Trump is the Manchurian Candidate - He's in bed with Putin's Oligarchs.

[Jonathan]

"Russians make up a pretty disproportionate
cross-section of a lot of our assets, Trumps son,
Donald Jr., told a real estate conference in 2008,
according to an account posted on the website of
eTurboNews, a trade publication. We see a lot
of money pouring in from Russia."



Now we know why Trump refuses to release his
tax returns whether under audit or not, they'll
reveal his extensive business dealings with
some of Putin's inner circle. And if any of
those business dealings are improper, that
means Putin could easily blackmail Trump.


GlobalSecurity.org a respected security publication
in it's page on Russian Organized Crime Trump's name
is mentioned...75 times and they outright call him
the...

GlobalSecurity.org

Russian Organized Crime

"To all evidence, Donald Trump is the Manchurian Candidate.
Trump has a variety of prior connections with Russian
interests. He has said strangely friendly things about
Russia, and early on in 2015 the Russians had clearly
endorsed him as their preferred candidate."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/russian-organized-crime.htm



Paul Manafort the Chief Strategist and Campaign
Chairman for Donald Trump has been working over
a decade /directly for/ a virulently pro-Russian
Ukrainian Oligarch Rinat Akhmetov who is considered
'The Boss' of...occupied E. Ukraine.

No one could be more important to Putin than Akhmetov
as he controls war torn E Ukraine for Putin.

And he worked for another virulently pro-Russian Oligarch
Oleg Deripaska.



Rinat Akhmetov
From Wiki

As of February 2015, he was listed as the 216th richest man
in the world with an estimated net worth of US 6.5 billion.
There have been claims Akhmetov has been involved in
organized crime.

During the 2014 pro-Russian conflict in Ukraine, some
pro-Ukrainian activists accused Akhmetov of being
a financial backer of the separatist militants
in Donetsk.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rinat_Akhmetov


Oleg Deripaska

In 2004, Deripaska was appointed by the President of Russia
to represent the country in the Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation Business Advisory Council (ABAC). He has
been Chairman of ABAC Russia since 2007
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_Deripaska




Plus the massive email leak from the Democratic
National Committee just released the other day
causing the DNC Chairman to resign was apparently
hacked and released by...Russia.

The Washington Post

Clinton campaign — and some cyber experts — say Russia
is behind email release

Her campaign chief, Robby Mook, told ABC News on Sunday that
“experts are telling us that Russian state actors broke in
to the DNC, took all these emails and now are leaking them
out through these Web sites ... It’s troubling that some
experts are now telling us that this was done by the Russians
for the purpose of helping Donald Trump.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-campaign--and-some-cyber-experts--say-russia-is-behind-email-release/2016/07/24/5b5428e6-51a8-11e6-bbf5-957ad17b4385_story.html



And Trump could have cared less about the Republican
Party plank at the convention last week, he let the
conservatives put in any policy they liked.

EXCEPT FOR ONE POLICY!

The republican policy to arm Ukraine, Trump launched
a full tilt strong armed campaign to change
ONLY THAT POLICY AND NO OTHER.

The one policy Putin wanted changed.




The games of Putin and Akhmetov

Putin does not need the Donbas in Russia. Putin does not
need the Donetsk and Luhansk “republics” either.
In both cases, Putin would be forced to support the
Donbas financially from the Russian budget.

And Donbas, with its current outdated, unreformed economy,
especially if subjected to possible sanctions, would
become a much greater burden for Russia than Crimea,
Abkhazia and Transnistria put together.

Akhmetov

Akhmetov does not need for the Donbas to be part of Russia.
He understands perfectly what kind of place he would occupy
in Putin’s hierarchy of the elites and what kind of access
he would be “granted” to the Russian budget. Akhmetov
also does not need the Donetsk and Luhansk “republics.”
He knows what economic prospects await these “states,”
and, therefore, him as well. This is why Akhmetov is not
joking when he declares that he views the Donbas remaining
exclusively within Ukraine.

No matter who is in government, Akhmetov needs to maintain
his status as the real “master of the Donbas,” which will
give him the opportunity to enjoy large profits as well
as significant political weight. For this to happen, he
needs for Donbas to be part of Ukraine, but, at the
same time, practically independent of Kyiv.
http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/05/16/the-games-of-putin-and-akhmetov/#!prettyPhoto



POLITIFACT

Paul Manafort, Donald Trump’s top adviser, and
his ties to pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine


Paul Manafort, the adviser hired by Donald Trump to add
stability and institutional know-how to Trump’s often
scattershot presidential campaign, has long and deep
reported ties to pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine.

"We joke in Ukraine that it is a bad sign for Trump that
he hired Manafort. Because his client Yanukovych was ousted
and fled to Russia, to the city of Rostov. So Trump could
also end up in Rostov. It is almost like an anecdote."
-- Ukrainian political expert Oleg Kravchenko

Ukrainian political experts say Manafort, 67, was first
hired to work in Ukraine more than a decade ago by
the country’s wealthiest businessman, *Rinat Akhmetov*.
Akhmetov, (right), a steel and iron ore magnate, is
worth an estimated $2.8 billion, according to Forbes.

Officially, Manafort advised Akhmetov in 2005 on a
corporate communication strategy for one of his
companies, System Capital Management.

Akhmetov, however, also was a supporter of Viktor Yanukovych,
the country’s prime minister, a leader of the Party of
Regions and an ally of Vladimir Putin.

According to information from Mustafa Nayyem, a former
Ukrainian journalist and currently a member of parliament,
Manafort was a protege of *Oleg Deripaska*, a Russian
businessman with an estimated net worth of $3.5 billion.

Manafort then was hired for the 2006 parliamentary elections
campaign to help Yanukovych’s Party of Regions. According
to Mustafa Nayyem, Yanukovych and Manafort first met
one-to-one in the Czech resort town of Karlovy Vary.

The meeting was arranged by Akhmetov, who wanted
Yanukovych to work with an American to repair his image
as opposed to Gleb Pavlovsky, a Russian who advised
Putin until 2011.

Akhmetov’s camp insisted on a partnership with American
consultants. Other parts of Yanukovych’s team preferred
the idea of collaborating with the Russians.

Akhmetov won out.

"It was advantageous for the defeated Yanukovych’s team
to find a guilty one," Pavlovsky told PolitiFact.

The relationship lasted for years leading up to Yanukovych’s
2010 presidential campaign. Manafort made Yanukovych
look more respectable, working with stylists and
consultants to redesign his image.

"It was a weird thing for the people in Ukraine, because
they could not imagine how an American strategist agreed
to cooperate with Putin’s friend. It was confusing. But
Manafort played a decisive role in the victory of
Yanukovych," Ukrainian political expert Oleg Kravchenko
told us.
http://www.politifact.com/global-news/article/2016/may/02/paul-manafort-donald-trumps-top-adviser-and-his-ti/





TPM EDITOR'S BLOG
Trump & Putin. Yes, It's Really a Thing

ByJOSH MARSHALL
Published JULY 23, 2016


Let's start with the basic facts. There is a lot of Russian
money flowing into Trump's coffers and he is conspicuously
solicitous of Russian foreign policy priorities.

I'll list off some facts.

1. All the other discussions of Trump's finances aside,
his debt load has grown dramatically over the last year,
from $350 million to $630 million. This is in just one year
while his liquid assets have also decreased. Trump has
been blackballed by all major US banks.

2. Post-bankruptcy Trump has been highly reliant on money
from Russia, most of which has over the years become
increasingly concentrated among oligarchs and sub-garchs
close to Vladimir Putin. Here's a good overview from
The Washington Post, with one morsel for illustration ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-trumps-financial-ties-to-russia-and-his-unusual-flattery-of-vladimir-putin/2016/06/17/dbdcaac8-31a6-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html


Since the 1980s, Trump and his family members have made
numerous trips to Moscow in search of business opportunities,
and they have relied on Russian investors to buy their
properties around the world.

Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section
of a lot of our assets, Trumps son, Donald Jr., told a
real estate conference in 2008, according to an account
posted on the website of eTurboNews, a trade publication.
We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.

3. One example of this is the Trump Soho development in
Manhattan, one of Trump's largest recent endeavors. The
project was the hit with a series of lawsuits in response
to some typically Trumpian efforts to defraud investors
by making fraudulent claims about the financial health
of the project. Emerging out of that litigation however
was news about secret financing for the project from
Russia and Kazakhstan. Most attention about the project
has focused on the presence of a twice imprisoned Russian
immigrant with extensive ties to the Russian criminal
underworld. But that's not the most salient part of
the story. As the Times put it,

"Mr. Lauria brokered a $50 million investment in Trump
SoHo and three other Bayrock projects by an Icelandic
firm preferred by wealthy Russians in favor with
President Vladimir V. Putin, according to a lawsuit
against Bayrock by one of its former executives.
The Icelandic company, FL Group, was identified in a
Bayrock investor presentation as astrategic partner,
along with Alexander Mashkevich, a billionaire once
charged in a corruption case involving fees paid by
a Belgian company seeking business in Kazakhstan;
that case was settled with no admission of guilt."

Another suit alleged the project "occasionally
received unexplained infusions of cash from accounts
in Kazakhstan and Russia."

Sounds completely legit.

Read both articles: After his bankruptcy and business
failures roughly a decade ago Trump has had an increasingly
difficult time finding sources of capital for new investments.
As I noted above, Trump has been blackballed by all major
US banks with the exception of Deutschebank, which is of
course a foreign bank with a major US presence. He has
steadied and rebuilt his financial empire with a heavy
reliance on capital from Russia. At a minimum the Trump
organization is receiving lots of investment capital
from people close to Vladimir Putin.

Trump's tax returns would likely clarify the depth of
his connections to and dependence on Russian capital
aligned with Putin. And in case you're keeping score
at home: no, that's not reassuring.

4. Then there's Paul Manafort, Trump's nominal 'campaign chair'
who now functions as campaign manager and top advisor.
Manafort spent most of the last decade as top campaign
and communications advisor for Viktor Yanukovych, the
pro-Russian Ukrainian Prime Minister and then President
whose ouster in 2014 led to the on-going crisis and
proxy war in Ukraine. Yanukovych was and remains a
close Putin ally. Manafort is running Trump's campaign.

5. Trump's foreign policy advisor on Russia and Europe is
Carter Page, a man whose entire professional career has
revolved around investments in Russia and who has deep
and continuing financial and employment ties to Gazprom.
If you're not familiar with Gazprom, imagine if most or
all of the US energy industry were rolled up into a
single company and it were personally controlled by
the US President who used it as a source of revenue
and patronage. That is Gazprom's role in the Russian
political and economic system. It is no exaggeration
to say that you cannot be involved with Gazprom at the
very high level which Page has been without being
wholly in alignment with Putin's policies. Those ties
also allow Putin to put Page out of business at any time.

6. Over the course of the last year, Putin has aligned
all Russian state controlled media behind Trump. As
Frank Foer explains here, this fits a pattern with how
Putin has sought to prop up rightist/nationalist
politicians across Europe, often with direct or covert
infusions of money. In some cases this is because they
support Russia-backed policies; in others it is simply
because they sow discord in Western aligned states.
Of course, Trump has repeatedly praised Putin, not only
in the abstract but often for the authoritarian policies
and patterns of government which have most soured his
reputation around the world.

7. Here's where it gets more interesting. This is one of a
handful of developments that tipped me from seeing all this
as just a part of Trump's larger shadiness to something more
specific and ominous about the relationship between Putin
and Trump. As TPM's Tierney Sneed explained in this article,
one of the most enduring dynamics of GOP conventions
(there's a comparable dynamic on the Dem side) is more
mainstream nominees battling conservative activists over
the party platform, with activists trying to check all the
hardline ideological boxes and the nominees trying to soften
most or all of those edges. This is one thing that made the
rump convention very different.

The Trump Camp was totally indifferent to the platform.
So party activists were able to write one of the most
conservative platforms in history.

Not with Trump's backing but because he simply didn't care.
With one big exception: Trump's team mobilized the
nominee's traditional mix of cajoling and strong-arming
on one point: changing the party platform on assistance
to Ukraine against Russian military operations in eastern
Ukraine. For what it's worth (and it's not worth much)
I am quite skeptical of most Republicans call for aggressively
arming Ukraine to resist Russian aggression. But the
single-mindedness of this focus on this one issue -
in the context of total indifference to everything
else in the platform - speaks volumes.

This does not mean Trump is controlled by or in the pay
of Russia or Putin. It can just as easily be explained
by having many of his top advisors having spent years
working in Putin's orbit and being aligned with his
thinking and agenda. But it is certainly no coincidence.
Again, in the context of near total indifference to the
platform and willingness to let party activists write
it in any way they want, his team zeroed in on one fairly
obscure plank to exert maximum force and it just happens
to be the one most important to Putin in terms of US policy.

Add to this that his most conspicuous foreign policy
statements track not only with Putin's positions but
those in which Putin is most intensely interested.
Aside from Ukraine, Trump's suggestion that the US
and thus NATO might not come to the defense of NATO
member states in the Baltics in the case of a Russian
invasion is a case in point.

There are many other things people are alleging about
hacking and all manner of other mysteries. But those
points are highly speculative, some verging on conspiratorial
in their thinking. I ignore them here because I've wanted
to focus on unimpeachable, undisputed and publicly known facts.
These alone paint a stark and highly troubling picture.

To put this all into perspective, if Vladimir Putin were
simply the CEO of a major American corporation and there
was this much money flowing in Trump's direction, combined
with this much solicitousness of Putin's policy agenda,
it would set off alarm bells galore. That is not hyperbole
or exaggeration. And yet Putin is not the CEO of an
American corporation. He's the autocrat who rules a
foreign state, with an increasingly hostile posture
towards the United States and a substantial stockpile
of nuclear weapons. The stakes involved in finding out
'what's going on' as Trump might put it are quite
a bit higher.

There is something between a non-trivial and a substantial
amount of circumstantial evidence for a financial
relationship between Trump and Putin or a non-tacit
alliance between the two men. Even if you draw no adverse
conclusions, Trump's financial empire is heavily leveraged
and has a deep reliance on capital infusions from oligarchs
and other sources of wealth aligned with Putin.

That's simply not something that can be waved off
or ignored.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/trump-putin-yes-it-s-really-a-thing

[Robert Camp]

[*Hemidactylus*]

On 07/25/2016 07:17 PM, Jonathan wrote:

[snip]

> Plus the massive email leak from the Democratic
> National Committee just released the other day
> causing the DNC Chairman to resign was apparently
> hacked and released by...Russia.

Yeah I was kinda pissed about that until I read what they found and
stopped with that genetic fallacy nonsense:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/07/22/wikileaks-democratic-party-officials-appear-to-discuss-using-sanderss-faith-against-him/

[quote]"In one email, DNC chief financial officer Brad Marshall says he
wants to get the question of Sanders’s faith raised — apparently in
primaries in Kentucky and West Virginia. The email was sent to DNC
Communications Director Luis Miranda, Deputy Communications Director
Mark Paustenbach and CEO Amy Lacey.

“It might may no difference, but for KY and WVA can we get someone to
ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has
a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make
several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would
draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist,” reads the email.

Another Marshall email, dated a few minutes later, says, “It’s these
Jesus thing.”

A few hours later Lacey responds: “Amen.”

The Kentucky primary was May 17 and West Virginia’s was May 10. Clinton
won Kentucky and Sanders won West Virginia.

While the DNC did not immediately comment to the Post, The Intercept,
which first reported on the WikiLeaks email, quoted Marshall Friday as
saying by email that he did not “recall” the exchange. “I can say it
would not have been Sanders. It would probably be about a surrogate.”
"[/quote]

Whether the email was aimed toward Sanders or a "surrogate" I now know
what the DNC thinks of me and they can go f**k themselves. This Brad
Marshall a-hole needs to be fired publicly. I was lukewarm about Hillary
already, but this Wasserman Schultz and Marshall crap has me thinking
third party principled vote. I won't bother emailing that DNC shitshow
my concerns this time because when I voiced anger about the DNC's stance
on my state (FL swing state...chads) making its primary earlier back in
2008 and the impact on seating delegates I got a crappy, rude, and curt
response and I got spammed mercilessly by Howard Dean and his nitwit
clown car flunkies. The DNC sucks as bad as the RNC. They can't blame
Putin for that fact. They suck!

I stand by CFI's anti-bigotry statement about this DNC mess:

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/newsroom/center_for_inquiry_condemns_dnc_staffers_anti-atheist_bigotry/

Send Brad Marshall packing! And the DNC should apologize profusely and
publicly for disparaging atheists! I thought that was a conservative
Republican trope. I was wrong.

GRRRRR!!!!

[jillery]

On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 18:15:31 -0700, Robert Camp
<rober...@hotmail.com> wrote:


Umm... can't argue with that.
--
This space is intentionally not blank.

[Robert Camp]

On 7/25/16 6:15 PM, Robert Camp wrote:

Hmmm. I was unaware of any inclination on my part to respond to the OP.

Apparently, random, accidental keyboard strokes have produced a (however
content-free) reply event. Who knew complexity could result from
mindless processes?

[eridanus]

omg, Johnathan. How much do you know. Then, among all the huge wealth
of information, a good portion of must be a forgery, isn't it?
eri

[Jonathan]

Well there are 447 officials working for the DNC, and
ALL their email traffic revealed two or three bad
apples. Do you really think they changed any votes?

When were those emails penned? What was the
vote count at the time? What difference
did it make? Probably none.

And Trump has screamed a hundred times the RNC
is rigged, crooked and a dozen other epithets.
What would the world see if ALL THEIR email
traffic were revealed? Especially given the
open hostility between Trump and the RNC
going on for months.

Given the reams of emails released I'm shocked
they didn't find much worst things than idle
talk about someone's religious beliefs by a
couple of Clinton supporters.

[Jonathan]

The sources are credible, Politifact is a Pulitzer Prize
winning site known for their independence.
Global Security.org and the Washington Post are solid
sources too. This isn't mudslinging by political
partisans, unlike what's coming from the Trump
campaign.

Let's see where the FBI investigation into the email
hacking at the DNC goes. There's still 3 long months
for Trump's shady business dealings with Russia to
come out.



s

[Jonathan]

On 7/26/2016 11:55 AM, eridanus wrote:

I just found this opinion piece posted yesterday that
seems to echo my post pretty well. I posted all this
stuff in other ng's a couple days ago.



THE NATIONAL INTEREST
July 25, 2016
11:01 a.m.
Why Some Leftists Are Defending Donald Trump’s Ties to Russia

What is the relationship between Trump and Russia? That Russia is
pulling for Trump is at this point beyond any dispute. The Kremlin’s
English-language propaganda channel RT and Russia’s army of Twitter
trolls, as well as Russia’s internal propaganda, have all thrown
themselves behind the Republican candidate. A series of reports (here,
here, and here) have shown that Russia backed the operation to hack the
DNC. Adrien Chen, who reported last summer on Russia’s army of internet
trolls that spreads disinformation abroad, noted in December that the
trolls he was tracking had begun posing as pro-Trump conservatives.


It is the other half of the equation that is more opaque. Putin is
helping Trump, but what exactly is Trump giving him in return? As Foer
notes, Trump’s habit of refusing to pay back people who loan him money
means regular American banks won’t lend him money anymore, making him
dependent on unusual sources of financing. He has cultivated deep
personal and financial ties with Russia — and to do major business with
Russia, unlike a reasonably free economy, is to do business with its
ruling claque. Trump’s campaign manager, Paul Manafort, helped
orchestrate Putin’s intervention in Ukraine. His Russia adviser Carter
Page has deep ties to Russia and owns stock in Gazprom, the
state-controlled firm that is a major source of the Kremlin’s financial
and economic power. Michael Flynn, another Trump adviser, appears
regularly on RT and refused to answer questions about whether he is paid
to do so. Trump and Putin have exchanged lavish compliments.

Trump’s own financial ties to Russia are completely non-transparent and
will remain so as long as he refuses to release his tax returns. With a
normal candidate, the Russia connection would amount to a massive,
disqualifying scandal. At minimum, the nominee would face overwhelming
pressure to release his tax return — a standard requirement even without
grounds for suspicion — to prove he is not getting paid by a hostile
foreign power. To be clear, it is pretty improbable that Trump is
literally working for Putin. But this hardly settles the question.
First, for a risk as consequential as the willful penetration of the
American government by a hostile power, “pretty improbable” is not
improbable enough. Second, the more likely explanation for the web of
ties between Trump and Putin is still fairly damning. You have a
candidate with a long record of admiring despots in general and the
Russian despot in particular, surrounded by advisers in his pay, and who
is flamboyantly ignorant of policy. Given these circumstances, it would
be hard to imagine how Trump could form views on Russia without Putin’s
influence.


http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/why-some-leftists-defend-trumps-ties-to-russia.html

[Glenn]

"Jonathan" <writeI...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:hLidnUPYpuJeAAvK...@giganews.com...

>
>
> "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate
> cross-section of a lot of our assets, Trumps son,
> Donald Jr., told a real estate conference in 2008,
> according to an account posted on the website of
> eTurboNews, a trade publication. We see a lot
> of money pouring in from Russia."
>
>
>
> Now we know why Trump refuses to release his
> tax returns whether under audit or not, they'll
> reveal his extensive business dealings with
> some of Putin's inner circle.

snip crap

No, we don't know anything as a result of he said he said.

We do know some things, though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_One

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0

"The hidden $2.35 million in Clinton Foundation donations from the former Russian uranium chief were part of a larger $145 million given from nine uranium investors involved in the deal approved by Hillary Clinton to transfer 20% of all U.S. uranium to the Russian government."

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/21/hacked-dnc-file-shows-fears-hidden-clinton-foundation-donations-former-russian-uranium-exec/

[Jonathan]

> omg, Johnathan. How much do you know. Then, among all the huge wealth
> of information, a good portion of must be a forgery, isn't it?
> eri
>

Just Googled this issue, look at all the articles
that have been posted in just the last...24 hours.
I think this story is spreading fast.



George Will: Trump Is Hiding Bribes From Russian Oligarchs
In His Tax Returns
By Grant SternPosted on July 26, 2016
http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/07/26/george-will-trump-hiding-bribes-russian-oligarchs-tax-returns/



CHICAGO SUN TIMES
EDITORIALS 07/26/2016, 05:33pm
Editorial: Emails from Russia with love prompt Trump questions
http://chicago.suntimes.com/opinion/editorial-emails-from-russia-with-love-prompt-trump-questions/


Why Did Trump Dodge the Russia Question?
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/why-did-trump-dodge-the-russia-question

New evidence reveals Donald Trump is a financial and political puppet of
Vladimir Putin’s Russia
By Thom Palmer | July 26, 2016 |

http://www.dailynewsbin.com/opinion/inside-the-political-and-financial-collusion-between-donald-trump-and-vladimir-putin/25393/

US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT
Did Russia Really Hack the DNC to Support Trump?
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-07-25/did-russia-really-hack-the-dnc-to-support-trump


Trump's personal finances rely on loans from Russia
Last updated 38 min ago
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/rogersville-tn/T7ILQSIIM5IHEN8L9


TUESDAY, JULY 26, 2016

The Russia Card in Trump's Deck (or is it the Trump card
in Putin's deck?)
http://pasquino.blogspot.com/2016/07/the-russia-card-in-trumps-deck.html


VOICE

Is Trump a Russian Stooge?
JULY 25, 2016
The Donald and Vlad might not be holding hands, but they’re
clearly friends with benefits.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/25/is-trump-a-russian-stooge-putin-dnc-wikileaks/


PUTIN IS SURELY BACKING TRUMP, WHETHER OR NOT RUSSIA WAS BEHIND DNC HACK
July 26, 2016
http://theguardianuk.blogspot.com/2016/07/putin-is-surely-backing-trump-whether.html


FBI traces DNC email hack to Russia, which has heavy financial
investment in Donald Trump’s empire
July 25, 2016
http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/fbi-traces-dnc-email-hack-to-russia-which-has-heavy-financial-investment-in-donald-trumps-empire/25375/



Trump And The Russian Mob, Er... Investors
By: @ambivalent, 8 hours ago
http://thenewstalkers.com/community/discussion/24520/


Our Manchurian Candidate…
Posted on July 26, 2016
http://manythingsconsidered.com/2016/07/our-manchurian-candidate/



More Details Continue to Support the Idea that Vladimir Putin is Trying
to Help Elect Donald Trump July 26, 2016 By
Read more at:
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/details-continue-support-idea-vladimir-putin-trying-help-elect-donald-trump/


Beat the System: Donald Trump would make Russia great again
Market Watch | 2016-07-25
http://newsherder.com/financial/market-news/read/433149/



Monday, July 25, 2016
National Security Officers Are Worried About Trump's Ties to Russia
http://michael-in-norfolk.blogspot.com/2016/07/national-security-officers-are-worried.html

[Jonathan]

It's your insinuations that are crap, do you have
any idea how many US govt agencies were involved
in that deal? And how scrutinized it was by Congress
before the deal? Clinton was just another agency
to sign off of a dozen other agencies, yet no one
is accusing any of those people of wrongdoing.

Use a credible source if you want to know the facts
not Trump smear mongering.


POLITIFACT

Donald Trump inaccurately suggests Clinton got paid
to approve Russia uranium deal

By Linda Qiu on Thursday, June 30th, 2016 at 2:21 p.m.

Trump’s claim is a reductive version of his source material’s
findings and runs into several problems.

First, the State Department did approve of Russia’s gradual
takeover of a company with significant U.S. uranium assets,
but it didn’t act unilaterally. State was one of nine
government agencies, not to mention independent federal
and state nuclear regulators, that had to sign off on
the deal.

Second, while nine people related to the company did donate
to the Clinton Foundation, it’s unclear whether they were
still involved in the company by the time of the Russian
deal and stood to benefit from it.

Third, most of their Clinton Foundation donations occurred
before and during Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential bid,
before she could have known she would become secretary of
state.

The bottom line: While the connections between the
Clinton Foundation and the Russian deal may appear
fishy, there’s simply no proof of any quid pro quo.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/




And here's some articles posted in the last....24 HOURS
echoing my post.

George Will: Trump Is Hiding Bribes From Russian Oligarchs
In His Tax Returns
By Grant Stern

Just since yesterday...I originally posted my quotes about
Trump...3 days ago in sci.naval.military

[eridanus]

what do you trying to say, Johnathan? That these are bad people?
The US and Russia are probably married. A secret marriage. About which one
of them both is really pregnant I am not sure.
But it looks that if we do no end with an atomic war for the when the oil
would be about more or less depleted, we would have to recur to uranium,
or thorium, or whatever radioactive shit we would get our hands on.

On the other hand, if this planet is going more or less surely towards
the next glacial age, it would be a good thing if we have some form of
energy or other, at least to heat the homes of the rich people. The poor
can die frozen for we are too many.
I think is a bad idea to welcome the next glacial age without some central
heating for homes of the rich sited below a latitude of 40 degrees.

Democratic party, republican party, all are good people.
"To er mundo e güeno". This is the motto of some bums in the south of Spain.
"To er mundo e güeno" can be translated as "everybody is good".

We are all good mostly with six feet of dirt over our heads. But today, with
almost everybody eating almost daily, we are like angels mostly.

But when the next glacial age would arrive, we would need a lot of calories.
Dog eating dog would be the motto.
eri

[eridanus]

they are all very nice people. They are rich. While we, the poor, we are
all the wrong people. Or the evil people. If a rich needs to kill someone,
he only needs to hire a poor to do the job.
eri

[jillery]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 05:03:35 -0700 (PDT), eridanus
<leopoldo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>they are all very nice people. They are rich. While we, the poor, we are
>all the wrong people. Or the evil people. If a rich needs to kill someone,
>he only needs to hire a poor to do the job.

When you say "hire a poor to do the job", is that the job of killing?
Or being killed? I ask only because I might consider one if the price
is right.

[eridanus]

a good question. I had not dig so so deep.
eri

[Earle Jones27]

On 2016-07-26 23:34:54 +0000, Glenn said:

> "Jonathan" <writeI...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hLidnUPYpuJeAAvK...@giganews.com...
>>
>>
>> "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate
>> cross-section of a lot of our assets, Trumps son,
>> Donald Jr., told a real estate conference in 2008,
>> according to an account posted on the website of
>> eTurboNews, a trade publication. We see a lot
>> of money pouring in from Russia."
>>
>>
>>
>> Now we know why Trump refuses to release his
>> tax returns whether under audit or not, they'll
>> reveal his extensive business dealings with
>> some of Putin's inner circle.

*
I think that the real reason that Trump will not open his personal tax
records is this:

We would get to know his net worth. Let's say, $2 billion.
Then some financial guru would show that, given the $1billion he
inherited 30 years ago, if invested in a Charles Schwab S&P 500 Index
Fund, would be worth much more than $2 billion today.

Ol' Trump is a real shrewd investor! A real deal-maker!

earle
*

[Jonathan]

On 7/27/2016 8:03 AM, eridanus wrote:


>
> they are all very nice people. They are rich. While we, the poor, we are
> all the wrong people. Or the evil people. If a rich needs to kill someone,
> he only needs to hire a poor to do the job.

> eri
>

Did you hear what Trump said today? He asked
for a hostile foreign nation to hack Clinton's
computers so Trump can win the election.

A state sponsored cyber attack against US
govt agencies borders on an act of war, and
Trump asked Putin to hack away.

That's almost treason.

Trump would've asked the Japanese to bomb
Pear Harbor so he could cash in on the
real estate deals.


Donald Trump Calls on Russia to Find Hillary
Clinton's Missing Emails.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html

[passer...@gmail.com]

What kind of a retard would think the Russian intelligence agencies would leave any trace on the computer?

Obviously not the FBI Director that said two weeks ago that there would be no trace. Dumbfounding that one would need to mention that, that anyone could be that totally bone stupid.

[passer...@gmail.com]

No moron, it was a joke and said if they released them, which he does NOT say they did, then they should release the missing personal closet server emails too.

Don't get it, moron, too complicated? Here, let me help, if the Russians hacked the DNC with a real IT team, they sure as hell hacked her closet server set up by the part time IT guy with a real day job in politics.

Meaning the Russians were receiving top secret information in real time, not to mention all the correspondence of the Secretary of State, meaning she should be locked up, not promoted.

Yeah, I know, too complicated.

[Glenn]

"Earle Jones27" <earle...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:2016072714221858175-earlejones@comcastnet...

> On 2016-07-26 23:34:54 +0000, Glenn said:
>
>> "Jonathan" <writeI...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:hLidnUPYpuJeAAvK...@giganews.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate
>>> cross-section of a lot of our assets, Trumps son,
>>> Donald Jr., told a real estate conference in 2008,
>>> according to an account posted on the website of
>>> eTurboNews, a trade publication. We see a lot
>>> of money pouring in from Russia."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Now we know why Trump refuses to release his
>>> tax returns whether under audit or not, they'll
>>> reveal his extensive business dealings with
>>> some of Putin's inner circle.
>
> *
> I think that the real reason that Trump will not open his personal tax
> records is this:
>
> We would get to know his net worth.

Tax returns show net worth??

[passer...@gmail.com]

No, Monkey Brain, he turned 1 million into 10 billion. Totally stinking ignorant of that, huh? Gotta really want to wallow in ignorance to stay that way.

Watch.

[passer...@gmail.com]

All humans have flaws. If you downbreeds can't find anything true that's bad about Donald Trump, if all you can think up is easily exposed deliberate lies, I can help. Just let me know. Anything but your moronic deliberate lies. Raise the intellectual level a bit.

[Rolf]

"jillery" <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5bahpb9a05jj2si0h...@4ax.com...

Consider which one for the right price?

[jillery]

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 16:21:45 +0200, "Rolf" <rolf.a...@gmail.com>
wrote:

That depends. As the old joke goes, I've alreadly established what I
am, I'm just haggling over the price.

[Rolf]

"jillery" <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:tfakpbdva6b72bbhk...@4ax.com...

;)

[Bob Casanova]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:01:36 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Jonathan
<writeI...@gmail.com>:

<snip>

>Did you hear what Trump said today? He asked
>for a hostile foreign nation to hack Clinton's
>computers so Trump can win the election.

No, he didn't. He said that *if* someone had hacked
Hillary's emails he's like to see what they found.

But if those emails consisted solely of yoga and birthday
messages, what possible harm could they do to the US? And
if, as Hillary's people stated, that is indeed all they
contained, why are they saying that Trump is endangering US
security by asking for their content to be released?

And no, I'm not a fan of Trump, *or* of Hillary; I think
they're both dangerous, but in different ways. If only
"NOTA" were a valid ballot option to force a reset...

<snip>
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 05:53:22 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by passer...@gmail.com:

>All humans have flaws.

Some more than others. Got a mirror handy?

[Earle Jones27]

*
If we raised the intellectual level a bit, how would you know?

earle
*

[RMcBane]

On 7/28/2016 2:19 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:01:36 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Jonathan
> <writeI...@gmail.com>:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Did you hear what Trump said today? He asked
>> for a hostile foreign nation to hack Clinton's
>> computers so Trump can win the election.
>
> No, he didn't. He said that *if* someone had hacked
> Hillary's emails he's like to see what they found.
>
> But if those emails consisted solely of yoga and birthday
> messages, what possible harm could they do to the US? And
> if, as Hillary's people stated, that is indeed all they
> contained, why are they saying that Trump is endangering US
> security by asking for their content to be released?
>
> And no, I'm not a fan of Trump, *or* of Hillary; I think
> they're both dangerous, but in different ways. If only
> "NOTA" were a valid ballot option to force a reset...

There will be at least 2 other options
(candidates) in most states.


--
Richard McBane

[Dexter]

______________________________________________

Trump's intellect leaves a lot to be desired.

<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story
/2016/07/donald_trump_is_unfit_to_be_president_here_are_141_
reasons_why.html>


http://tinyurl.com/jrue5wk

--
- There is no harm in being a fool; harm lies in being a
fool at the top of your lungs. (Author Unknown)

[Jonathan]

On 7/28/2016 2:19 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:01:36 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Jonathan
> <writeI...@gmail.com>:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Did you hear what Trump said today? He asked
>> for a hostile foreign nation to hack Clinton's
>> computers so Trump can win the election.
>
> No, he didn't. He said that *if* someone had hacked
> Hillary's emails he's like to see what they found.
>
> But if those emails consisted solely of yoga and birthday
> messages,

And if they included classified material?

Trump would be calling for US State Dept classified
material to be made PUBLIC to help him win.
Talk about a security risk.

Trump is banking of those emails having classified
material.

What else would Trump stoop to in order to win?
Next thing ya know he'll be encouraging ISIS
to bomb someone for him. That's just one step
away from what he's already done.

For a presidential candidate to say he wants
a hostile foreign power to release possibly
classified material to help him win is
just unbelievable.

And when Trump was asked if he thought it proper
for Russia to intervene in the election
Trump said ...'who am I to tell Putin what to do?"

Openly encouraging Putin to turn the election
his way is beyond words. How much you wanna
bet Putin releases something come October?

[Jonathan]

On 7/27/2016 9:52 PM, passer...@gmail.com wrote:

> No moron, it was a joke

No it wasn't, Trump wants it both ways, to say something
but not really saying it. Like when he denied knowing
David Duke, that's a clear message to Duke supporters.

Or when he was 'joking' when he said the US might
default on it's debt.

It's called speaking with a forked tongue, it's called
being two-faced...


artificial, backhanded, counterfeit, double, double-dealing,
double-faced, fake, feigned, hypocritical, Janus-faced,
jive [slang], left-handed, lip, mealy, mealymouthed,
Pecksniffian, phony (also phoney), phony-baloney
(or phoney-baloney), pretended, two-faced, unctuous

http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/two%20faced


Click the link above, look to the lower right and
see what is listed at #4 trending....that's right
it's....


After Trump Called on Russia to Find Clinton's Emails,
a Surge in Lookups for 'Treason' Lookups for 'treason'
increased 76% as people reacted to the news on
social media

> and said if they released them, which he does NOT say they did, then
> they should release the missing personal closet server emails too.

What if there's classified material in them? Trump would
be calling for US State Dept /classified/ material to
be /publicly released/ to help him win an election.

Maybe Pres Obama should have the CIA or NSA or FBI
release classified material on Trump to help
Hillary win?

How would you feel about that?

>
> Don't get it, moron, too complicated? Here, let me help, if the Russians hacked the DNC with a real IT team, they sure as hell hacked her closet server set up by the part time IT guy with a real day job in politics.
>

Maybe so, and maybe they'll conveniently show up on the eve
of the election like the DNC emails showed up the Friday
before the convention?

How do you feel about our election for President being
decided by Putin, America's current #1 greatest threat
according to the Defense Dept?

> Meaning the Russians were receiving top secret information in real time, not to mention all the correspondence of the Secretary of State, meaning she should be locked up, not promoted.
>

Such cyber attacks are against the law and borders
on an act of war. Are you ok with that too?

Tell me then, what is NOT OK with you for Trump to do
to win? If the Russians can't put him over the top
maybe he should enlist N Korea or ISIS to help him
out. I'm sure you'd be OK with that too.

Whatever it takes to win eh!

That's Trump, the outsider, the fresh face that
bringing decency and honor back to politics.

In a pigs eye.

[Jonathan]

On 7/27/2016 9:52 PM, passer...@gmail.com wrote:

> No moron, it was a joke

Let's talk about another Trump 'joke', did you
watch the republican convention? Remember how
the Hollywood icon Scot Baio was saying how
shocked he was to be invited to speak, wondering
why he was picked?

Ya know why he was picked? A couple weeks before he
called Hillary a cunt on social media. So that was
Trump's way of calling Clinton a cunt without saying it
himself.

Just like his call for Russia to hack away, but
without really saying it, since it was a 'joke'.

That's how juvenile and classless Trump is.
Trump says he can handle ISIS easily, Trump
can't even handle Fox news Megyn Kelly.

ISIS would play thin-skinned Trump like a fiddle.

[James Beck]

There has been at least one estimate along that line that suggests
that Trump is about half as rich as he would have been had he
passively invested his inheritance in the S&P500. You wouldn't get
that information from his tax returns, though.

My guess is that we'd learn that he gives embarrassingly little to
charity and that he pays relatively little in taxes.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 15:09:53 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by RMcBane <rmc...@aol.com>:

Yep.

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 20:22:52 -0400, the following appeared

in talk.origins, posted by Jonathan
<writeI...@gmail.com>:

>On 7/28/2016 2:19 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:

>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:01:36 -0400, the following appeared
>> in talk.origins, posted by Jonathan
>> <writeI...@gmail.com>:

>>> Did you hear what Trump said today? He asked
>>> for a hostile foreign nation to hack Clinton's
>>> computers so Trump can win the election.

>> No, he didn't. He said that *if* someone had hacked
>> Hillary's emails he's like to see what they found.
>>
>> But if those emails consisted solely of yoga and birthday
>> messages,

>And if they included classified material?

The Dems insist they didn't. And even if the Dems are lying
(again) it's irrelevant, since they're already in the
hackers' hands. Bottom line: Trump did *not* ask anyone to
hack anything, which error in your post was the only thing
my post was concerned with.

>Trump would be calling for US State Dept classified
>material to be made PUBLIC to help him win.
>Talk about a security risk.
>
>Trump is banking of those emails having classified
>material.
>
>What else would Trump stoop to in order to win?
>Next thing ya know he'll be encouraging ISIS
>to bomb someone for him. That's just one step
>away from what he's already done.
>
>For a presidential candidate to say he wants
>a hostile foreign power to release possibly
>classified material to help him win is
>just unbelievable.
>
>And when Trump was asked if he thought it proper
>for Russia to intervene in the election
>Trump said ...'who am I to tell Putin what to do?"
>
>Openly encouraging Putin to turn the election
>his way is beyond words. How much you wanna
>bet Putin releases something come October?

You seem to be in "hysterical mode" over quite a few "what
ifs", none of which are supported by evidence. Trying to
redirect away from your erroneous assertion? Read the below
again:

>> what possible harm could they do to the US? And
>> if, as Hillary's people stated, that is indeed all they
>> contained, why are they saying that Trump is endangering US
>> security by asking for their content to be released?
>>
>> And no, I'm not a fan of Trump, *or* of Hillary; I think
>> they're both dangerous, but in different ways. If only
>> "NOTA" were a valid ballot option to force a reset...
>>
>> <snip>
>>

[passer...@gmail.com]

Ok, you are bone stupid and have no sense of humor. Who cares?

[passer...@gmail.com]

It's the much stronger personality.

Sorry, I'm not that interested in me, and I can't imagine anything more mind numbing boring than you.

[passer...@gmail.com]

Another sub-moron fascinated with me. Swell. Is that what you are going to look back on as you review your life at the end. The time spent fascinated with me?

I have no clue who you are or anything you've said. You are a total zero to me. Not interested, sorry.

[passer...@gmail.com]

Translation: "Yep, I am so bone stupid, I think the Russians would leave some sign of having hacked it. Now that I realize the FBI Director a couple weeks ago said we would never know, best to talk about what is a good joke and what isn't. Sure as hell won't address the fact that if they did, they also hacked the closet server causing terrible damage to national security, not just crooked DNC politics."

[passer...@gmail.com]

Translation: "He only turned 1 million into 5 billion, not 10 billion."

[passer...@gmail.com]

Oh yeah, and it's deliberate lie that he inherited a billion. Total lying drivel.

Look if you guys are so permanently demented that all you can come up with is deliberate lies, I'll help, all humans have genuine flaws.

[Jonathan]

Trump calls everyone a liar, but Trump is
the world class liar.


On Wednesday, Donald Trump angrily told reporters
that he had no connection to Russian President
Vladimir Putin.

"I have nothing to do with Putin," he said. "I've never
spoken to him.

First ten second of the video from 2014 Trumps says
he spoke ..."directly to Putin who could not have
been nicer."


video at the link
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/07/watch-trump-brag-of-speaking-to-vladimir-putin

[Bob Casanova]

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 16:29:28 -0700 (PDT), the following

appeared in talk.origins, posted by passer...@gmail.com:

>It's the much stronger personality.

Your reflection is indeed a much stronger personality (and a
more intelligent one) than that which it reflects. Reflect
on that.

[passer...@gmail.com]

Ok downbreeds, here's your medicine...

The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server found no evidence that her communications were hacked while she was secretary of state, but it made clear that “hostile actors” here and abroad could have done so.

Clinton “used her personal email extensively while outside of the United States,” FBI Director James B. Comey said, including “in the territory of sophisticated adversaries.”

It was “possible” that they accessed her account, he said. But “given the nature of the system and the actors potentially involved, we assess we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-no-evidence-clintons-email-was-hacked-by-foreign-powers-but-it-could-have-been/2016/07/05/93334ba0-42dc-11e6-8856-f26de2537a9d_story.html

"We would be unlikely to see such direct evidence."

Ignorant of how the world works, totally ignorant of the FBI Director's press conference on indicting Hillary or not or what was said in it, but oh so eager to run their now proven ignorant mouths.

[Mark Isaak]

On 7/30/16 11:47 AM, passer...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ok downbreeds, here's your medicine...
>
> The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server found no evidence that her communications were hacked while she was secretary of state, but it made clear that “hostile actors” here and abroad could have done so.

That is true of every email server in the world. That people single out
Clinton's server just shows that they are biased to the point of illness.

> Clinton “used her personal email extensively while outside of the United States,” FBI Director James B. Comey said, including “in the territory of sophisticated adversaries.”

The same is true of virtually every computer-literate person who travels
overseas.

> It was “possible” that they accessed her account, he said. But “given the nature of the system and the actors potentially involved, we assess we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence.”
>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-no-evidence-clintons-email-was-hacked-by-foreign-powers-but-it-could-have-been/2016/07/05/93334ba0-42dc-11e6-8856-f26de2537a9d_story.html
>
> "We would be unlikely to see such direct evidence."
>
> Ignorant of how the world works, totally ignorant of the FBI Director's press conference on indicting Hillary or not or what was said in it, but oh so eager to run their now proven ignorant mouths.

Yes, you are ignorant of how the world works.

Hillary Clinton has been attacked by her political enemies for decades.
For at least ten years now, those attacks have been relentless. Those
who are attacking her include people with a great deal of competence,
power, and motivation. If they had found any actual dirt on her, there
is no doubt that Hillary would not merely be smeared with it; she would
be buried and out of sight by now. The Republicans have done this much
for Hillary: They have made sure that she is by far the most thoroughly
vetted presidential candidate in this country's history.

--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) curioustaxonomy (dot) net
"The evil that is in the world always comes of ignorance, and good
intentions may do as much harm as malevolence, if they lack
understanding." - Albert Camus, _The Plague_

[Earle Jones27]

*
Has anyone checked to see whether Trump has made a deal with Kim Jong-Un?

See ABC News and Bustle.com

"Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump is curiously known for
cozying up to dictators, and now it looks like those dictators may be
returning the favor. While Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton recently
received an endorsement from President Obama at this week's Democratic
National Convention, the GOP presidential hopeful has gotten praise of
a different kind. Back in May, Trump was endorsed by North Korea, home
to that champion of freedom Kim Jong-Un. Should this come as a surprise
to voters? Given Trump's repeated praise of the likes of Vladimir Putin
and Benito Mussolini, probably not."

Who's next?

earle
*

[passer...@gmail.com]

Another chickenshit downbreed with a segmented post.

Good riddance.

[passer...@gmail.com]

Like I said, if you downbreeds are too stupid to come up with anything other than deliberate lies, let me know, I'll be glad to help. All human beings have flaws.

[passer...@gmail.com]

Russia Expert Stephen Cohen: Trump Wants To Stop The New Cold War, But The American Media Just Doesn't Understand

Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at NYU and Princeton, spoke with CNN's 'Smerconish' Saturday morning about Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and the 'New Cold War.'

Cohen says the media at large is doing a huge disservice to the American people by ignoring the substance of Trump's arguments about NATO and Russia, and buying the Clinton campaign's simplistic smear that Trump is a Russian "Manchurian candidate."

"That reckless branding of Trump as a Russian agent, most of it is coming from the Clinton campaign," Cohen said. "And they really need to stop."

"We're approaching a Cuban Missile Crisis level nuclear confrontation with Russia," he explained...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/07/30/russia_expert_stephen_cohen_trump_wants_to_stop_the_new_cold_war_but_the_america_media_just_doesnt_understand.html

To try to gain some domestic politics advantage, the traitor tries to start a war with a country with 50,000 Thermonuclear Weapons. Treason.

[Mark Isaak]

On 7/30/16 6:08 PM, passer...@gmail.com wrote:
> Like I said, if you downbreeds are too stupid to come up with anything other than deliberate lies, let me know, I'll be glad to help. All human beings have flaws.

I'll repeat what you irrationally skipped earlier:

Hillary Clinton has been attacked by her political enemies for decades.
For at least ten years now, those attacks have been relentless. Those
who are attacking her include people with a great deal of competence,
power, and motivation. If they had found any actual dirt on her, there
is no doubt that Hillary would not merely be smeared with it; she would
be buried and out of sight by now. The Republicans have done this much
for Hillary: They have made sure that she is by far the most thoroughly
vetted presidential candidate in this country's history.

And what's more, you know it is true.

[Glenn]

"Mark Isaak" <eci...@curioustax.onomy.net> wrote in message news:nnk1eu$9kj$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 7/30/16 6:08 PM, passer...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Like I said, if you downbreeds are too stupid to come up with anything other than deliberate lies, let me know, I'll be glad to help. All human beings have flaws.
>
> I'll repeat what you irrationally skipped earlier:
>
> Hillary Clinton has been attacked by her political enemies for decades.
> For at least ten years now, those attacks have been relentless. Those
> who are attacking her include people with a great deal of competence,
> power, and motivation. If they had found any actual dirt on her, there
> is no doubt that Hillary would not merely be smeared with it; she would
> be buried and out of sight by now. The Republicans have done this much
> for Hillary: They have made sure that she is by far the most thoroughly
> vetted presidential candidate in this country's history.
>
> And what's more, you know it is true.
>

She's certainly "vetted" by morons like you, but for many there is plenty of "dirt" on her and Bill.

[Rolf]

"Earle Jones27" <earle...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2016073015195055263-earlejones@comcastnet...

Mussolini was crazy. Putin is not. That doesn't mean you have to like him.
How long is it since (if ever) Russia wasn't ruled by a Czar?

Oh now I rememeber, Mikhail Gorbachev.

[Mark Isaak]

There is plenty of accusations of dirt. There is no dirt, at least not
more than you would expect from an average law-abiding person. The
Republican machine has proven that.

[passer...@gmail.com]

Run away Chickenshit.

No loss at all.

[Jonathan]

On 7/27/2016 9:49 PM, passer...@gmail.com wrote:
> What kind of a retard would think the Russian intelligence agencies would leave any trace on the computer?
>
> Obviously not the FBI Director that said two weeks ago that there would be no trace. Dumbfounding that one would need to mention that, that anyone could be that totally bone stupid.
>


Of course it's Russia, Putin hates Clinton for encourages
protests against Putin and in Ukraine, and for the
ground breaking Iranian sanctions that Clinton has promised
to point Russia's way if she's elected. Putin has been
interfering in European election for years in the same
way. Not to mention Trump would be just what Putin
could ever hope for.


Exclusive: FBI probes hacking of Democratic congressional group - sources


The sources said the Internet Protocol address of the spurious site
resembled one used by Russian government-linked hackers suspected in the
breach of the DNC, the body that sets strategy and raises money for the
Democratic Party nationwide.

Cyber security experts and U.S. officials have said there was evidence
that Russia engineered the DNC hack to release sensitive party emails in
order to influence the U.S. presidential election.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-exclusive-idUSKCN1082Y7?il=0

[Paul J Gans]

Mark Isaak <eci...@curioustax.onomy.net> wrote:
>On 7/30/16 6:08 PM, passer...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Like I said, if you downbreeds are too stupid to come up with anything other than deliberate lies, let me know, I'll be glad to help. All human beings have flaws.

>I'll repeat what you irrationally skipped earlier:

>Hillary Clinton has been attacked by her political enemies for decades.
>For at least ten years now, those attacks have been relentless. Those
>who are attacking her include people with a great deal of competence,
>power, and motivation. If they had found any actual dirt on her, there
>is no doubt that Hillary would not merely be smeared with it; she would
>be buried and out of sight by now. The Republicans have done this much
>for Hillary: They have made sure that she is by far the most thoroughly
>vetted presidential candidate in this country's history.

>And what's more, you know it is true.

Bravo! It needed saying. It is true.

--
--- Paul J. Gans

[Paul J Gans]

No, there isn't. There are only accusations. No proof. As Mark said,
if there was anything of a criminal nature that was proovable, she's have
been indicted long since.

She's never been indicted.

You'll just have to live with that.

[passer...@gmail.com]

The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server found no evidence that her communications were hacked while she was secretary of state, but it made clear that “hostile actors” here and abroad could have done so.

Clinton “used her personal email extensively while outside of the United States,” FBI Director James B. Comey said, including “in the territory of sophisticated adversaries.”

It was “possible” that they accessed her account, he said. But “given the nature of the system and the actors potentially involved, we assess we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-no-evidence-clintons-email-was-hacked-by-foreign-powers-but-it-could-have-been/2016/07/05/93334ba0-42dc-11e6-8856-f26de2537a9d_story.html

"We would be unlikely to see such direct evidence."

Ignorant of how the world works, totally ignorant of the FBI Director's press conference on indicting Hillary or not or what was said in it, but oh so eager to run their now proven ignorant mouths.

[Mitchell Coffey]

Well, the headlines in National Enquirer are pretty damning.

Also, Ted Cruz's father had lunch with Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mitchell Coffey

[Glenn]

"Paul J Gans" <gan...@panix.com> wrote in message news:nnm29h$r6q$2...@reader2.panix.com...

Many dishonest and corrupt officials in the world have never been indicted. And neither Mark nor I used the term.
If you had any integrity, you would not have implied otherwise.

Whether there is any proof, or what come consider evidence of criminal behavior, does not always determine indictment in a court, one way or the other. You know that.

"Had someone who was obscure and unimportant and powerless done what Hillary Clinton did - recklessly and secretly install a shoddy home server and work with top-secret information on it, then outright lie to the public about it when they were caught - they would have been criminally charged long ago, with little fuss or objection."

http://www.salon.com/2016/07/08/hillarys_awful_week_she_wont_be_indicted_but_the_damage_is_done/

[Jonathan]

Gingrich sealed the audits on how much
Congress had spent investigating Clinton
once the figure reached $250 million
dollars, and the investigation went
on for another 6 months, I extrapolated
Congress spend some $400 million dollars
of taxpayer money investing the Clintons
and they had amassed over 100,000 files.

And that's not even bringing up the point
that Congressional investigations are not
supposed to be used to win elections, that's
called an abuse of power.

And the whole email controversy?

The first month in office as Sec or State
her staff met with 5 NSA security specialist
and 2 from the State Dept IT and asked for a
secure blackberry for Clinton. They told her
is was too much trouble to integrate into
the dated State Dept system.

Clinton's staff then asked for a secure
standalone computer on her desk and they
never gave her one.

I mean, does the President work weekends
to check his communication system himself?
Does the President install the firewall and
check the encryption and all that...himself
on weekends or late at night?

Does Hillary need to go get a IT degree and
run the flippin' wires by herself?

Everyone knew she was using that blackberry
from day one and they never gave it a second
thought. They didn't even bother to check
how she accessed the Internet or they would
have found out about the private server.

And Hillary, btw, is computer illiterate.

When asked if her server was secure she
answered it was guarded by the Secret
Service, as if 'secure' to her meant
physically secure, not encrypted.

She couldn't install Windows 10 if her
life depended on it yet somehow she is
supposed to secure her communications
all by herself.

"But she lied"...small change next to Trump.


The PolitiFact scorecard

True (4%)
Mostly True (11%)
Half True (15%)
Mostly False (15%)
False (37%)
Pants on Fire (18%)

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/


Trump lies....70% of the time.


A few 'best of' Trump video clips
are at my Twitter site.

https://twitter.com/Non_Linear1




s

[passer...@gmail.com]

Oh yeah, she's too stupid to know every intelligence agency and criminal syndicate on the planet was reading her top secret emails in real time. Just what we need for president, a illiterate sub-moron.

[jillery]

And Barack Obama wasn't born in the U.S.
--
This space is intentionally not blank.

[Paul J Gans]

Yeah. You are right. I'm going to write in Sarah Palin for President.

[Paul J Gans]

There is no evidence that he was born anywhere.

[jillery]

Just like you and me, but in your case, you were hatched.

[Paul J Gans]

Eggsactly.

[Glenn]

"Jonathan" <writeI...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1LOdnRkuIsibeALK...@giganews.com...

> On 7/31/2016 7:38 PM, Paul J Gans wrote:
>> Mark Isaak <eci...@curioustax.onomy.net> wrote:
>>> On 7/30/16 6:08 PM, passer...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Like I said, if you downbreeds are too stupid to come up with anything other than deliberate lies, let me know, I'll be glad to help. All human beings have flaws.
>>
>>> I'll repeat what you irrationally skipped earlier:
>>
>>> Hillary Clinton has been attacked by her political enemies for decades.
>>> For at least ten years now, those attacks have been relentless. Those
>>> who are attacking her include people with a great deal of competence,
>>> power, and motivation. If they had found any actual dirt on her, there
>>> is no doubt that Hillary would not merely be smeared with it; she would
>>> be buried and out of sight by now. The Republicans have done this much
>>> for Hillary: They have made sure that she is by far the most thoroughly
>>> vetted presidential candidate in this country's history.
>>
>>> And what's more, you know it is true.
>>
>> Bravo! It needed saying. It is true.
>>
>
>
> Gingrich sealed the audits on how much
> Congress had spent investigating Clinton
> once the figure reached $250 million
> dollars, and the investigation went
> on for another 6 months, I extrapolated
> Congress spend some $400 million dollars
> of taxpayer money investing the Clintons
> and they had amassed over 100,000 files.
>

Where did you get that crap from?

[Mark Isaak]

Yup, just like I said: Accusations, not facts. The FBI investigation
found that the server was no more shoddy than standard for high
government officials, that she did not work with top-secret information
on it, and that she was not at all reckless. For working with
top-secret material, she consistently went to the server for working
with top-secret material. Since her enemies cannot find an actual
evidence of wrongdoing, they make up lies and hope that enough gullible
people pretend that it is evidence.

The excuse that Hillary is not obscure and unimportant is vacuous,
because the people working against her have been just as important and
powerful, if not more so.

[Glenn]

"Mark Isaak" <eci...@curioustax.onomy.net> wrote in message news:nnreha$pk6$1...@dont-email.me...

Is that a fact? I wonder if you read what you write. For that matter, I wonder if you read what you read.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fbi-director-james-comey-hillary-clinton-email-probe/story?id=41044927
"Asked whether Clinton's use of a personal server while secretary of state made some of America's secrets vulnerable to adversaries, Comey simply replied, "Yes."

http://www.npr.org/2016/08/01/488251255/fact-check-clinton-says-comey-said-my-answers-were-truthful-on-emails
"Comey: "No there was classified material emailed."

http://www.drudge.com/news/201731/hillary-fact-check-comey-called-my-answers
"I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time."

Are you confident, Mark?

[Paul J Gans]

One might add to the above that there is no evidence that Clinton's
server was ever hacked. Other servers that HAVE been hacked include
the one used by the head of the CIA. In addition, practically every
government agency has had its servers hacked.

This is in part due to the ancient equipment and programming in use
by the government. Somehow, money never seems to be appropriated for
the upgrade of equipment.

[Mark Isaak]

Duh. All servers in the world fit that description.

> http://www.npr.org/2016/08/01/488251255/fact-check-clinton-says-comey-said-my-answers-were-truthful-on-emails
> "Comey: "No there was classified material emailed."

Yes, approximately three emails contained paragraphs which were not
clearly marked, but *were* marked classified. The information in them
need not have been classified; one could not tell their security status
from the content. Anyone skimming quickly through the email, as any
competent administrator would do, could easily miss the classification.

> http://www.drudge.com/news/201731/hillary-fact-check-comey-called-my-answers
> "I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time."

I said Clinton did not use her personal server to work with classified
information. Letting the information pass by unnoticed is not "working
with" it.

> Are you confident, Mark?

Was Clinton wrong? Technically, yes. How wrong? On a scale of 0 to
10, perhaps 0.5. How many real people have done better over their
entire lives?

You do know, don't you, that Donald Trump is a serial liar and is being
indicted for fraud? And those aren't even his worse qualities.

[Glenn]

"Mark Isaak" <eci...@curioustax.onomy.net> wrote in message news:nnua9v$osi$1...@dont-email.me...

No, I don't know that.

[*Hemidactylus*]

Trump does seem to be more tolerant of LGBT than his conservative Repug
base given the data point of letting Caitlin Jenner pee where she wants
in a Trump property and his heartfelt comments about the Pulse shootings
and thanking the Repugs for their apparent supportive response to that
at the convention. I credit Trump with that (though the undercurrent may
be blatantly Islamophobic).

From that apparently admirable starting point it's all downhill.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/07/donald_trump_is_unfit_to_be_president_here_are_141_reasons_why.html

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/first-read-gop-trump-go-unraveling-break-glass-mode-n622116

How could you digest that cacophony of batshit and support Trump
seriously? I really dislike Clinton for some of the same reasons as you.
For one, if she wins our tax dollars pay for a full time staffer or two
to keep Slick Willy away from all female interns and other potential
temptations, lest there be ANOTHER scandal. But damn it all she ain't
dissing veterans like McCain or some Muslim family that lost their son
who served our country. Not really sure about Benghazi or the email
servers but hey...douche vs. turd sandwich.

And I hope there is a four way debate. Sure it enables the kooky Greens
who might pull Sanders votes from Clinton with their wack-a-doodle
anti-GMO, pro-homeopathy, vaccination questioning crap, but it also
allows the Libertarians to vacuum votes from Trump. In this race I want
to see Libertarians enabled. If Repugs don't vote Libertarian on
principle or fear of Trump, maybe they will write in Kasich-Jeb or
Jeb-Kasich. Florida survived Jeb. So can the US.

After this next primary vote I wonder how many Repugs will defect and
either declare their support for (cringe...vomit) Hillary or vote
Libertarian. They could hope to hold Congress and keep Hillary in check
for four years at least, being the infamous Party of No that helped turn
Obamacare into a steaming pile of shit (sans public option).