Senate upholds findings re Russia

Revoltingest · Jul 4, 2018

james dixon said:
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prevents Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion, prohibiting the free exercise of religion, or abridging the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the right to peaceably assemble, or to petition for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.
https://tinyurl.com/6s4s59a

Please inform Pence that he needs to keep his theological views to himself.

I don't oppose him airing his views.
I just oppose him gaining that power.

The First Amendment is a wonderful limitation on government's power, but remember
that the Constitution is a "living document", & that SCOTUS can amend it to a great
extent by fiat, eg, Kelo v New London, the Petty Offense Doctrine.

Riders · Jul 4, 2018

Jayhawker Soule said:
From The Hill ...

Senate panel upholds finding that Russia backed Trump, contradicting House

The Senate Intelligence Committee has unequivocally upheld the conclusion of the intelligence community that Russia developed a "clear preference" for then-candidate Donald Trump in the 2016 election and sought to help him win the White House.

The assessment, announced in an unclassified summary released Tuesday, represents a direct repudiation of the committee’s counterpart in the House — and of President Trump himself, who has consistently rejected assertions that Moscow sought to bolster his candidacy through its election interference.

“The Committee has spent the last 16 months reviewing the sources, tradecraft and analytic work underpinning the Intelligence Community Assessment and sees no reason to dispute the conclusions,” said Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said in a statement.

< -- snip -- >

In yet another contradiction to Trump allies claims, the Senate panel also found that a piece of Democratic-funded opposition research known as the Steele dossier did not "in any way inform the analysis in the ICA — including the key findings."

This was "because it was unverified information and had not been disseminated as serialized intelligence reporting," the Senate report found.

All in all, the Senate panel's report was a unflinching contradiction of many of the core claims made by Trump allies in the House. ...

Meanwhile, we can expect Trump and his servile supporters to carry on as usual, which means doing what they can to enable a repeat in the upcoming elections while debasing the USA.

Have a great Fourth of July, folks.

Thank you for being more specific and intelligent then my dinky thread. ALl the Trumps supporters on my thread are screaming no way it didnt happen they never reported collusion in that report. SO with 'no the report didn't happen' by Trump supporters there's no way to go on my thread.

Kangaroo Feathers · Jul 4, 2018

james dixon said:
Pence and Trump are one of a kind.

I remain of the opinion Pence is scarier than Trump. Just as authoritarian and potentially dictatorial, but I worry Pence may actually bring some level of competence to his designs. You don't want to trade a bumbling Mussolini for a capable Hitler.

dust1n · Jul 4, 2018

Estro Felino said:
Many European countries, including mine had a "clear preference" for then-candidate Donald Trump in the 2016 election ...because Hillary was behind the destabilization of Libya and Syria...so, no lesbian terrorists, thank you.

Does this mean we helped him win?

That's interesting they aren't far more anti-French then, because Sarkozy not only pushed NATO in the operations in Libya, but it also came out later that Qaddafi donated 5x the amount of money he was allowed to raise in French elections (for actual citizens that is) straight to Sarkozy's campaign. I mean, Italians okay'd it too.

"The EU remained silent when the protests in eastern Libya erupted in mid-February, but the UK and France quickly asserted themselves as the revolution’s protagonists. They convinced the United States to impose a no-fly zone, despite initial objections by Catherine Ashton motivated mainly by German and Italian opposition and criticism by other NATO members, especially Turkey. Only after it became obvious that the actions of Italy’s long-standing ally Muammar Qaddafi were beyond salvage, Italy joined the camp of belligerents."

https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-libyan-crisis-seen-from-european-capitals/

Also, the US had no play in the destabliziation in Syria. If anything, US mostly bombed ISIS, one of the largest forces against Assad. Also, American has put more groups on the ground, as well as ground artillery, and then killed far more civilians as the remaining rebels were pushed out of remaining cities.

"More than 15,399 civilians were killed by explosive weapons in the first 11 months of 2017, marking a 42 percent increase from 2016, according to a global survey.
The sharp rise in civilian deaths is largely due to a massive increase in the use of airstrikes by state actors such as the US, UK, Russia and Saudi Arabia in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, according to figures compiled by Action on Armed Violence (AOAV)."

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/i...talities-doubled-in-2017-driven-by-iraq-syria

LuisDantas · Jul 4, 2018

Estro Felino said:
Many European countries, including mine had a "clear preference" for then-candidate Donald Trump in the 2016 election ...because Hillary was behind the destabilization of Libya and Syria...so, no lesbian terrorists, thank you.

Does this mean we helped him win?

How is that about Hillary and Libya and Syria again?

Not that it would excuse support for Trump, mind you. But I want to know what you are talking about.

LuisDantas · Jul 4, 2018

Audie said:
I am no trump fan. His support base is fundamentally alien
to me.

It does seem to me though, that should an effort to impeach
actually succeed, that the consequences would be bad
far far beyond the good in the accomplishment of "justice"- if
that were even what was actually involved.

At first? Sure, Because Pence.

Still... giving up on even the goal of attaining a somewhat respectable set of institutions is hardly preferable to an succesful impeachment.

Ye underestimators and failed predictors of the forces
that brought him to power now want to try to unseat him,
like they know how thst will turn out?

We do not.

But we have no benefit to reap in remaining ignorant any longer than unavoidable.

Audie · Jul 4, 2018

LuisDantas said:
At first? Sure, Because Pence.

Still... giving up on even the goal of attaining a somewhat respectable set of institutions is hardly preferable to an succesful impeachment.

We do not.

But we have no benefit to reap in remaining ignorant any longer than unavoidable.

I dont know what point there is to any of the above.

james dixon · Jul 4, 2018

Armoured said:
You don't want to trade a bumbling Mussolini for a capable Hitler.

If push comes to shove I will reluctantly settle for Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the house.

Shadow Wolf · Jul 4, 2018

BSM1 said:
Evidently there was no laws broken or warrants would have been issued.

Is that why there have been indictments, plea bargins, agreements to cooperate with the investigation, and guilty charges?

Kangaroo Feathers · Jul 4, 2018

james dixon said:
If push comes to shove I will reluctantly settle for Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the house.

If it's up to you... Hey, I'd agree Ryan is preferable to the other two, I'm just saying getting Trump out won't necessarily get rid of Pence, and I think he's the more dangerous of the two.

james dixon · Jul 4, 2018

Armoured said:
Trump out won't necessarily get rid of Pence, and I think he's the more dangerous of the two.

If Pence knowingly knew trump was colluding with the Russians he is just as guilty as Trump.

Birds of a feather flock together

Kangaroo Feathers · Jul 4, 2018

james dixon said:
If Pence knowingly knew trump was colluding with the Russians he is just as guilty as Trump.

Birds of a feather flock together

If.

I don't know what that means for impeachment proceedings though. Can you impeach both at once?

Estro Felino · Jul 4, 2018

dust1n said:
That's interesting they aren't far more anti-French then, because Sarkozy not only pushed NATO in the operations in Libya, but it also came out later that Qaddafi donated 5x the amount of money he was allowed to raise in French elections (for actual citizens that is) straight to Sarkozy's campaign. I mean, Italians okay'd it too.

Yes, I do know that the French are the main responsible for Gaddafi's downfall, because his new gold currency would have replaced the Franc CFA.
But it was the NATO, so the US which put this operation into action...and Italy is a US military colony..I don't think its opposition would have mattered.

Revoltingest · Jul 4, 2018

Armoured said:
If.
I don't know what that means for impeachment proceedings though. Can you impeach both at once?

There's no prohibition against it.
But they better get some real evidence first.
(Something more than an old saw about birds, feathers, & flocking.)

Kangaroo Feathers · Jul 4, 2018

Estro Felino said:
Yes, I do know that the French are the main responsible for Gaddafi's downfall, because his new gold currency would have replaced the Franc CFA.
But it was the NATO, so the US which put this operation into action...and Italy is a US military colony..I don't think its opposition would have mattered.

The Duce's granddaughter congratulates him on Twitter all the time

https://twitter.com/Ale_Mussolini_/status/1011647961049239554

Try responding to stuff people actually say. You might like it?

LuisDantas · Jul 4, 2018

Audie said:
I dont know what point there is to any of the above.

In a nutshell, we should not conform to be passive accomplices to the further erosion of American institutions.

Although it will be a very painful, very long headache to resist, it is still far better than the alternative.

(Not that I am remotely American, mind you.)

Subduction Zone · Jul 4, 2018

Father Heathen said:
You often presume to speak for the whole of Europe, yet I doubt that you're actually in any position to do so...

...and what exactly is the phrase "lesbian terrorists" supposed to even mean?

It is a relatively new genre of porn.

Subduction Zone · Jul 4, 2018

james dixon said:
If push comes to shove I will reluctantly settle for Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the house.

Paul Ryan will no longer be in Congress next year. He is retiring.

Stanyon · Jul 4, 2018

But...where's the beef?

We have heard this same old song and dance for quite a while now. A clear preference? If I remember correctly they said it was shadowy Russian trolls,when pushed for examples it ended up being some ads on facebook and comments on Twitter and it was admitted that overall there was no real preference as the ads both supported and bashed Trump and Clinton. The narrative then was that the Russians were just trying to cause division in the U.S. but if we look back on the coverage before, during, and after the election it seems our own domestic media sources were doing a great job of it all by themselves.

dust1n · Jul 4, 2018

Estro Felino said:
Yes, I do know that the French are the main responsible for Gaddafi's downfall, because his new gold currency would have replaced the Franc CFA.

But it was the NATO, so the US which put this operation into action...and Italy is a US military colony..I don't think its opposition would have mattered.

My opposition doesn't matter, therefore I won't oppose it, therefore I am complicit.

Senate upholds findings re Russia

Pragmatic Libertarian

Well-Known Member

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...

Zindīq

Aura of atheification

Aura of atheification

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Certified People sTabber

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...

Well-Known Member

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...

Believer in free will

Pragmatic Libertarian

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...

Aura of atheification

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

WWMRD?

Zindīq