Reply With Quote
I'll have to agree with that.
I call BS.
One can think critically in their job and completely drop this thinking and go fundamental ideologue. In fact IMO people with expertise in one area gain some sort of logical hubris which leads them to cherry pick their input in politics.
I'll have to agree with that.
I would totally disagree.
What is your definition of bright? I have a BS in molecular biology and a masters in Biochem. I don't consider myself as bright, just curious. ( since we have decide to compare penis length) There are plenty of very bright people who are not motivated and not curious but are tremendous at solving logic puzzles. They die on the vine because they don't gain any current knowlege as they move along in life. They don't keep up and they become very binary IMO.
You disagree that accountants and auditors are generally very bright? In my experience they generally are.
Most accountants I know are ambitious and attack life. It doesn't fit the stereotype but that's what I think. I find it refreshing.
Yeah I would. What's bright?
If it's the ability to concentrate for long periods of time I would agree.
True.
Good critical thinking and examining bias is difficult. Human brains aren't made for that kind of underlying analysis.
Curiosity is the most important thing, IMO, no matter what you do.
That right there is a good way to falsify the whole collusion thing.
If Trump was/is colluding, and was/is compromised, he won't do anything.
It seems obvious we need to hit back in no uncertain terms, but that doesn't seem to be a priority in the slightest on the part of the Trump administration.
It reminds me of the story about the murderer on trial, when the defense lawyer says the victim is just "missing" and can walk through the door at any time, pointing. Then entire room looks, except for the accused, who knows the absolute truth more than anyone.
The Trump administration is staring at their fingernails.
No, you'll just move on to the next manufactured story and until there is no evidence found, then on to next, then the next etc.
Fair enough, I will elaborate then.
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is a very easy one to run afoul of. You can do it, without even knowing you are doing it, especially if you aren't careful.
The types of businesses that the Trump Organization does, namely real estate development, are the exact kinds of business enterprise that brings corrupt officials out of the woodwork with their hands out at all levels.
The inherent risk of that kind of work in those countries is HIGH, even if you are careful. If you are willing to bend the law, look the other way, etc., as Trump seems to be from the accounts I have read, that means this risk was likely not mitigated, as long as the check cleared.
The sheer number of transactions and undertakings means that there is a LOT Of chances to run afoul of this.
Real estate and construction also is VERY attractive for money laundering. The Baku development was almost certainly used for this by the government of Azerbaizhan that has some well-do ented ties to various elements of the Iranian government under banking sanctions. The sheer amount of money involved increases the risk of this. This relates to sanctions, but that country's government is one of the most corrupt in the world.
The question is if T.Org. was aware of this at some level. This is harder to say, but again, whistling and looking the other way when someone stuffs a big check in your hand tends not to be a very good defense.
On to the Russian connection. That government is so corrupt that the Economist had to coin a new term "Kleptocracy". It is very hard to seperate business from mafia from government. If you start taking Russian investment money, you can bet some of it will be linked back to some nasty characters.
When the financial crisis hit, and banks were puckered up, the people with cash to offer were the same types that always have cash to offer, for a price.
NOtice I haven't said a single thing about the political affiliation of Donald Trump. These risks exist outside of that, no matter if he were a Democrat, Republican, Green, or Communist.
He is a con man, and a fairly obvious one at that.
(Shrugs)
What steps has the Trump administration undertaken to hold Russia to account for this?
Has Trump addressed the issue to a level you think might be commensurate with active Russian cyberassuault on the US voting system, as appears to be the case?
A statement or speech would work as evidence. Anything.
What, do you think the Azerbaijan government is not corrupt? Is that manufactured?
Senate overwhelmingly votes to impose new sanctions on Russia over election meddling
97-2
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/14/senat...-meddling.html
My question remains, and this is a really good way to falsify my theory. Be happy to admit he isn't compromised, if some evidence supports that. Everything he has done thus far is consistent with compromised and/or some level of collusion. Any actions against Russia would put that to rest. The more he ignores this, the thinner your denials will be, and the stronger the case gets.
What steps has the Trump administration undertaken to hold Russia to account for this?
I pointed out how corrupt the Azerbaijan government was long before you brought it up and you conveniently ignored all of the lobbying on behalf of the Podesta group because at the time your girl still had a chance.
Senate overwhelmingly votes to impose new sanctions on Russia over election meddling
97-2
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/14/senat...-meddling.html
My question remains, and this is a really good way to falsify my theory. Be happy to admit he isn't compromised, if some evidence supports that. Everything he has done thus far is consistent with compromised and/or some level of collusion. Any actions against Russia would put that to rest. The more he ignores this, the thinner your denials will be, and the stronger the case gets.
What steps has the Trump administration undertaken to hold Russia to account for this?
*ding*
Impeach him!
Here it is.
This is what each side fears but won't say.
Some Republicans are so edgy they actually fear their Donald might have indeed got help from the Russians. The Democrats bolster this fear by pretending there was some ornate plan between Trump and the Russians to get him elected.
The real side story right now is that the Russians really did interfere in our elections to CAUSE DOUBT that our system works. They did not get Trump elected.
Sanctions need to happen and they need to be bipartisan and NOW. Trump needs to start up these talks now and let the Senate work on it. You don't "talk" with the Russians under Putin without a hammer-lock on their testicles first.
So for once in your life stop the wandering idiocy darkman Duck, ya damn Rajun Asian.
i can agree with this to a certain extent BUT with the caveat that the "evidence" is shown. fueling further antagonism with russia is already a dangerous agenda and the flavor of the day for the vast neocon population in washington. also, in many ways (and what the MSM refuses to acknowledge) this is a pendulous dynamic between the U.S. and russia that goes back to the end of the warsaw pact. the U.S. is not without its own intrusions (or acts of aggression) against russia.
I don't think any ornate angle was on the Repug side, they aren't that smart, as we can see now. All sophistication was on the Russian side, cracking US machines, leaking to Assange, and also paying (probably cheaply) 100s or 1000s people in Macedonia, IIRC, to spread fake news, fake websites, fake social media BS.
I do think Trash and his entourage were informed by the Russians what the Russians were doing on his behalf. Their silence is criminally treasonous.
Pootin HATED Hillary for Ukraine/Crimea sanctions and saying that his 2011 election was illegit.
Pootin/Assange damaged Hillary badly, with complicity from the media, blocking her from getting any traction, from the time Assange started dribbling out the Dem emails until the election.
Badly damaged, Hillary was finished off by protocol-violating Comey's "we got more emails, but we haven't look at them" crap 10 days before the election, which compounded the damage he did months earlier violating FBI protocol to trash Hillary severely on national TV but w/o an indictment. He effectively incriminated Hillary with indicting.
538 said it saw movement to Trash in the weekend after Comey's "we got more emails", in the 3 states that Trash won by small fractions of a percent, giving him enough EVs to win.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 06-15-2017 at 04:06 PM.
Senate overwhelmingly votes to impose new sanctions on Russia over election meddling
97-2
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/14/senat...-meddling.html
My question remains, and this is a really good way to falsify my theory. Be happy to admit he isn't compromised, if some evidence supports that. Everything he has done thus far is consistent with compromised and/or some level of collusion. Any actions against Russia would put that to rest.
What steps has the Trump administration undertaken to hold Russia to account for this?
There didn't have to be an "ornate plan" to simply share operational intel, or to simply talk about how to get sanctions eased.
The margin of victory for Trump was determined by 3 states, which, if they had gone the other way, would have swung the electoral college.
The total margin of victory from those three states was 80,000. Meaning if 40,000 people had switched votes, the entire election would have gone the other way.
40,000 out of 130,000,000 votes. Three hundredths of one percent.
How much effort do you think it would take to affect the opinions of .03% of the electorate?
Donald J. Trump realDonaldTrump
·
1h
Crooked H destroyed phones w/ hammer, 'bleached' emails, & had husband meet w/AG days before she was cleared- & they talk about obstruction?
USA USA USA
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
