Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Trump compromised by Russian intelligence, reports say Watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    Except he was the one who shared this intelligence in the first place. You really have to be pulling some pretty hardcore mental gymnastics if you want to try to convince yourself that this is the fault of the liberal media. Donald Trump is so atrocious that he is turning the Republican establishment against him.
    John McCain is a good example - he's a powerful figure on the Republican side and he absolutely hates Trump, not least because Trump called him a coward - McCain is a decorated war hero - and for other reasons. It would appear that Trump's chief skill lies in making enemies amongst people who should be your friends.
    • Offline

      18
      (Original post by l'etranger)
      Just look at the left's reaction to Pizzagate to see how hypocritical and morally bankrupt they are. ''B...b..but he's a rapist George tell him about the report, tell em about John McCain George''
      I'm not even a Trump fan or particularly right-wing - I'd hoped that Bernie Sanders would win the Democratic nomination (albeit for slightly unconventional reasons). But I'm fully expecting to be labelled a Trumpkin or Trumptard any minute now. :laugh:
      Offline

      20
      ReputationRep:
      OK soo, Trump is got rid of. Then what? President Pence? :afraid:

      There is no escape from this -____-
      • TSR Support Team
      • Clearing and Applications Advisor
      Offline

      21
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Dodgypirate)
      Are you retarded?
      Dunno, I hope not.
      • Very Important Poster
      Offline

      19
      (Original post by l'etranger)
      I assure you that nobody apart from the Breibart was ok with Pizzagate and that shows the great hypocrisy of the losers here.
      There were plenty on here supporting it. Also the Trump camp didnt go out of there way in putting an end to it. I just think its ironic where you blame the security services only when they find things against yourself is a bit hypocritical.

      You have the same old issues.

      1. The more you deny it, even if it doesnt exist, then the more it looks like there culd be soemthing to hide.

      2. Nothing has to be proved really because part of the work in discrediting is already done.

      3. Russia wins every single way. If its true they have neutralised the US president, especially Donald whose ego is so large. A massive coup and they wouldnt have to do anything, its existence would be power enough.

      If its untrue then they still end up lookling like good guys and they would deny it anyway.

      Time will tell, but I was surprised when I saw the thread and then saw it had been picked up by the major news services.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by l'etranger)
      If this report is credible, why was it not released when Hillary was running up against Trump and used as ammunition
      That confirms that this is not political. If it was all about politics, that's exactly what Obama would have done.

      Btw, President Obama did want to release more information about this and Russian hacking, and to have a congressional investigation into it. The GOP senate leader Mitch McConnell refused to allow any investigation or to allow information to be released, claiming it was purely "partisan". And weak Obama, like always, bowed before the Republicans as he feared being accused of partisanship (and thought Clinton would win anyway).

      The fact he didn't release it beforehand, and is doing so now when it cant make any difference, works in its favour. In any case, are you actually denying that this report exists, that it was created by a former MI6 officer, and that its author was ajudged credible by US intelligence? I don't think anyone is disputing those three facts are true. Are you saying the American people should not be allowed to know those three facts? Are you saying there should be no investigation of these allegations? Trumpkins are going mental over this story because they know it is extremely serious, and also that it's not so outrageous that it seems out of character for Trump or completely implausible. Based on his behaviour kissing Putin's butt, undermining NATO, applauding the annexation of Crimea and appointing Putin's personal friends to high government positions for which they are completely unqualified, he is acting precisely the way you'd expect him to if he had been compromised.

      If anyone needs to go back to the 60's, it's the Neo-Conservatives who think sabre ratting over the Russians
      It's said to see an otherwise intelligent person having been completely taken in by propaganda, as you have been. President Obama, when he came to office, tried really hard to improve relations with the Russians, with his "reset" policy. President Obama believed relations were bad with Russia because of the evil neocons and President Bush, and if only there was a rational, friendly person in the White House then relations would improve.

      What he found out was that relations are bad because the Russian government finds it impossible to behave like a civilised nation-state. The annexation of Crimea is the first such non-treaty change of nation-state borders in Europe since Hitler. Russia's attacks on the LGBT population are utterly revolting, as are his dictatorial tendencies and his kleptomaniac style of government. And after 2012 there was a distinct shift in the tone of Russian state propaganda organs and media shills, as Putin started going in really hard on the, "We, poor little Russia, are under siege from the evil Illuminati west. We are a bastion of goodness, under siege from the forces of darkness" to frighten the Russian people.

      Russia has become more and more aggressive each year (flying nuclear bombers right up to the British and American air borders, moving nuclear weapons into the Kaliningrad Oblast, etc etc), it has acted more and more outrageously each year (the murder of 298 innocent people, Dutch, Malaysians and Australians, on flight MH17, by weapons provided by the Russians to terrorists). And, of course, we see in the 2016 election the Russians not only hacking the DNC (which by itself woudl be a legitimate espionage operation) but brazenly and openly trying to interfere in the outcome of the US election, which comes close to being an act of war.

      But I suppose when you live in the conspiracist / Alex Jones / Breitbart sort of world, it's very easy to be pro-Putin because you're inculcated with the idea that all Western governments are evil and that Putin is the only world leader who is "fighting the Illuminati". And thus any lie and outrage perpetrated by, or in faovur of, the Russians becomes acceptable. And one witnesses the most pathetic emotional investment of the hard left and far right into Russia and Putin personally, such that they will justify anything and deny even indisputable facts.

      I think most ordinary people are getting tired of this crap, tired of the butt-kissing of Vlad Putin, the incessant justifying of Russian aggression.
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Hydeman)
      I'm not even a Trump fan or particularly right-wing - I'd hoped that Bernie Sanders would win the Democratic nomination (albeit for slightly unconventional reasons). But I'm fully expecting to be labelled a Trumpkin or Trumptard any minute now. :laugh:
      The worst part is that the left is failing to learn any lessons from any of this. If 2 years ago someone told you that the GoP nominee was going to be someone who spoke about grabbing women's pussies, called Mexican migrants rapists and said he could shoot someone and it wouldn't matter, you would sell everything you own and place a bet on the next president being Democrat. The fact Hillary was so lacking in charisma that she failed to get people fired up enough to get out of bed and vote just for the sake of keeping Trump out, in spite of how well funded her campaign was, shows just how poorly she engaged voters. Sanders inspired people, Obama inspired people, Hillary is the living embodiment of privileged mediocrity.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Plagioclase)
      Dunno, I hope not.
      I'm worried for you chap, you're showing signs.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by nutz99)
      (Q) If it was genuine why did it not come out before the election?
      (A) Because it has only just been thrown together.
      :lol: Even I knew about this report before the election.

      http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...e-donald-trump

      It was reported, in fact I think I even created a thread about it. The fact that President Obama didn't make a big deal about it before the election is because the Republicans shrieked "murder" and claimed it would be an unforgivable partisan act. The fact this is only really being ventilated now serves to support it, not denigate it.

      In any case, I have just completely discredited you by showing it existed before the election. Tbh, I find hard-left / far-right pro-Russian, anti-Western anti-semitic conspiracy nuts tiresome, so I'm going to add you to my block lost.
      • Very Important Poster
      Offline

      19
      (Original post by Hydeman)
      Imagine the reverse for a second. What would you have thought of this argument if it had been made about Clinton's email controversy? I doubt you would've accepted this then, and quite rightly so.
      Except it was reported in detail
      • TSR Support Team
      • Clearing and Applications Advisor
      Offline

      21
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Dodgypirate)
      I'm worried for you chap, you're showing signs.
      Offline

      14
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by AlexanderHam)
      The claim Clinton would start World War 3 is a fake meme that originated as Russian government propaganda. Clearly it worked on you.

      But it's completely illogical; are they saying that by standing up to Russia and not bending over for Vlad, Clinton would have started a war? That failing to be a shill for the Russians will cause the Russians to go mental and start world war 3? I think not, they're not suicidal.



      The US never supported Al-Nusra. Completely made up. What is undeniably true is that the US has consistently opposed and fought ISIS (and its predecessor org, Al-Qaeda in Iraq). By contrast, Bashar al-Assad was AQI's biggest supporter in the 2000s; he allowed them to use Syria as a logistics base from which to launch attacks into Iraq in the post-2003 era.

      And in late 2011, just when the civil war was starting to heat up, Assad released thousands of jihadist prisoners from jails, knowing they would rise up against him and create an Islamist insurgency which he could use to discredit the moderate opposition.

      So please, if you're going to claim you don't like Islamist terrorism (and I bet you're very happy with it when it's Hamas or Hezbollah), try to be consistent
      Why would I be happy with it? Israel is the only functioning democracy in the middle East.You cannot just assume my position on other foreign policy issues from the view I have on one issue.The US might not have supported al nursra but they did support other Islamist groups.One of these groups that recieved support from the USA actually beheaded a child.So moderate.Clinton might well have started a war.She certainly would not cooperate with Russia which would be better for all concerned.Clinton wanted a no fly zone over Syria.That same Syria where Russian planes were flying over.So in order to enforce it she would have had to shoot down Russian planes. That would definitely lead to war.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Hydeman)
      I'm not even a Trump fan or particularly right-wing - I'd hoped that Bernie Sanders would win the Democratic nomination
      There are many Sanders fans whose hatred of Clinton is seeing them take the most preposterously pro-Putin positions and desperately attempting to deny that Russia hacked the DNC. Just like it's not surprising that Julian Assange is extremely defensive about the Russian hacking issue even though he's not right-wing. And just like it's not surprising that hard-left individuals love the Russian state even though Putin is a fascist. We're not surprised by that anymore; horseshoe theory of politics is correct.

      So your comment doesn't serve to innoculate you from ridicule if you join in the increasingly desperate attempts to deny that the Russians hacked the DNC, that this report exists, etc.
      • Political Ambassador
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by l'etranger)
      Looks like another ruse from the anonymous hacker known as 4Chan

      https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...hics-questions

      http://nypost.com/2017/01/10/buzzfee...o-a-new-level/
      pol was going crazy about this last night :laugh:

      >2017
      >pol is trolling CIA

      what timeline even is this anymore?
      Offline

      18
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Hydeman)
      Imagine the reverse for a second. What would you have thought of this argument if it had been made about Clinton's email controversy? I doubt you would've accepted this then, and quite rightly so.
      Hit the nail on the head. It's been narrative over fact for so many (on both sides as well) throughout this whole pre and post-election period, and when something turns up that goes against their narrative, they assume that it's not true rather than question that maybe not all their narrative driven assumptions are entirely true. It's why I'm not as anti-Trump now as I was at the time of the election.

      And you're right, if the roles were reversed and it was Hillary Clinton in question, then the same people would right now be saying the reports are unsubstantiated and brush it under the carpet. What says it all for me is the way that other mainstream media sources that have been completely 100% against Trump and colluded with the Clinton campaign like the NY Times decided not to run it and even admit it was ' based on memos generated by political operatives seeking to derail Mr. Trump’s candidacy'. When the NY Times decides not to take up an opportunity to attack Trump, you know it's probably nonsense.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Robby2312)
      The US might not have supported al nursra but they did support other Islamist groups
      What other groups? Name them.

      By the way, if you're saying Islamist groups are bad, then presumably you abhor the involvement of Hezbollah and various Shi'a fascists fighting with the Syrian regime? Or do you find it impossible to be consistent?

      One of these groups that recieved support from the USA actually beheaded a child
      What you mean to say is that in one of the most vicious, insane conflicts of the last 100 years, a single crazed individual from a certain group may have beheaded a child. What does that signify in grand strategic terms? Nothing. It's an anecdote.

      And you don't seem to be too concerned about children being beheaded if you support Assad; hundreds of children will have had their heads blown off, literally, by Syrian Air Force bombs and Syrian Arab Army artillery.

      That would definitely lead to war.
      Nah, it wouldn't. The Russians aren't suicidal. They wouldn't start a nuclear war over Syria.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Pikachū)
      #x
      You're been hoaxed by fake news. There was no "4chan hoax".

      The intelligence report put together by a former MI6 officer, which was submitted to the FBI and the author of which was ajudged to be credible while the allegations themselves are as yet unsubstantiated... these are facts.

      The claim that there was some kind of hoax by some internet forum? Completely made up.

      Trumptards seem desperate to suppress this news story such that they will throw any old crap at it. But I'm not surprised credulous Trump supporters by the 4chan hoax theory, unsupprted by evidence as it is; they bought that Trump would "drain the swamp", after all.
      • Offline

        18
        (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
        OK soo, Trump is got rid of. Then what? President Pence? :afraid:

        There is no escape from this -____-
        I was thinking this earlier in the thread when somebody said liberals are desperate to have Trump impeached. What could liberals possibly have to gain from a Pence presidency (besides the initial ego trip of having forced Republicans to impeach one of their own)? :holmes:

        (Original post by 999tigger)
        Except it was reported in detail
        Indeed it was. But FoS's position on that was that the media had unfairly demonised Clinton and sought to portray her as a silly old woman. The fact that so much airtime was devoted to it didn't seem to make that accusation more convincing in her mind, so why should this be an exception? You can't have it both ways - the U.S. media is either corrupt and unscrupulous, or it's not.

        (Original post by AlexanderHam)
        There are many Sanders fans whose hatred of Clinton is seeing them take the most preposterously pro-Putin positions and desperately attempting to deny that Russia hacked the DNC.
        I'm not one of them. I supported him for different reasons to the commonest ones, e.g. trade, anti-interventionism, healthcare reform.

        Just like it's not surprising that Julian Assange is extremely defensive about the Russian hacking issue even though he's not right-wing. And just like it's not surprising that hard-left individuals love the Russian state even though Putin is a fascist. We're not surprised by that anymore; horseshoe theory of politics is correct.

        So your comment doesn't serve to innoculate you from ridicule if you join in the increasingly desperate attempts to deny that the Russians hacked the DNC, that this report exists, etc.
        I'm not hard-left (or pro-Putin) by any stretch of the imagination...
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by AlexanderHam)
        That confirms that this is not political. If it was all about politics, that's exactly what Obama would have done.
        Of course it's political, the fact Trump could be acting under the influence of Russia makes it very political.

        (Original post by AlexanderHam)
        Btw, President Obama did want to release more information about this and Russian hacking, and to have a congressional investigation into it. The GOP senate leader Mitch McConnell refused to allow any investigation or to allow information to be released, claiming it was purely "partisan". And weak Obama, like always, bowed before the Republicans as he feared being accused of partisanship (and thought Clinton would win anyway).

        The fact he didn't release it beforehand, and is doing so now when it cant make any difference, works in its favour. In any case, are you actually denying that this report exists, that it was created by a former MI6 officer, and that its author was ajudged credible by US intelligence? I don't think anyone is disputing those three facts are true. Are you saying the American people should not be allowed to know those three facts? Are you saying there should be no investigation of these allegations? Trumpkins are going mental over this story because they know it is extremely serious, and also that it's not so outrageous that it seems out of character for Trump or completely implausible. Based on his behaviour kissing Putin's butt, undermining NATO, applauding the annexation of Crimea and appointing Putin's personal friends to high government positions for which they are completely unqualified, he is acting precisely the way you'd expect him to if he had been compromised.
        I wasn't aware that the release of this report was blocked by McConnell or that it was possible to essentially force a gag onto this issue prior to the election, but assuming that is the case, I have to also ask why the same was not done to the FBI's investigation of Hillary Clinton, should that not too have been delayed until after polling had closed?

        I'm not denying the report exists or any specific details pertaining to the nature of the report, but if you're going to accept media reporting in the basis of unverified reports and innuendos, then you should apply that in a consistent manner to other trashy stories such as Pizzagate and accept that your media sources have no more credibility than the Breitbart.

        (Original post by AlexanderHam)
        It's said to see an otherwise intelligent person having been completely taken in by propaganda, as you have been. President Obama, when he came to office, tried really hard to improve relations with the Russians, with his "reset" policy. President Obama believed relations were bad with Russia because of the evil neocons and President Bush, and if only there was a rational, friendly person in the White House then relations would improve.

        What he found out was that relations are bad because the Russian government finds it impossible to behave like a civilised nation-state. The annexation of Crimea is the first such non-treaty change of nation-state borders in Europe since Hitler. Russia's attacks on the LGBT population are utterly revolting, as are his dictatorial tendencies and his kleptomaniac style of government. And after 2012 there was a distinct shift in the tone of Russian state propaganda organs and media shills, as Putin started going in really hard on the, "We, poor little Russia, are under siege from the evil Illuminati west. We are a bastion of goodness, under siege from the forces of darkness" to frighten the Russian people.

        Russia has become more and more aggressive each year (flying nuclear bombers right up to the British and American air borders, moving nuclear weapons into the Kaliningrad Oblast, etc etc), it has acted more and more outrageously each year (the murder of 298 innocent people, Dutch, Malaysians and Australians, on flight MH17, by weapons provided by the Russians to terrorists). And, of course, we see in the 2016 election the Russians not only hacking the DNC (which by itself woudl be a legitimate espionage operation) but brazenly and openly trying to interfere in the outcome of the US election, which comes close to being an act of war.

        But I suppose when you live in the conspiracist / Alex Jones / Breitbart sort of world, it's very easy to be pro-Putin because you're inculcated with the idea that all Western governments are evil and that Putin is the only world leader who is "fighting the Illuminati". And thus any lie and outrage perpetrated by, or in faovur of, the Russians becomes acceptable. And one witnesses the most pathetic emotional investment of the hard left and far right into Russia and Putin personally, such that they will justify anything and deny even indisputable facts.

        I think most ordinary people are getting tired of this crap, tired of the butt-kissing of Vlad Putin, the incessant justifying of Russian aggression.
        I find Putin extremely distasteful, largely because of his state sponsored homophobia and I definitely agree that by framing himself as the underdog he has allowed Russia to be held to standards far lower than the standards to which the West is held, but you're still failing to address the issue that many people in the West do not feel threatened by Russia or Russian actions across the globe. This is why I say to you that Neo-Conservatism is dead, the age of the right-leaning Westerner who thinks NATO has this special position of moral superiority where we have a duty to go out and act as righteous crusaders healing the world of its ills is over. The entire political landscape has become much more dark than that, the average right-wing person is more afraid of being massacred in the streets by ISIS inspired terrorists than they are afraid that Assad might be contravening international law if he uses chemical weapons or if Putin's actions in Syria undermine democracy, because we don't even believe in our own political systems now, so there is no way we're going to believe we can build a positive political system in Syria.
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Pikachū)
        pol was going crazy about this last night :laugh:

        >2017
        >pol is trolling CIA

        what timeline even is this anymore?
        It's the best timeline :cry2:


        (Original post by Hydeman)
        I was thinking this earlier in the thread when somebody said liberals are desperate to have Trump impeached. What could liberals possibly have to gain from a Pence presidency (besides the initial ego trip of having forced Republicans to impeach one of their own)? :holmes:
        If I'm ever forced to see another social conservative in the White House I think I'll defect to the Russians. It would be amazing if Trump where to be impeached, just to see the fallout of these gun toting nuts having their right-wing Jesus taken from them
       
       
       
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • Poll
      Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
      Useful resources
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

      Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

      Quick reply
      Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.