Midterm Elections
- Thread starter eyephone
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
You failed to include, that Trump apologists and enthusiasts routinely use anecdotes to prove larger points.
I agree with Soylent. All were in the end nothing more than photo ops except Reykjavik and Camp David. And Camp David didn't help Carter get re-elected. It was the economy but Jimmy Carter is sure he would have easily won reelection if he had sent in one more helicopter to rescue those Iranian hostages.
I assume you will rate Reykjavik poorly.
No I don't think the point is idiotic. It is relevant to the topic at hand. As much as i distrust polls as a whole, when you see this much disparity it overcomes the statistical insignificance. When regular people are asked these questions (not just anecdotal) they overwhelmingly don't care about this Russia topic. Certainly when asked how it influences their mid term vote. As always, Its the economy, stupid! that tops concern, followed closely by immigration. Both issues Trump scores well on.
Most Important Problem
What do you think is the most important problem facing the country today?
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx
Our leaders lying to the American people are a bigger national security threat than the antics of some 2 bit dictator.
Remember the Pentagon Papers? The classified documents the Rand employee stole and sent to the press?
The Pentagon Papers revealed that the US government knew for years the Vietnam War could not be won and was desperately finding a way out with our credibility intact. At the same time, they told us we were winning the war and victory was just around the corner. Yes, you heard that right, tens of thousands of American kids (mostly poor and minority) were gettiing sent to die by a government who knew the war was hopeless.
The American people have a right to know the truth about what the governemnt is doing even if it takes a crime to bring the information to light. As they said at the time, the American people paid for the classified Pentagon Papers with the blood of 48,000 of their kids.
Which begs the question, why does Trump talk about Russia collusion so much? If he never mentioned Mueller's investigation, in interviews, Twitter, and elsewhere, it might be discussed a fraction of what it is.
The older you get, the more you KNOW you absolutely CANNOT trust what politicians say, from ANY party. Their number one priority is their own job.
The article nails it ...
Are Republicans Covering for Trump, or for Themselves?
If the N.R.A. was compromised by Russia, the whole party's in trouble.
July 20, 2018
Of all the interlocking mysteries of the Trump-Russia scandal, one that I?ve found particularly perplexing is the utter servility of congressional Republicans before a president many of them hate and believe to be compromised by a foreign power.
Yes, I know they?re thrilled about tax cuts and judges. Given how Russia has become a patron of the right globally over the last decade, some Republicans might welcome its intervention into our politics, believing that the Democrats are greater enemies of the Republic. And some are just cowards, afraid of mean tweets or base blowback.
But that doesn?t explain why, for example, Speaker Paul Ryan, a Russia hawk who is retiring in January, allowed his party to torpedo the House Intelligence Committee investigation into Russian interference in the election. Ryan, after all, knows full well who and what Donald Trump is. In a secretly recorded June 2016 conversation about Ukraine, obtained by The Washington Post, the House majority leader, Kevin McCarthy, said, ?There?s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump.? Far from disagreeing, Ryan said, ?What?s said in the family stays in the family.? If he were patriotic ? or even if he just wanted to set himself up for a comeback should Trump implode ? he would have stood up for the rule of law in the Russia inquiry. It?s hard to see what he got in return for choosing not to.
This week, however, a new possibility came into focus. Perhaps, rather than covering for Trump, some Republicans are covering for themselves.
Last Friday, Robert Mueller, the special counsel, indicted 12 members of Russian military intelligence for their interference in the 2016 election. The indictment claims that in August 2016, Guccifer 2.0, a fictitious online persona adopted by the Russian hackers, ?received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for the U.S. Congress.? The Russian conspirators obliged, sending ?the candidate stolen documents related to the candidate?s opponent.? Congress has, so far, done nothing discernible to find out who this candidate might be.
Then, on Monday, we learned of the arrest of Maria Butina, who is accused of being a Russian agent who infiltrated the National Rifle Association, the most important outside organization in the Republican firmament. Legal filings in the case outline a plan to use the N.R.A. to push the Republican Party in a more pro-Russian direction.
Butina, 29, appears to have worked for Alexander Torshin, a Russian politician linked to organized crime who is the target of U.S. sanctions. She developed a romantic relationship with Paul Erickson, a conservative operative close to the N.R.A. (Court filings cite evidence it was insincere on her part.) Erickson, in turn, wrote to a Trump adviser in May 2016 about using the N.R.A. to set up a back channel to the Kremlin.
The young Russian woman clearly understood the political significance of the N.R.A. In one email, court papers say, she described the central ?place and influence? of the N.R.A. in the Republican Party. Through her pro-gun activism, she became a fixture of the conservative movement and was photographed with influential Republican politicians. A Justice Department filing quotes Torshin as comparing her to another young, famous Russian agent: ?You have upstaged Anna Chapman. She poses with toy pistols, while you are being published with real ones.?
If the N.R.A. as an organization turns out to be compromised, it would shake conservative politics to its foundation. And this is no longer a far-fetched possibility. ?I serve on both the Intelligence Committee and the Finance Committee,? Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, told me. ?So I have a chance to really look at this through the periscope of both committees. And what I have wondered about for some time is this whole issue of whether the N.R.A. is getting subverted as a Russian asset.?
This is not a question that Republicans are eager to answer. Before Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee abruptly closed their investigation into Russian election interference, committee Democrats wanted to interview both Butina and Erickson. Their Republican colleagues refused. ?If there were efforts towards a back channel towards the N.R.A., they didn?t want to know,? Representative Adam Schiff, a California Democrat who is the ranking member on the committee, told me. ?It was too hot to handle.?
It is not surprising that Republicans would want to protect the N.R.A. According to an audit obtained by the Center for Responsive Politics, the N.R.A.?s overall spending increased by more than $100 million in 2016. ?The explosion in spending came as the N.R.A. poured unprecedented amounts of money into efforts to deliver Donald Trump the White House and help Republicans hold both houses of Congress,? the center wrote.
McClatchy has reported that the F.B.I. is investigating whether Torshin illegally funneled money to the N.R.A. to help Trump. Wyden has also been trying to trace foreign money flowing into the N.R.A., but has found little cooperation from the organization, his Republican colleagues or the Treasury Department.
?The fact is, the N.R.A. has flipped their position more times than a kid does on a summer diving board,? Wyden said of the organization?s conflicting responses to his inquiries. At this point, the N.R.A. has acknowledged receiving just over $2,500 from Russians or people living in Russia, mostly for dues payments and magazine subscriptions. But that doesn?t tell us anything about money that might have been routed through shell companies, like, for example, Bridges, the limited liability corporation that Butina and Erickson set up in South Dakota in February 2016.
Wyden said Republicans on the Intelligence Committee have thwarted his attempts to look deeply into the Russian money trail. ?The Intelligence Committee has completely ducked for cover on follow-the-money issues,? he said. (As it happens, Richard Burr, the North Carolina Republican who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, is one of Congress?s leading recipients of N.R.A. support.)
On Monday, a few hours after news broke of Butina?s arrest, the Treasury Department announced a new rule sparing some tax-exempt groups, including the N.R.A., from having to report their large donors to the I.R.S. Wyden called the move ?truly grotesque,? saying it would ?make it easier for Russian dark money? to flow into American politics. You might ask who benefits. The answer is: not just Trump.
Are Republicans Covering for Trump, or for Themselves?
If the N.R.A. was compromised by Russia, the whole party's in trouble.
July 20, 2018
Of all the interlocking mysteries of the Trump-Russia scandal, one that I?ve found particularly perplexing is the utter servility of congressional Republicans before a president many of them hate and believe to be compromised by a foreign power.
Yes, I know they?re thrilled about tax cuts and judges. Given how Russia has become a patron of the right globally over the last decade, some Republicans might welcome its intervention into our politics, believing that the Democrats are greater enemies of the Republic. And some are just cowards, afraid of mean tweets or base blowback.
But that doesn?t explain why, for example, Speaker Paul Ryan, a Russia hawk who is retiring in January, allowed his party to torpedo the House Intelligence Committee investigation into Russian interference in the election. Ryan, after all, knows full well who and what Donald Trump is. In a secretly recorded June 2016 conversation about Ukraine, obtained by The Washington Post, the House majority leader, Kevin McCarthy, said, ?There?s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump.? Far from disagreeing, Ryan said, ?What?s said in the family stays in the family.? If he were patriotic ? or even if he just wanted to set himself up for a comeback should Trump implode ? he would have stood up for the rule of law in the Russia inquiry. It?s hard to see what he got in return for choosing not to.
This week, however, a new possibility came into focus. Perhaps, rather than covering for Trump, some Republicans are covering for themselves.
Last Friday, Robert Mueller, the special counsel, indicted 12 members of Russian military intelligence for their interference in the 2016 election. The indictment claims that in August 2016, Guccifer 2.0, a fictitious online persona adopted by the Russian hackers, ?received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for the U.S. Congress.? The Russian conspirators obliged, sending ?the candidate stolen documents related to the candidate?s opponent.? Congress has, so far, done nothing discernible to find out who this candidate might be.
Then, on Monday, we learned of the arrest of Maria Butina, who is accused of being a Russian agent who infiltrated the National Rifle Association, the most important outside organization in the Republican firmament. Legal filings in the case outline a plan to use the N.R.A. to push the Republican Party in a more pro-Russian direction.
Butina, 29, appears to have worked for Alexander Torshin, a Russian politician linked to organized crime who is the target of U.S. sanctions. She developed a romantic relationship with Paul Erickson, a conservative operative close to the N.R.A. (Court filings cite evidence it was insincere on her part.) Erickson, in turn, wrote to a Trump adviser in May 2016 about using the N.R.A. to set up a back channel to the Kremlin.
The young Russian woman clearly understood the political significance of the N.R.A. In one email, court papers say, she described the central ?place and influence? of the N.R.A. in the Republican Party. Through her pro-gun activism, she became a fixture of the conservative movement and was photographed with influential Republican politicians. A Justice Department filing quotes Torshin as comparing her to another young, famous Russian agent: ?You have upstaged Anna Chapman. She poses with toy pistols, while you are being published with real ones.?
If the N.R.A. as an organization turns out to be compromised, it would shake conservative politics to its foundation. And this is no longer a far-fetched possibility. ?I serve on both the Intelligence Committee and the Finance Committee,? Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, told me. ?So I have a chance to really look at this through the periscope of both committees. And what I have wondered about for some time is this whole issue of whether the N.R.A. is getting subverted as a Russian asset.?
This is not a question that Republicans are eager to answer. Before Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee abruptly closed their investigation into Russian election interference, committee Democrats wanted to interview both Butina and Erickson. Their Republican colleagues refused. ?If there were efforts towards a back channel towards the N.R.A., they didn?t want to know,? Representative Adam Schiff, a California Democrat who is the ranking member on the committee, told me. ?It was too hot to handle.?
It is not surprising that Republicans would want to protect the N.R.A. According to an audit obtained by the Center for Responsive Politics, the N.R.A.?s overall spending increased by more than $100 million in 2016. ?The explosion in spending came as the N.R.A. poured unprecedented amounts of money into efforts to deliver Donald Trump the White House and help Republicans hold both houses of Congress,? the center wrote.
McClatchy has reported that the F.B.I. is investigating whether Torshin illegally funneled money to the N.R.A. to help Trump. Wyden has also been trying to trace foreign money flowing into the N.R.A., but has found little cooperation from the organization, his Republican colleagues or the Treasury Department.
?The fact is, the N.R.A. has flipped their position more times than a kid does on a summer diving board,? Wyden said of the organization?s conflicting responses to his inquiries. At this point, the N.R.A. has acknowledged receiving just over $2,500 from Russians or people living in Russia, mostly for dues payments and magazine subscriptions. But that doesn?t tell us anything about money that might have been routed through shell companies, like, for example, Bridges, the limited liability corporation that Butina and Erickson set up in South Dakota in February 2016.
Wyden said Republicans on the Intelligence Committee have thwarted his attempts to look deeply into the Russian money trail. ?The Intelligence Committee has completely ducked for cover on follow-the-money issues,? he said. (As it happens, Richard Burr, the North Carolina Republican who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, is one of Congress?s leading recipients of N.R.A. support.)
On Monday, a few hours after news broke of Butina?s arrest, the Treasury Department announced a new rule sparing some tax-exempt groups, including the N.R.A., from having to report their large donors to the I.R.S. Wyden called the move ?truly grotesque,? saying it would ?make it easier for Russian dark money? to flow into American politics. You might ask who benefits. The answer is: not just Trump.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
Would buying a guard gated older home in Northpark be better than buying a new home with higher taxes in The Great Park?
Irvinecommuter
New member
Here is the thing...Trumpers never actually talk about the issues or the policies. It all delves into YOU LIBERALS JUST DON'T GET IT or DEEP STATE TRYING TO STOP TRUMP.
I would love for Trumpers to actually set forth what Trump has done since his presidency? Foreign policy has been a disaster. Economy actually slowing down since Trump came on board and the tax cuts have not done anything but line the pockets of the ultrarich.
Oh...hey trade wars are easy and fun!
I would love for Trumpers to actually set forth what Trump has done since his presidency? Foreign policy has been a disaster. Economy actually slowing down since Trump came on board and the tax cuts have not done anything but line the pockets of the ultrarich.
Oh...hey trade wars are easy and fun!
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-says-apos-apos-ready-100900482.html
Perspective
Well-known member
Irvinecommuter said:
You failed to include, that Trump apologists and enthusiasts routinely use anecdotes to prove larger points.
Perspective
Well-known member
Trump Is Being Manipulated by Putin. What Should We Do?
Lawmakers must keep the American people informed of the current danger, writes a Republican congressman from Texas.
By Will Hurd
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/opinion/trump-russia-putin-republican-congress.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
Is Trump finally crossing a line that will result in more than just a few Republicans tepidly speaking out?
Lawmakers must keep the American people informed of the current danger, writes a Republican congressman from Texas.
By Will Hurd
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/opinion/trump-russia-putin-republican-congress.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
Is Trump finally crossing a line that will result in more than just a few Republicans tepidly speaking out?
Perspective
Well-known member
Rank the greatest threats to our national security:
steel and aluminum imports
Mexican and central Americans entering the US illegally
Hillary Clinton's private server
Russia and Putin
steel and aluminum imports
Mexican and central Americans entering the US illegally
Hillary Clinton's private server
Russia and Putin
sgip
Well-known member
Summits are photo opportunities. Nothing more. The only successful Summits in the past 40 years were IMHO the Camp David Accords (Carter/Begin/Sadat) and Reykjavik (Reagan/Gorbachev). If I had to rate these, it would run an 8. The rest were mere zeros
Some of the reasons I supported President Trump (R-abid Orangutan) and his actions that I would consider"successes"
1) Originalist SCOTUS judges.
2) Appointment of replacement judges. Yes, some will say the ABA calls these nominees UNQUALIFIED!!! Considering how often these present judges are overturned, anyone would be better than many on the bench today. ABA's shenanigans are more in the vein of bitter sour grapes than fine wine of truth.
3) Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital (as Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama had, and never did anything) and finally moving the Embassy there.
4) NATO spending. Yes, even NATO spokespersons have said Trumps push to have NATO members contribute to the level everyone agreed to some time ago is working.
There are other things that admittedly are not so good - tariff/trade, etc, but there are still 2 years left to go, possibly another 4, and we'll eventually see where it all ends up. Generally speaking anyone under 40 won't clearly remember the environment during Reagan's first 2 years in office. (No, Trump is not Reagan...pleez) The same poisonous atmosphere existed then as it does today. Reagan was going to push the button. Reagan did this and that. Nothing here is new, however it was the Reagan revolution that gave us the collapse of the Soviet Union, interest rates that went from 18% to 10%, and an inflation rate back in the 2-3 percent range. It could be reasonably argued that during the term of Richard Nixon things were outright revolutionary what with college kids being shot by the National Guard, and gigantic protests against the war. What did Nixon also bring? D?tente with China. The EPA, and other positive changes during what would be considered a "Failed presidency".
Time will tell, as it did with other Presidents.
Some of the reasons I supported President Trump (R-abid Orangutan) and his actions that I would consider"successes"
1) Originalist SCOTUS judges.
2) Appointment of replacement judges. Yes, some will say the ABA calls these nominees UNQUALIFIED!!! Considering how often these present judges are overturned, anyone would be better than many on the bench today. ABA's shenanigans are more in the vein of bitter sour grapes than fine wine of truth.
3) Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital (as Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama had, and never did anything) and finally moving the Embassy there.
4) NATO spending. Yes, even NATO spokespersons have said Trumps push to have NATO members contribute to the level everyone agreed to some time ago is working.
There are other things that admittedly are not so good - tariff/trade, etc, but there are still 2 years left to go, possibly another 4, and we'll eventually see where it all ends up. Generally speaking anyone under 40 won't clearly remember the environment during Reagan's first 2 years in office. (No, Trump is not Reagan...pleez) The same poisonous atmosphere existed then as it does today. Reagan was going to push the button. Reagan did this and that. Nothing here is new, however it was the Reagan revolution that gave us the collapse of the Soviet Union, interest rates that went from 18% to 10%, and an inflation rate back in the 2-3 percent range. It could be reasonably argued that during the term of Richard Nixon things were outright revolutionary what with college kids being shot by the National Guard, and gigantic protests against the war. What did Nixon also bring? D?tente with China. The EPA, and other positive changes during what would be considered a "Failed presidency".
Time will tell, as it did with other Presidents.
The only thing Russia allegedly did was show the world how corrupt the Democrats are.
Don't shoot the messenger. The Russians are (allegedly) just the messenger. The contents of the message was authored by the Dems.
Was it the Russians that caused Hillary to privately tell the rich people at the Goldman Sachs meeting to ignore her public statements about helping the poor and that she really had the rich's back?
Was it the Russians that caused the DNC to conspire to deny Bernie the nomination?
It may be unfortunate how Wikileaks obtained the information, but the American people have a right to know that their leaders are telling them one thing and doing the exact opposite.
If the Dems want to prevent future Russian meddling, the solution is simple, stop lying to the American people. Then the Russians won't have any dirt to disclose.
Don't shoot the messenger. The Russians are (allegedly) just the messenger. The contents of the message was authored by the Dems.
Was it the Russians that caused Hillary to privately tell the rich people at the Goldman Sachs meeting to ignore her public statements about helping the poor and that she really had the rich's back?
Was it the Russians that caused the DNC to conspire to deny Bernie the nomination?
It may be unfortunate how Wikileaks obtained the information, but the American people have a right to know that their leaders are telling them one thing and doing the exact opposite.
If the Dems want to prevent future Russian meddling, the solution is simple, stop lying to the American people. Then the Russians won't have any dirt to disclose.
momopi
Well-known member
Russia's economy, even at its recent peak was smaller than California's. With declining energy prices their economy and government revenue has been greatly reduced, resulting in military budget cuts. The games/intrigue they're playing is an attempt to punch above their weight.
Ready2Downsize
Well-known member
eyephone said:
I agree with Soylent. All were in the end nothing more than photo ops except Reykjavik and Camp David. And Camp David didn't help Carter get re-elected. It was the economy but Jimmy Carter is sure he would have easily won reelection if he had sent in one more helicopter to rescue those Iranian hostages.
I assume you will rate Reykjavik poorly.
It increasingly looks like it is not just Trump who is exposed , but HOUSE GOP itself , when it comes to Russia .
They don?t dare do anything to upset trump
senate Republicans drop bid to block Trump from lifting sanctions on Chinese telecom giant ZTE
The retreat means that ZTE ? a company found guilty of selling U.S. goods to Iran in violation of sanctions ? will get to duck tough Commerce Department penalties that bar U.S. companies from doing business with it. Chinese officials said those penalties would effectively put ZTE out of business
They don?t dare do anything to upset trump
senate Republicans drop bid to block Trump from lifting sanctions on Chinese telecom giant ZTE
The retreat means that ZTE ? a company found guilty of selling U.S. goods to Iran in violation of sanctions ? will get to duck tough Commerce Department penalties that bar U.S. companies from doing business with it. Chinese officials said those penalties would effectively put ZTE out of business
morekaos
Well-known member
Perspective said:
No I don't think the point is idiotic. It is relevant to the topic at hand. As much as i distrust polls as a whole, when you see this much disparity it overcomes the statistical insignificance. When regular people are asked these questions (not just anecdotal) they overwhelmingly don't care about this Russia topic. Certainly when asked how it influences their mid term vote. As always, Its the economy, stupid! that tops concern, followed closely by immigration. Both issues Trump scores well on.
Most Important Problem
What do you think is the most important problem facing the country today?
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx
Perspective said:
Our leaders lying to the American people are a bigger national security threat than the antics of some 2 bit dictator.
Remember the Pentagon Papers? The classified documents the Rand employee stole and sent to the press?
The Pentagon Papers revealed that the US government knew for years the Vietnam War could not be won and was desperately finding a way out with our credibility intact. At the same time, they told us we were winning the war and victory was just around the corner. Yes, you heard that right, tens of thousands of American kids (mostly poor and minority) were gettiing sent to die by a government who knew the war was hopeless.
The American people have a right to know the truth about what the governemnt is doing even if it takes a crime to bring the information to light. As they said at the time, the American people paid for the classified Pentagon Papers with the blood of 48,000 of their kids.
Perspective
Well-known member
morekaos said:
Which begs the question, why does Trump talk about Russia collusion so much? If he never mentioned Mueller's investigation, in interviews, Twitter, and elsewhere, it might be discussed a fraction of what it is.
Ready2Downsize
Well-known member
Happiness said:
The older you get, the more you KNOW you absolutely CANNOT trust what politicians say, from ANY party. Their number one priority is their own job.