Setting the table to blame the Russians

#26
#26
LouderVol said:
not sure how you can say Hilary is strong. the rest is pretty spot on though.
Click to expand...


Its relative.

Relative to Trump, she's MUCH stronger on national defense, particularly in dealing with Russia.

And as to the ME, I think it safe to say that Trump better pray that in the debates they don't hold up a map with no names on it and ask him to identify Syria or Libya. Or Yemen or Iran. Or Turkey or Pakistan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#27
#27
lawgator1 said:
Its relative.

Relative to Trump, she's MUCH stronger on national defense, particularly in dealing with Russia.

And as to the ME, I think it safe to say that Trump better pray that in the debates they don't hold up a map with no names on it and ask him to identify Syria or Libya. Or Yemen or Iran. Or Turkey or Pakistan.
Click to expand...

What has she done to demonstrate strength in national defense? Where/what did she do as SOS to improve our security or quell instability in the world?
 
#28
#28
hog88 said:
It was Obama and Clinton who set the stage for Putin to take Crimea and other parts of Ukraine.
Click to expand...

That's just wrong. Had Ukraine been a NATO member it likely would not have happened. Ukraine's application for NATO membership was withdrawn in 2010 when pro Russian Viktor Yanukovych became president. Putin knew he had to move while Ukraine was not a member. Obama nor anyone else could have stopped it without engaging the Russians militarily on their turf. Certainly without NATO that was not going to happen.

Please tell me how you feel it was on Obama and Clinton.

By the way Viktor Yanukovych is known to have close and possibly illegal ties to Trump advisor Paul Manafort.

Paul Manafort, Donald Trump?s top adviser, and his ties to pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine | PolitiFact Global News Service
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#29
#29
MT LeConte said:
That's just wrong. Had Ukraine been a NATO member it likely would not have happened. Ukraine's application for NATO membership was withdrawn in 2010 when pro Russian Viktor Yanukovych became president. Putin knew he had to move while Ukraine was not a member. Obama nor anyone else could have stopped it without engaging the Russians militarily on their turf. Certainly without NATO that was not going to happen.

Please tell me how you feel it was on Obama and Clinton.

By the way Viktor Yanukovych is known to have close and possibly illegal ties to Trump advisor Paul Manafort.

Paul Manafort, Donald Trump?s top adviser, and his ties to pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine | PolitiFact Global News Service
Click to expand...

Because as POTUS and SOS they both demonstrated weakness and indecision giving Putin a perfect opportunity to act.
 
#31
#31
Orange_Crush said:
Anyone else think it is reckless to be so publicly and cavalierly blaming Russia for everything from cyber espionage to the death of the tooth fairy? Seems to be horrible foreign policy. (Unless it's both a diversion and a stick to poke with.)
Click to expand...

You left out the other explanation, which is "unless it's true."
 
#32
#32
Nn no no

I know pick me!

She brokered gazillion$$$ arms deals (fer dumping a little $$ in the CF) with countries we could find have declared war on us or our allies.
 
#33
#33
hog88 said:
When is it going to dawn on you that the Clintons, Democratic Party and Putin are one in the same and working towards the same goals? All three want to redivide the world into their spheres and consolidate power among just a handful of people.
Click to expand...

That's interesting, because it just dawned on me yesterday that Trump's whole campaign is essentially to turn the United States into Russia. He is a Democrat, to be sure, so your theory makes some sense.
 
#35
#35
"The use of that common SQL injection vulnerability hardly signals the involvement of sophisticated state-sponsored hackers, much less specifically Russian ones. But the security firm ThreatConnect, which has been investigating IP addresses that the FBI said were associated with the attacks, has found a few still-murky clues that point in RussiaÂ’s direction. ThreatConnect found that one of the IP addresses named by the FBI mapped in 2015 to Rubro.biz, a Russian-language website it describes as a cybercriminal black market. (However, WIRED found that the IP address now points to a website appearing to be associated with the Turkish AKP political party. This, too, could be a red-herring, as neither WIRED nor ThreatConnect has yet confirmed the legitimacy of that apparently Turkish website.) And the VPN used by the attackers appears to have been King Servers, the firm says, a service with a Russian language website.

“There are elements to suggest there are Russian fingerprints on this,” says Rich Barger, ThreatConnect’s director of threat intelligence. But he cautions that the firm’s research is “very nascent. We’re still working on it.”

basically they aren't 100% sure it is Russia

https://www.wired.com/2016/08/hack-brief-fbi-warns-election-sites-got-hacked-eyes-russia/
 
#36
#36
volprof said:
That's interesting, because it just dawned on me yesterday that Trump's whole campaign is essentially to turn the United States into Russia. He is a Democrat, to be sure, so your theory makes some sense.
Click to expand...

He is and in a normal election cycle he wouldn't even have had a shot at the nomination, now he has an outside slim chance at being POTUS.

Have the Clintons and the Dem party rigged the election? Sure, they got their media lapdogs to sensationalize and cover Trump almost 24/7 during the primaries giving him millions of free advertising. But no, you're wrong about Trump wanting to turn us into Russia, he doesn't have that level of vision. As GV said, he's the dog that caught the car.

Keep ignoring the Clinton/Russian connection at your own peril.
 
#37
#37
hog88 said:
He is and in a normal election cycle he wouldn't even have had a shot at the nomination, now he has an outside slim chance at being POTUS.

Have the Clintons and the Dem party rigged the election? Sure, they got their media lapdogs to sensationalize and cover Trump almost 24/7 during the primaries giving him millions of free advertising. But no, you're wrong about Trump wanting to turn us into Russia, he doesn't have that level of vision. As GV said, he's the dog that caught the car.

Keep ignoring the Clinton/Russian connection at your own peril.
Click to expand...

Like her dark money from Russia, and the fact that she invested in Russia's "Silicon Valley," the same tech that was used to supply the Russian intelligence front, Wikileaks, with dirt against her and to potentially one day blackmail her? I don't ignore the Clinton-Russian connection; I just don't think she actively wants to turn us into Russia, nor is she being actively supported by the SVR and GRU to do so. Clinton is no patriot's idea of an American president, but I also don't think she's seeking to turn this country into a state capitalist, protectionist energy-state oligarchy that has limited individual freedoms and very few allies and partners.

We're already a transnational oligarchy, so I don't see how what Clinton is going to do will be that much different from what we already have.
 
#38
#38
Its funny watching the GOP react to these shenanigans.

On the one hand, the GOP has built an entire empire around identifying and isolating Russia as the greatest threat to our existence. Spurring panic over Russian aggression has been their bread and butter for 70 years.

But now, when it is clear that their nominee is beholden to Russia, and there are Russian banks with their hooks in him, and the guy's campaign manager is getting paid millions to work for Russian interests, including the Ukraine, and which he did not report in violation of federal law, and when the Russians are playing favorites in the election -- and their boy is the favorite, suddenly the GOP is caught between denying its own claim for decades that the Russians have been trying to manipulate our system the entire time, versus trying to deny what they themselves believe: The Russians want Trump to win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#39
#39
volprof said:
Like her dark money from Russia, and the fact that she invested in Russia's "Silicon Valley," the same tech that was used to supply the Russian intelligence front, Wikileaks, with dirt against her and to potentially one day blackmail her? I don't ignore the Clinton-Russian connection; I just don't think she actively wants to turn us into Russia, nor is she being actively supported by the SVR and GRU to do so. Clinton is no patriot's idea of an American president, but I also don't think she's seeking to turn this country into a state capitalist, protectionist energy-state oligarchy that has limited individual freedoms and very few allies and partners.

We're already a transnational oligarchy, so I don't see how what Clinton is going to do will be that much different from what we already have.
Click to expand...

Then you are not paying attention.
 
#40
#40
lawgator1 said:
Its funny watching the GOP react to these shenanigans.

On the one hand, the GOP has built an entire empire around identifying and isolating Russia as the greatest threat to our existence. Spurring panic over Russian aggression has been their bread and butter for 70 years.

But now, when it is clear that their nominee is beholden to Russia, and there are Russian banks with their hooks in him, and the guy's campaign manager is getting paid millions to work for Russian interests, including the Ukraine, and which he did not report in violation of federal law, and when the Russians are playing favorites in the election -- and their boy is the favorite, suddenly the GOP is caught between denying its own claim for decades that the Russians have been trying to manipulate our system the entire time, versus trying to deny what they themselves believe: The Russians want Trump to win.
Click to expand...

:lolabove:

If they wanted Trump to win they would open the floodgates with really damaging information about Hillary. So far nothing cataclysmic has been released.
 
#41
#41
lawgator1 said:
Its funny watching the GOP react to these shenanigans.

On the one hand, the GOP has built an entire empire around identifying and isolating Russia as the greatest threat to our existence. Spurring panic over Russian aggression has been their bread and butter for 70 years.

But now, when it is clear that their nominee is beholden to Russia, and there are Russian banks with their hooks in him, and the guy's campaign manager is getting paid millions to work for Russian interests, including the Ukraine, and which he did not report in violation of federal law, and when the Russians are playing favorites in the election -- and their boy is the favorite, suddenly the GOP is caught between denying its own claim for decades that the Russians have been trying to manipulate our system the entire time, versus trying to deny what they themselves believe: The Russians want Trump to win.
Click to expand...

I firmly believe that this is why Trump will never release his tax returns. They will reveal that he is in so much debt to Russian creditors - many probably connected to Putin himself and god knows what anti-American global initiatives - that it will make your head spin, as he would say.

That, or he's just generally in an incredible amount of debt, thus confirming he is a complete fraud and liar.

These are the only two possible explanations as to why he will not release them. There are no other explanations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#42
#42
volprof said:
I firmly believe that this is why Trump will never release his tax returns. They will reveal that he is in so much debt to Russian creditors - many probably connected to Putin himself and god knows what anti-American global initiatives - that it will make your head spin, as he would say.

That, or he's just generally in an incredible amount of debt, thus confirming he is a complete fraud and liar.

These are the only two possible explanations as to why he will not release them. There are no other explanations.
Click to expand...

Good God we need a training session on what is in a tax return. NOWHERE in a personal or corporate tax return do you name creditors or identify debt by country of origin. There is NOWHERE on a personal return to list debts. That has nothing to do with income taxes. You could see members of a partnership but since it's a partnership everyone has a share and it's rare someone owes another partner. Personally I think Trump would be an idiot to release returns currently being audited. Let the IRS finish, let the statute pass, turn em loose. But not while you could face litigation in tax court.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#43
#43
volprof said:
I firmly believe that this is why Trump will never release his tax returns. They will reveal that he is in so much debt to Russian creditors - many probably connected to Putin himself and god knows what anti-American global initiatives - that it will make your head spin, as he would say.

That, or he's just generally in an incredible amount of debt, thus confirming he is a complete fraud and liar.

These are the only two possible explanations as to why he will not release them. There are no other explanations.
Click to expand...

What tax form or line do you enter you're debt and creditors on?
 
#44
#44
lawgator1 said:
Its relative.

Relative to Trump, she's MUCH stronger on national defense, particularly in dealing with Russia.

And as to the ME, I think it safe to say that Trump better pray that in the debates they don't hold up a map with no names on it and ask him to identify Syria or Libya. Or Yemen or Iran. Or Turkey or Pakistan.
Click to expand...

and hopefully Hilary never has to identify (lie about) how many Americans she has already gotten killed in those same countries.

and considering Hilary already sold Russia rights to mine nuclear material from the US there is no way she is stronger than Trump.

If one is voting against someone how can you prefer the actual proven threat vs the theoretical threat? yes if Trump gets elected he will do stupid ish and may end up proving he is a traitor; but Hilary has already been there and done that.

and you have still yet to say how she is stronger. Try making a point FOR Hilary without bringing up Trump. (same goes the other way around)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#45
#45
volprof said:
I firmly believe that this is why Trump will never release his tax returns. They will reveal that he is in so much debt to Russian creditors - many probably connected to Putin himself and god knows what anti-American global initiatives - that it will make your head spin, as he would say.

That, or he's just generally in an incredible amount of debt, thus confirming he is a complete fraud and liar.

These are the only two possible explanations as to why he will not release them. There are no other explanations.
Click to expand...

He's probably deep into the Chinese pockets also. He could easily clear this up if he wanted to. But I bet you never see his tax returns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#47
#47
DancingOutlaw said:
Good God we need a training session on what is in a tax return. NOWHERE in a personal or corporate tax return do you name creditors or identify debt by country of origin. There is NOWHERE on a personal return to list debts. That has nothing to do with income taxes. You could see members of a partnership but since it's a partnership everyone has a share and it's rare someone owes another partner. Personally I think Trump would be an idiot to release returns currently being audited. Let the IRS finish, let the statute pass, turn em loose. But not while you could face litigation in tax court.
Click to expand...


Would his corporate returns not indicate interest payments and deductions or charges related to same?

As to your last comment, that is pure idiocy. Their being released or not has zero to do with an audit. The audit is not affected one way or the other by releasing them. You know this. Everyone knows this.

He is holding them back because there is something really damaging in there. The GOP itself largely says so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#48
#48
lawgator1 said:
Would his corporate returns not indicate interest payments and deductions or charges related to same?

As to your last comment, that is pure idiocy. Their being released or not has zero to do with an audit. The audit is not affected one way or the other by releasing them. You know this. Everyone knows this.

He is holding them back because there is something really damaging in there. The GOP itself largely says so.
Click to expand...

Now you want his corporate returns? For how many of his companies?

What could be in them that would be damaging? The effective rate he paid? Actual reported income? What?
 
#49
#49
lawgator1 said:
Would his corporate returns not indicate interest payments and deductions or charges related to same?

As to your last comment, that is pure idiocy. Their being released or not has zero to do with an audit. The audit is not affected one way or the other by releasing them. You know this. Everyone knows this.

He is holding them back because there is something really damaging in there. The GOP itself largely says so.
Click to expand...

A corporate return would have interest expense. That's as specific as it gets. Not who it's to, not what it's for, nothing. Interest expense. That's it. Liabilities are the same. Accounts payable and long term debt. No specifics.

On a big enough company or individual there is more and more political pressure regarding audits and litigation. If the IRS isn't finding much to argue about and the media starts questioning methods or findings, you can best believe the service will do what it takes to save face. Especially with the opposing party controlling the executive and the overall narrative of greedy corporations ruining everything. We are not talking about some mom and pop operation where no one would care. By and large agents are reasonable to work with but run into one trying to make a name or be a company man and you could find yourself in a lot of trouble.
 
#50
#50
hog88 said:
Now you want his corporate returns? For how many of his companies?

ALL OF THEM

What could be in them that would be damaging? The effective rate he paid? Actual reported income? What?


NO, THE EFFECTIVE RATE HE PAID WOULD BE ON HIS PERSONAL RETURN
Click to expand...


I bet you he paid an effective rate of less than 12 percent. Maybe even 10.

So much for his championing the little guy against the rigged system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top