Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

**RandomGuy** · 06-16-2017

The only thing the Trump administration appears to be angling for is removing economic sanctions on Russia. One has to wonder why this choice of action is indicated, when common sense would seem to dictate that rewarding them would not be appropriate.

This administration is reinstating restrictions on Cuba, because they view Cuba as hostile, wants to scrap the Iran deal, because they view Iran as hostile, talks about militarily threatening North Korea, because they view NK as hostile, yet nothing about Russia, other than pushing to ease sanctions.

What do you think is so different about Russia to them?

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Because he's worried they'll release the golden shower tapes?

A non-serious answer to a serious question.

You can't answer that question with anything approaching a mature, considered, or informed answer.

So, you are willing to accept an attack on the country, and the very democracy we should all be fighting for, because what? The man in the oval office has an "R" behind his name?

I am embarrassed for you. smh Good men and women have given their lives in the hundreds of thousands over the past 200+ years, so people like you can piss it all away in a fit of laziness.

**TSA** · 06-16-2017

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Hmm. I didn't think my question was that hard.

It is almost as if you don't want to, or can't answer it, and this is a recurring pattern in our interactions. Instead of dealing with something that you might not like directly, you dodge and deflect. It usually takes about 3-5 times of me asking a direct question to get an answer.

You would do well to think about why that is. Here is something you might find helpful.

https://designmatrix.wordpress.com/2...ual-honesty-2/

So, let's try one more time, so we can get to something we can agree with. A good debate has to establish facts, and lay ground work, and that can't be done if basic reality can't be agreed on.

What steps has the Trump administration undertaken to hold Russia to account for this?

You repeatedly ignore questions from me and then get upset when I do the same to you?

The bill hasn't even made it through the house so Trump hasn't even had the opportunity to sign or reject it---the question you've asked 20 times at this point is moot until it clears the house.

If he signs it that would be action against Russia and you claim that it would put your theory to rest, I don't believe that for a second. If he doesn't sign it you'll come back and say he's compromised, while failing to realize if he didn't sign the bill it was because of threats of retaliation from Germany and Austria due both countries being hurt by the sanctions.

Now lets address this joke of a statement.

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

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.

You claim he's compromised and have no such proof. You claim he colluded and have no such proof. You claim you have a case yet have zero evidence. Three claims, three burdens of proof.

**RandomGuy** · 06-16-2017

What steps has the Trump administration undertaken to hold Russia to account for this?

Originally Posted by TSA

The bill [from Congress] hasn't even made it through the house so Trump hasn't even had the opportunity to sign or reject it---

Sigh.

**DarrinS** · 06-16-2017

Muh FONTS!!!

**RandomGuy** · 06-16-2017

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Muh FONTS!!!

Now with 700% more emphasis.

**DarrinS** · 06-16-2017

It would be ironic if they manage to impeach Trump AND determine there was no collusion whatsoever.

**baseline bum** · 06-16-2017

Originally Posted by DarrinS

It would be ironic if they manage to impeach Trump AND determine there was no collusion whatsoever.

Even funnier if they find evidence of collusion and they don't impeach.

**RandomGuy** · 06-16-2017

Originally Posted by TSA

You repeatedly ignore questions from me and then get upset when I do the same to you?

The bill hasn't even made it through the house so Trump hasn't even had the opportunity to sign or reject it---the question you've asked 20 times at this point is moot until it clears the house.

If he signs it that would be action against Russia and you claim that it would put your theory to rest, I don't believe that for a second. If he doesn't sign it you'll come back and say he's compromised, while failing to realize if he didn't sign the bill it was because of threats of retaliation from Germany and Austria due both countries being hurt by the sanctions.

Now lets address this joke of a statement.

You claim he's compromised and have no such proof. You claim he colluded and have no such proof. You claim you have a case yet have zero evidence. Three claims, three burdens of proof.

You ignored my question, I ignore yours.

Quid.

Pro.

Quo.

Alternately, since you need to be spoon fed:

So let me get this straight.

A president that signs dozens of executive orders doing all sorts of things, and could easily slap ANYTHING together to make a statement, just forgot to do anything when it comes to a direct assault on our electoral process by a hostile foreign power.

That's what you are going with? Really?

**Adam Lambert** · 06-16-2017

Originally Posted by DarrinS

It would be ironic if they manage to impeach Trump AND determine there was no collusion whatsoever.

no it wouldnt. you are stuck on this idea that most democrats and the media think donald trump was personally arranging the russian interference. we know hes too stupid for that. but we also know members of his campaign may have been coordinating, and hes doing everything he can to keep them from facing justice.

its not that difficult to follow, but i understand its harder to position yourself as oh-so-levelheaded against a rational argument, so you invent an irrational one instead so you can congratulate yourself for not being as crazy as those people.

**DarrinS** · 06-16-2017

Originally Posted by Adam Lambert

no it wouldnt. you are stuck on this idea that most democrats and the media think donald trump was personally arranging the russian interference. we know hes too stupid for that. but we also know members of his campaign may have been coordinating, and hes doing everything he can to keep them from facing justice.

Originally Posted by Comey

The President went on to say that if there were some "satellite" associates of his who did something wrong, it would be good to find that out, but that he hadn't done anything wrong and hoped I would find a way to get it out that we weren't investigating him.

**Adam Lambert** · 06-16-2017

oh okay trump said something, that changes everything, my bad, guess well just ignore everything else now, thanks bud

**TSA** · 06-16-2017

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

You ignored my question, I ignore yours.

Quid.

Pro.

Quo.

Alternately, since you need to be spoon fed:

So let me get this straight.

A president that signs dozens of executive orders doing all sorts of things, and could easily slap ANYTHING together to make a statement, just forgot to do anything when it comes to a direct assault on our electoral process by a hostile foreign power.

That's what you are going with? Really?

You just posed this question in the last few days. You've dodged multiple questions of mine for weeks. Quid pro quo my ass.

**TSA** · 06-16-2017

Originally Posted by DarrinS

It would be ironic if they manage to impeach Trump AND determine there was no collusion whatsoever.

That's what they are trying for.

**TSA** · 06-16-2017

Originally Posted by Adam Lambert

no it wouldnt. you are stuck on this idea that most democrats and the media think donald trump was personally arranging the russian interference. we know hes too stupid for that. but we also know members of his campaign may have been coordinating, and hes doing everything he can to keep them from facing justice.

its not that difficult to follow, but i understand its harder to position yourself as oh-so-levelheaded against a rational argument, so you invent an irrational one instead so you can congratulate yourself for not being as crazy as those people.

What exactly has Trump done to keep his campaign members from facing justice? Who has he pardoned and what investigations has he shut down?