sea Hag. There's something about her in particular that screams "opportunist" every time she opens her mouth.

She's some mutation of D.C. careerism devoid of partisanship. This was her shot to be the face of an administration and if you had told her she'd have to put babies in a meat grinder on live television, she'd ask "but I still get to be the face of the administration, right?".

People like her and SH Sanders give political hacks a bad name.

In your daily work and encounters, is Mueller's investigation a common topic of conversation or do most in your sphere tend to consume their news on their own and keep their POV under wraps?

Thanks Clyde, and I agree of course with your sentiments.

In my line of work, while this is not universally true, I've been disappointed that people are not concerned enough by what has been happening, and tend to ignore the day to day developments. Indeed, as long as markets go up and the economy is doing well, the latest Trump shock-inducing incident or comment tends to be no more than a temporary topic of conversation, to be quickly forgotten or, by the worst among us, excused.

I think this is a sad reflection of the broader body politic that has become extremely short-sighted, and degraded by the debased behavior of Trump. Policy positions are important, and merit rigorous debate. But over time, they are insignificant relative to the values we all do (or should) share, such as liberty, free speech, a free press, inclusion, tolerance, and compassion, to name just a few.

I fear that if Trumpism is not stopped by well meaning people of every political persuasion, those values will recede and be subsumed by the worst elements that have always existed in the underbelly of America.


Yes, I couldn't agree more. We are definitely in the midst of an historical inflection point on the political fulcrum that could tip either way.

On the one hand, you could see a descent into the passive acceptance of the dismantling of democratic functions as you're describing and all that requires is for people who should know better to stand by idly, because the aggression of fascistic elements will always plow ahead forcefully unless they are stopped by civilians forcing the system to use its checks and balances.

On the other hand, the outcome of the investigations could result in a reset button that washes away the worst aspects of government corruption for the first time in decades. If that coincides with a renewed impulse for actual justice for the average Joe within the Democratic party then there would be a sliver of a chance for actual reforms to be institutionalized on the campaign finance level while addressing the issues of executive branch criminality more effectively than foreseen by the original framers.

It appears Mueller is addressing this systemically which I've done my best to convey repeatedly. This is why I pointed out the RICO approach he is deploying. By RICO-style I mean following the money, nailing the lower tertiary players to flip on those above them in the food chain until you get a domino effect where your paper trail is buttressed by incontrovertible testimonies from the bottom all the way to the top of the criminal enterprise. And the GOP has functioned like a criminal enterprise, thus Mueller is pursuing this in a grand manner. This is not just about Trump, though in the end he is the ultimate objective.

Mueller took down the Gambinos in the same way he is dissecting the GOP. But I must add Mueller is not only a registered Republican when this started (can't blame him if he changes affiliations after this though :wink:), he also just referred Democrats like Podesta to State level investigators as part of his investigation:

Robert Mueller referred lobbyists, including Tony Podesta, to Manhattan prosecutors

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/31/17637426/robert-mueller-ukraine-lobbyists-tony-podesta-vin-weber-greg-craig

This is a critical point, because Mueller is basically probing anything that crosses his path, regardless of party. If one wants to cynicalize everything you could say he's throwing a few democrats on to the bonfire as a calculated display of neutrality, but that's the kind of BS explanation you'll hear from apologists. The truth is Mueller is not sparing the rod for anyone he discovers broke the law.

Mueller is not a partisan, but he is a patriot. And that is why Mueller's investigation is critical for saving democratic institutions.

The system of three branch checks and balances are now essentially dependent on Mueller succeeding.

The Executive Branch is obviously rogue and co-opted by Russia.

The congressional branch on the Republican side has also gone rogue and been co-opted by Russian influence. But there are major cracks in the GOP and they are no longer backing Trump like before.

(on a side note to everyone here, anytime someone is countered by What About Hillary? rebuttals in the future, just ask "Why hasn't a GOP controlled White House and Congress not launched new investigations into the Clintons?" We know the answer is because the accusations are just vapor meant to incite their base, but then you'll probably get deranged answers that the Clintons run the world.)

The judicial branch at the federal level has been effectively backing Mueller as I showed with a previous post link. He cannot be shut down now as new precedents were established this week in a 92 page ruling in response to a challenge by Roger Stone during his grand jury inquiry:

This Major Mueller Court Victory Means Trump is Doomed

https://www.politicususa.com/2018/08/05/this-major-mueller-court-victory-means-trump-is-doomed.html

That ruling will go a long way towards pre-empting some possible constitutional challenges that could decided by the SCOTUS. For instance, if Trump is subpoenaed for an interview by Mueller, it probably will not reach SCOTUS and he will be compelled to comply much more rapidly now. And we know a Trump interview with Mueller is the cherry on top and a fait accompli as Trump would not survive an interview without repeatedly perjuring himself.

In sum, the ability of a Trump or someone else stonewalling themselves in the WH and evading justice while attempting to behave like a king and not an elected representative of the people should be mitigated soon.

The challenges to this kind of incipient despotism are:

The two branches vs. the executive branch
The electoral public
The Fifth Estate (journalism)

As a significant portion of our public is intellectually challenged to put it politely, all of the above will be for naught if the combined direction of the November mid-terms and 2020 does not deliver a civilian vote that decisively demands actual reforms of the corruption that allowed this to happen.

And the media I've written about before, but as a whole they have swallowed the hit parade of daily travesties like a treadmill and have not as a general rule provided a consistent overview for the public to maintain the mental framework of everything happening.

As a result, the back and forth of social media usually descends into pissing matches over single bullet points and it is rare to find people either online or in the MSM capable of maintaining the big picture. I've done my best to connect the dots for folks on RealGM, but it is generally sorely lacking in the Fifth Estate as a whole.

There is good journalism, but the biggest outlets are OK, but not good enough to provide actual resistance to the foreign takeover we have witnessed.

Moreover, Obama dropped the ball big time and that's a whole other subject, but he knew what was going on with Trump and the Russians, but he was too much of a coward to soil his precious legacy by going out on his sword amidst what would have been the inevitable accusations of Clinton favoritism if he clamped down and blew the whistle. Obama really crapped the bed on that one.

So it boils down to:

1) Getting out the vote;

and

2) Mueller removing a good amount of the swamp across the political spectrum.

Those are the two things that will hold the dam in place and give us another decade to get this right. If either of those fail, then its Goodnight Gracie for democracy in America.

Wow, great stuff Clyde! And very well said. Thank you for that.

Despite the powers of corruption, aided and abetted by the know-nothing horde, there are still forces for good as you point out, and millions of Americans who remain clear-thinking and on the side of the righteous.

And though the past two years have moved us all closer to the abyss, for reasons you so eloquently articulated, I am hopeful that good will ultimately prevail. For, after all, as the great man said, I believe the arc of history bends toward justice.

But if, as you said, November 6th proves us wrong, we are doomed.
Clyde_Style
RealGM
Posts: 71,855
And1: 69,930
Joined: Jul 12, 2009

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#137 » by Clyde_Style » Sun Aug 5, 2018 11:18 pm

Dave DaButcher wrote:Wow, great stuff Clyde! And very well said. Thank you for that.

Despite the powers of corruption, aided and abetted by the know-nothing horde, there are still forces for good as you point out, and millions of Americans who remain clear-thinking and on the side of the righteous.

And though the past two years have moved us all closer to the abyss, for reasons you so eloquently articulated, I am hopeful that good will ultimately prevail. For, after all, as the great man said, I believe the arc of history bends toward justice.

But if, as you said, November 6th proves us wrong, we are doomed.


Thanks Dave

Yes, November is a big deal

Since the M.O. of the GOP + Trump's immigration/deportation tactics has been an effort to minimize the influence of non-white demographics at the voting booth, if the tides turn against them this year and 2020 then the demographic future they tried to ward off should kick in and provide stronger majorities that are sympathetic to what the USA actually is, a multi-cultural nation.

If that does not happen or the vote hacking remains in effect (voter suppression tactics are still being addressed, but they are dangerous still to rigging the vote; Eric Holder is doing his best to address this and gerrymandering), then we're in big trouble.

I recently chose Sweden over Canada as my fall-back option. If the U.S. can't get its act together, I'll be a Swedish citizen within six years.
blanko
Starter
Posts: 2,438
And1: 1,143
Joined: Mar 14, 2015

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#138 » by blanko » Mon Aug 6, 2018 4:33 am

Fat Kat wrote:
Read on Twitter


Read on Twitter
[/quote]

People who blindly follow "parties" are idiots. Peons, minnows, and mindless zombies that follow their leader. We are americans first and everything else second.

Sent from my LGM-V300K using Tapatalk
septahex
Pro Prospect
Posts: 805
And1: 341
Joined: Jun 27, 2017
   

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#139 » by septahex » Mon Aug 6, 2018 4:56 am

There's more evidence of Israeli control of US politics than there is of Russian control, yet if I pointed out how both parties' candidates grovel to an Israeli lobby, AIPAC and that some of the major donors on both parties donate based on Israeli interests (Adelson + Saban) I'd be called a racist antisemite, yet the most tenuous, fact-devoid smearing of Trump predicated on russophobic canards is allowed to stand unchallenged.

I think a lot of the self-appointed intelligentsia in Washington are just mad that Russians aren't living in abject poverty despite the best attempts of Harvard stinkers to ruin post-soviet Russia with the US-backed Yeltsin at the helm. If we're talking about US-Russian political collusion and subversion of muh democracy, why not talk about the US State Department's funding of the euromaidan and selection of the president of Ukraine, seemingly abrogating the ukrainian people's democratic right to the election of their leaders. But that's right, this russophobic hysteria is only because the ivy leaguers in DC couldn't get their way to bring in a neocon who pays heed to them instead of the american voters and now project themselves to be the defenders of democracy in a thinly veiled temper tantrum.
Clyde_Style
RealGM
Posts: 71,855
And1: 69,930
Joined: Jul 12, 2009

Re: OT: Twitter Thread on 3 Decades of Russian & Mafia Relationships with Trump 

Post#140 » by Clyde_Style » Mon Aug 6, 2018 5:19 am

septahex wrote:There's more evidence of Israeli control of US politics than there is of Russian control, yet if I pointed out how both parties' candidates grovel to an Israeli lobby, AIPAC and that some of the major donors on both parties donate based on Israeli interests (Adelson + Saban) I'd be called a racist antisemite, yet the most tenuous, fact-devoid smearing of Trump predicated on russophobic canards is allowed to stand unchallenged.

I think a lot of the self-appointed intelligentsia in Washington are just mad that Russians aren't living in abject poverty despite the best attempts of Harvard stinkers to ruin post-soviet Russia with the US-backed Yeltsin at the helm. If we're talking about US-Russian political collusion and subversion of muh democracy, why not talk about the US State Department's funding of the euromaidan and selection of the president of Ukraine, seemingly abrogating the ukrainian people's democratic right to the election of their leaders. But that's right, this russophobic hysteria is only because the ivy leaguers in DC couldn't get their way to bring in a neocon who pays heed to them instead of the american voters and now project themselves to be the defenders of democracy in a thinly veiled temper tantrum.


I wouldn't call you an anti-semite for suggesting Israel has lots of hooks into the U.S. government, but when you use that as a counterbalance to claim it is hysterical (or that somehow it is an ivy leaguer plot) to draw direct lines between the GOP and Trump to Putin you don't make a good case for one point by trying to use it to invalidate another.

What the Trump administration, and Kushner in particular, has done in regards to Israel is a subject unto itself.

If you really just want to say the matter of Trump's collusion with Putin is false, then say it straight and provide some basis for why it is false. What you just posted is a melange of various ideas, not a coherent statement. And if you're saying others are having tantrums, have you read your post back to yourself? It sure looks like a tantrum.

Return to New York Knicks