It's getting harder and harder to think any different at this point.tennbengal wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:10 pmMcConnell. Ryan. I think they were in on it too. And others in leadership.Joe K wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:04 pmDepends who exactly you mean by “Trump and Republicans.” I said like 3 days ago in this thread that, based on the latest indictment, I expect Roger Stone to be indicted. Will anyone closer to Trump get directly implicated? I don’t know.tennbengal wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:20 pm Also, are we all now on board that Trump and the republicans colluded with Russian in the summer of 2016? JoeK, you there yet?
The more immediate question is whether Congressional Repuclicans will actually back to their tough talk today with any meaningful action. I think we all know the answer to that.
The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Moderators: Shirley, Sabo, brian, rass, DaveInSeattle
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
-
- The Dude
- Posts: 12031
- Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:07 pm
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
For sure McConnell. 100%.
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
So an NRA activist was just indicted for being an agent of the Russian government. Hopefully everyone responds by treating the NRA and other gun nuts with appropriate civility.
- degenerasian
- The Dude
- Posts: 12369
- Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:22 pm
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Why don't Flake, Corker and McCain just cross over to the Democrats and effective end Trump's presidency?
Is crossing the floor allowed in the US Senate?
Is crossing the floor allowed in the US Senate?
Kung Fu movies are like porn. There's 1 on 1, then 2 on 1, then a group scene..
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Because that would take courage and character. It should have happened the moment Trump became president. There should have been numerous Republicans to say "ENOUGH!" and held his presidency hostage.
But no. These are spineless assholes more beholden to some false ideal of conservatism than to actually care about the republic. It's party over country.
But no. These are spineless assholes more beholden to some false ideal of conservatism than to actually care about the republic. It's party over country.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
There's nothing technically stopping them from switching parties or dropping party affiliation. They wouldn't be able to tap into the GOP war chest, but if they're not running again/going to die soon, it's not like it matters. Congress doesn't act like a Parliament if that's what you're asking.degenerasian wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:19 pm Why don't Flake, Corker and McCain just cross over to the Democrats and effective end Trump's presidency?
Is crossing the floor allowed in the US Senate?
My avatar corresponds on my place in the Swamp posting list with the all-time Home Run list. Number 45 is Paul Konerko with 439.
- Pruitt
- The Dude
- Posts: 18105
- Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:02 am
- Location: North Shore of Lake Ontario
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Apparently many Republicans are grumbling (I know, nothing will happen), but the rumbling must have reached Air Force One, because someone has decided to clarify the fact that despite what you heard him say...
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Also, Flake, McCain et al. might despise Trump’s temperament but they agree with the vast majority of his policy agenda.Johnnie wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:25 pm Because that would take courage and character. It should have happened the moment Trump became president. There should have been numerous Republicans to say "ENOUGH!" and held his presidency hostage.
But no. These are spineless assholes more beholden to some false ideal of conservatism than to actually care about the republic. It's party over country.
- DSafetyGuy
- The Dude
- Posts: 8811
- Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:29 pm
- Location: Behind the high school
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
And when they disagree with something he does, it's easy just to send out a tweet about it to get people to think you're a good guy, then fall back in line when it comes time to vote.Joe K wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 3:01 pmAlso, Flake, McCain et al. might despise Trump’s temperament but they agree with the vast majority of his policy agenda.Johnnie wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:25 pm Because that would take courage and character. It should have happened the moment Trump became president. There should have been numerous Republicans to say "ENOUGH!" and held his presidency hostage.
But no. These are spineless assholes more beholden to some false ideal of conservatism than to actually care about the republic. It's party over country.
“All I'm sayin' is, he comes near me, I'll put him in the wall.”
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Ady Barkan literally pled for his life to Jeff Flake and made waves 7 months ago. Where's Flake now? Not opposing Donald Trump. That's for fuck's sure. Ady has gotten worse though and still keeps fighting. He's been a guest a couple times on Pod Save America.
Republicans are evil incarnate.
Republicans are evil incarnate.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
- Pruitt
- The Dude
- Posts: 18105
- Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:02 am
- Location: North Shore of Lake Ontario
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
The old cliche is that "In the Kingdom of the blind, a one-eyed man is king."
Perhaps we can change it to "In the kingdom of the assholes, the one who can fake decency is lauded."
Perhaps we can change it to "In the kingdom of the assholes, the one who can fake decency is lauded."
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
James Jeffords left the GOP in 2001 to caucus with the Democrats. Vermont Republicans are more traditional Republicans though not caught up in social aspects that drive the party now.L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:30 pmThere's nothing technically stopping them from switching parties or dropping party affiliation. They wouldn't be able to tap into the GOP war chest, but if they're not running again/going to die soon, it's not like it matters. Congress doesn't act like a Parliament if that's what you're asking.degenerasian wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:19 pm Why don't Flake, Corker and McCain just cross over to the Democrats and effective end Trump's presidency?
Is crossing the floor allowed in the US Senate?
Did you see that ludicrous display last night?
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
- Pruitt
- The Dude
- Posts: 18105
- Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:02 am
- Location: North Shore of Lake Ontario
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Love it.
But a cursory click on the tweet leads me to this question: Who the fuck taunts Dictionary.com? What a world.
But a cursory click on the tweet leads me to this question: Who the fuck taunts Dictionary.com? What a world.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
- The Sybian
- The Dude
- Posts: 19047
- Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
- Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Wow, Trump is getting killed by his sycophants today. Fox is killing him, commentators who almost always back even his most ludicrous shit are killing him. A few GOP Congressmen and party leaders spoke out against him... I had given up hope of that ever happening, because lets face it, after all of the horrendous things Trump has said and done, if they haven't backed away from him yet, I didn't think anything could get them to speak out. Not expecting this to continue past today, but it was a bit of surprise.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
-Pruitt
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
That's almost, almost grounds for the Mister D signal in an unironic way.
Reddit politics is going batshit with links to everyone calling him the new Benedict Arnold, treasonous, and a traitor.
That press conference by Rosenstein was so fucking well timed. I guess when you have the truth on your side you can eventually control the narrative.
Reddit politics is going batshit with links to everyone calling him the new Benedict Arnold, treasonous, and a traitor.
That press conference by Rosenstein was so fucking well timed. I guess when you have the truth on your side you can eventually control the narrative.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
- Pruitt
- The Dude
- Posts: 18105
- Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:02 am
- Location: North Shore of Lake Ontario
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Don;t get too excited.
Fox primetime excuse sessions in the next two nights.
Fox primetime excuse sessions in the next two nights.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Oh fuck off dude. I was in all day training and was just reading through here and got all excited to break it back out. But ironically. Definitely ironically. This is no different than the dozens of other “dealbreakers”.
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
I think you guys are in agreement.
"What a bunch of pedantic pricks." - sybian
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Violent agreement, it seems.
Read better, Delaware. I'm on your side!
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
I’m with you guys. The GOP will pressure Trump to atone for his friendliness towards Putin by bombing Iran or orchestrating a coup in Venezuela. Then they’ll rally behind his brave moral leadership.
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Pretty ironic though that dictionary.com of all sources is completely misusing the definition of “treason.” It’s specifically defined in the US Constitution, and that definition has been interpreted by the Courts as requiring that the other country involved be one with which the US is currently involved in an active war. Not just a “hostile power” or a power that spies on us or tries to hack computers. For that reason, in the leading case on the issue, it was ruled that it wasn’t treason for a US citizen to assist Nazi Germany in the late-1930s, since we didn’t actually go to war with them until 1941.
And frankly, I find this repeated use of the word “treason” to be completely overblown and counterproductive. Overblown for the reasons I’ve stated: conduct can be impeachable or criminal without being treason. Do those throwing out the word “treason” actually think Trump should be subject to execution or imprisonment for life as a consequence of the Helsinki Summit? And counterproductive because if you don’t think the Right will throw this treason rhetoric right back at the next Democratic President for something like trying to renegotiate Obama’s Iran deal or improving relations with Venezuela, you’re being naive.
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
That's all well and good but he should work harder and get his own insurance. Are YOU willing to spend 13 more cents on each Papa John's pizza?? This PC culture has gone too far!Johnnie wrote: ↑Mon Jul 16, 2018 3:54 pm Ady Barkan literally pled for his life to Jeff Flake and made waves 7 months ago. Where's Flake now? Not opposing Donald Trump. That's for fuck's sure. Ady has gotten worse though and still keeps fighting. He's been a guest a couple times on Pod Save America.
Republicans are evil incarnate.
Pack a vest for your james in the city of intercourse
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Noli Timere Messorem
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Okay, I’ll play along. If what Russia has done is truly an act of “warfare,” how should we retaliate against them once Trump is out of power? Bombings? An invasion? Targeted assassinations? Because when people call this an “act of war,” or worse yet analogize it to Pearl Harbor or 9/11, it begs the question what the appropriate response is.
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
For the record - I didn’t post that to emphasize the finer points of what constitutes treason. I posted it for patently obvious (other) reasons.Joe K wrote: ↑Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:34 am Okay, I’ll play along. If what Russia has done is truly an act of “warfare,” how should we retaliate against them once Trump is out of power? Bombings? An invasion? Targeted assassinations? Because when people call this an “act of war,” or worse yet analogize it to Pearl Harbor or 9/11, it begs the question what the appropriate response is.
Noli Timere Messorem
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
I’m not sure what the approriate external response should be, however I’d start with making certain foreign entities can no longer dump millions of dollars into PACs like the NRA (which of course used said infusion to further buy American politicians).Joe K wrote: ↑Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:34 am Okay, I’ll play along. If what Russia has done is truly an act of “warfare,” how should we retaliate against them once Trump is out of power? Bombings? An invasion? Targeted assassinations? Because when people call this an “act of war,” or worse yet analogize it to Pearl Harbor or 9/11, it begs the question what the appropriate response is.
Stop thinking so black and white.
Noli Timere Messorem
-
- The Dude
- Posts: 12031
- Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:07 pm
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Cold war is re-started, if it even ever ended. Not sure your confusion, JoeK. An attack is an attack. The US can respond without raining bombs.
-
- The Dude
- Posts: 12031
- Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:07 pm
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
If you’re right, then hopefully Cold War 2.0 is a hell of a lot more restrained, without all the terribly destructive proxy wars, coups and support for tyrants that the first one featured. Because if “an attack is an attack,” then we attacked an awful lot of countries in service of our Cold War goals.tennbengal wrote: ↑Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:50 am Cold war is re-started, if it even ever ended. Not sure your confusion, JoeK. An attack is an attack. The US can respond without raining bombs.
ETA: This entire piece is so, so good. It’s by Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law professor who is an expert on international law and has worked for the Defense Department. It asks all the right questions about where the US goes from here:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortab ... ence-putin
-
- The Dude
- Posts: 12031
- Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:07 pm
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
There's other responses beyond proxy wars too.Joe K wrote: ↑Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:13 amIf you’re right, then hopefully Cold War 2.0 is a hell of a lot more restrained, without all the terribly destructive proxy wars, coups and support for tyrants that the first one featured. Because if “an attack is an attack,” then we attacked an awful lot of countries in service of our Cold War goals.tennbengal wrote: ↑Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:50 am Cold war is re-started, if it even ever ended. Not sure your confusion, JoeK. An attack is an attack. The US can respond without raining bombs.
ETA: This entire piece is so, so good. It’s by Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law professor who is an expert on international law and has worked for the Defense Department. It asks all the right questions about where the US goes from here:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortab ... ence-putin
By the way, I reject your framing. The issue here isn't that the Russians hacked into US computers, and we can't say boo about that because we do it too. The issue is that they installed a party in the White House to serve Russian interests. That's something else entirely.
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Why do you think that US intelligence agencies routinely intervene in other countries’ domestic politics? Just for fun or because they want to help candidates prevail that will serve American interests? I mean, back in the 1990s, we openly celebrated doing that exact thing in Russia:
The Lawfare article I linked makes the astute point that even if you accept the premises that the US is a better global actor than Russia and that we usually intervene in foreign elections for the right reasons — and I think Goldsmith would agree with both of those premises — there are consequences to criminally prosecuting the same type of conduct our intelligence agencies routinely engage in. If your argument boils down to “Trump’s a bad guy and we only intervene to help good guys” that’s all well and good, but you’re going to have a hard time discouraging Russia, China, etc. from this type of meddling — or from indicting US intelligence officials.
The Lawfare article I linked makes the astute point that even if you accept the premises that the US is a better global actor than Russia and that we usually intervene in foreign elections for the right reasons — and I think Goldsmith would agree with both of those premises — there are consequences to criminally prosecuting the same type of conduct our intelligence agencies routinely engage in. If your argument boils down to “Trump’s a bad guy and we only intervene to help good guys” that’s all well and good, but you’re going to have a hard time discouraging Russia, China, etc. from this type of meddling — or from indicting US intelligence officials.
-
- The Dude
- Posts: 12031
- Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:07 pm
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
I get it. We do it too. Totally get that point. So, because we do it too, we just have to take it when it happens to us? We just need to accept that Republicans were complicit because the CIA has done this in other countries for years? I reject that. And I would imagine that our operatives know and accept as the high price of their service that their lives and freedom are in jeapordy. Is that moreso because we indicted the Russians? Got me. I am guessing they are in more danger of Trump literally outing them to whoever he wants to.
- DaveInSeattle
- The Dude
- Posts: 8550
- Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:51 am
- Location: Seattle, WA
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
I made the mistake of hearing some of RightWing Radio blowhard Mark Levin on the way home from my guitar lesson last night. Guy was predictably completely unhinged about yesterday's events. The highlights:
- Former CIA Director John Brennan is a communist
- Mueller's investigation is a farce because he didn't indict Putin
- This all happened in 2016, so its all Obama's fault
- None of it matters, because Trump is doing such a great job
- Former CIA Director John Brennan is a communist
- Mueller's investigation is a farce because he didn't indict Putin
- This all happened in 2016, so its all Obama's fault
- None of it matters, because Trump is doing such a great job
- The Sybian
- The Dude
- Posts: 19047
- Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:36 am
- Location: Working in the Crap Part of Jersey
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
I think this article sums it all up. Browder revealed the corruption that allowed Putin to steall 100s of Billions in cash and assets from the Russian people, and his work on passing the Magnitsky Act and similar laws in other countries is tying up Billions of dollars of Putin's wealth.
I know we discussed it, but if you haven't listened to Preet Bharara's podcast interview with Browder, it's an absolute must.
https://www.businessinsider.nl/trump-pu ... ce-2018-7/
As for JoeK's question of how respond if this is an act of war, I think we increase sanctions on Russia and Russian oligarchs tied to Putin. We work on improving relations with our allies, who will in turn support us by sanctioning Russia and refusing to do business with Putin's oligarchs. We squeeze Putin's power, limit his access to his criminal enterprise around the world. We quietly provide support to groups protesting Putin. The CIA spreads information campaigns in areas susceptible to rebelling. Provide training to Chechen rebels. So much of what I read about Putin, is that he is a weak leader behind a veneer of totalitarianism. He kills reporters who begin to uncover dirt, because his grasp on power would be tenuous if his dirt came out and his access to stolen fortunes cut off. This is why it is a tragic shame that Trump has destroyed the State Department, and cut off information and power to those who remain at State. We are royally fucked not just wrt Russia, but basically all countries we have/had diplomatic relationships with.
I know we discussed it, but if you haven't listened to Preet Bharara's podcast interview with Browder, it's an absolute must.
https://www.businessinsider.nl/trump-pu ... ce-2018-7/
As for JoeK's question of how respond if this is an act of war, I think we increase sanctions on Russia and Russian oligarchs tied to Putin. We work on improving relations with our allies, who will in turn support us by sanctioning Russia and refusing to do business with Putin's oligarchs. We squeeze Putin's power, limit his access to his criminal enterprise around the world. We quietly provide support to groups protesting Putin. The CIA spreads information campaigns in areas susceptible to rebelling. Provide training to Chechen rebels. So much of what I read about Putin, is that he is a weak leader behind a veneer of totalitarianism. He kills reporters who begin to uncover dirt, because his grasp on power would be tenuous if his dirt came out and his access to stolen fortunes cut off. This is why it is a tragic shame that Trump has destroyed the State Department, and cut off information and power to those who remain at State. We are royally fucked not just wrt Russia, but basically all countries we have/had diplomatic relationships with.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
-Pruitt
- Pruitt
- The Dude
- Posts: 18105
- Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:02 am
- Location: North Shore of Lake Ontario
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
This capped a week where he insulted the PM of the UK, called the EU a "foe" and acted like a cartoonish, stereotypical American boor at the NATO summit.The Sybian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 17, 2018 10:57 am This is why it is a tragic shame that Trump has destroyed the State Department, and cut off information and power to those who remain at State. We are royally fucked not just wrt Russia, but basically all countries we have/had diplomatic relationships with.
And for the benefit of whom?
(it's an old statement, I know, but...) How he has more than 20% support is just so repulsive.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Did you see that ludicrous display last night?
- degenerasian
- The Dude
- Posts: 12369
- Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:22 pm
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
Was it because of the financial crisis and just trying to keep the financial system from collapsing that prevented the Dems from going for the second New Deal? All this while navigating the rough waters of the GOP impeding his efforts at every point.Joe K wrote: ↑Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:43 am Democrats also need to give serious thought to pushing for some significant structural changes. Because the Electoral College, gerrymandering, and equal distribution of Senators, regardless of population, all allow for what’s essentially one-party rule by a political party that doesn’t even have a majority. The GOP has won the popular vote for the presidency only once since 1988 (in 2004) and yet it controls every branch of the federal government and the vast majority of state governments. Democrats are almost allergic to pushing for big changes, but they are up against it for the foreseeable future regardless of Trump. Just typing this out frustrates me because it reminds me that the 2008 Election gave the Dems a once in a lifetime opportunity for a second New Deal but they wasted that chance by listening to the likes of Lieberman, Geithner and Rahm Emanuel.
Kung Fu movies are like porn. There's 1 on 1, then 2 on 1, then a group scene..
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
That would have been the Great Society under JFK and more so LBJ.
Did you see that ludicrous display last night?
Re: The Indictment Thread (Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part II)
JoeK, the Constitution might have outlined the definition of treason in 1770s-1780s terms since kinetic warfare with cannons, wooden ships, muskets, and bayonets was the only type of warfare imagined by a bunch of them.
They had no idea how the structure of warfare would change into the future. Cyber warfare is still warfare. And the head of state is acting counterintuitive to the welfare of everyone.
The Constitution and the structures it upholds are far past it's due date. There needs to be a complete rewrite to modernize our laws and core values.
Otherwise we end up in this gray area of "Well technically it's not treason since we aren't at war with ..." logic. That gives the perfect cover for the Intel community to be trumped (pun intended) by an adversary.
And as an aside, when I was stationed in Germany, Russia was always the reason we did things. Exercises in the Eastern bloc and the Baltic Sea countries? Russia. Joint exercises of operational plans and concept plans? Russia. Having a strong NATO alliance and going to war if any one nation were affected? Russia. If there was anything Moderate Mitt got right, it's that Russia was our biggest geopolitical foe.
And wouldn't you know, some 3 years after that debate Obama updated the National Security Strategy to reflect "Russian aggression."
Compare that to his 2010 National Security Strategy where Russia is a "strong voice" and we should "seek cooperation" with them.
Anyhoo, if I did this shit I'd be going to jail. That's how I weigh his actions if it were me making them.
They had no idea how the structure of warfare would change into the future. Cyber warfare is still warfare. And the head of state is acting counterintuitive to the welfare of everyone.
The Constitution and the structures it upholds are far past it's due date. There needs to be a complete rewrite to modernize our laws and core values.
Otherwise we end up in this gray area of "Well technically it's not treason since we aren't at war with ..." logic. That gives the perfect cover for the Intel community to be trumped (pun intended) by an adversary.
And as an aside, when I was stationed in Germany, Russia was always the reason we did things. Exercises in the Eastern bloc and the Baltic Sea countries? Russia. Joint exercises of operational plans and concept plans? Russia. Having a strong NATO alliance and going to war if any one nation were affected? Russia. If there was anything Moderate Mitt got right, it's that Russia was our biggest geopolitical foe.
And wouldn't you know, some 3 years after that debate Obama updated the National Security Strategy to reflect "Russian aggression."
Compare that to his 2010 National Security Strategy where Russia is a "strong voice" and we should "seek cooperation" with them.
What's baffling is that Trump is going against his own National Security Strategy, published in 2017, by doing what he did in Helsinki. The verbiage in his NSS compared to Obama's is far more direct and accusatory. It takes the aggression adjective and expands it considerably.Russia: We seek to build a stable, substantive, multidimensional relationship with Russia, based on mutual interests. The United States has an interest in a strong, peaceful, and prosperous Russia that respects international norms. As the two nations possessing the majority of the world’s nuclear weapons, we are working together to advance nonproliferation, both by reducing our nuclear arsenals and by cooperating to ensure that other countries meet their international commitments to reducing the spread of nuclear weapons around the world. We will seek greater partnership with Russia in confronting violent extremism, especially in Afghanistan. We also will seek new trade and investment arrangements for increasing the prosperity of our peoples. We support efforts within Russia to promote the rule of
law, accountable government, and universal values. While actively seeking Russia’s cooperation to act as a responsible partner in Europe and Asia, we will support the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia’s neighbors.
Today, actors such as Russia are using information tools in an a empt to undermine the legitimacy of democracies. Adversaries target media, political processes, financial networks, and personal data. The American public and private sectors must recognize this and work together to defend our way of life. No external threat can be allowed to shake our shared commitment to our values, undermine our system of government, or divide our Nation.
http://nssarchive.usAlthough the menace of Soviet communism is gone, new threats test our will. Russia is using subversive measures to weaken the credibility of America’s commitment to Europe, undermine transatlantic unity, and weaken European institutions and governments. With its invasions of Georgia and Ukraine, Russia demonstrated its willingness to violate the sovereignty of states in the region. Russia continues to intimidate its neighbors with threatening behavior, such as nuclear posturing and the forward deployment of offensive capabilities.
Anyhoo, if I did this shit I'd be going to jail. That's how I weigh his actions if it were me making them.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.