Why Vladimir Putin’s Russia Is Backing Donald Trump

[CPUd]

Why Vladimir Putin’s Russia Is Backing Donald Trump

In phone calls, meetings and cables, America’s European allies have expressed alarm to one another about Donald Trump’s public statements denying Moscow’s role in cyberattacks designed to interfere with the U.S. election. They fear the Republican nominee for president has emboldened the Kremlin in its unprecedented cybercampaign to disrupt elections in multiple countries in hopes of weakening Western alliances, according to intelligence, law enforcement and other government officials in the United States and Europe.

While American intelligence officers have privately briefed Trump about Russia’s attempts to influence the U.S. election, he has publicly dismissed that information as unreliable, instead saying this hacking of incredible sophistication and technical complexity could have been done by some 400-pound “guy sitting on their bed” or even a child.

Officials from two European countries tell Newsweek that Trump’s comments about Russia’s hacking have alarmed several NATO partners because it suggests he either does not believe the information he receives in intelligence briefings, does not pay attention to it, does not understand it or is misleading the American public for unknown reasons. One British official says members of that government who are aware of the scope of Russia’s cyberattacks both in Western Europe and America found Trump’s comments “quite disturbing” because they fear that, if elected, the Republican presidential nominee would continue to ignore information gathered by intelligence services in the formulation of U.S. foreign policy.

Trump’s behavior, however, has at times concerned the Russians, leading them to revise their hacking and disinformation strategy. For example, when Trump launched into an inexplicable attack on the parents of a Muslim-American soldier who died in combat, the Kremlin assumed the Republican nominee was showing himself psychologically unfit to be president and would be forced by his party to withdraw from the race. As a result, Moscow put its hacking campaign temporarily on hold, ending the distribution of documents until Trump stabilized, both personally and in the polls, according to reports provided to Western intelligence.

America’s European partners are also troubled by the actions of several people close to Trump’s campaign and company. Trump has been surrounded by advisers and associates with economic and familial links to Russia. The publicized connections and contacts between former campaign manager Paul Manafort with Ukraine have raised concerns. Former Trump adviser Carter Page is being probed by American and European intelligence on allegations that he engaged in back-channel discussions with Russian government officials over the summer. Page did travel to Moscow, but he denies any inappropriate contact with Russian officials. The allies are also uneasy about retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, a Trump adviser who was reportedly considered a possible running mate for the GOP nominee. Last December, Flynn attended a dinner at the Metropol Hotel in honor of the 10th anniversary of RT, a Russian news agency that has been publicly identified by American intelligence as a primary outlet for Moscow’s disinformation campaigns. Flynn, who was two seats away from Russian President Vladimir Putin at the dinner, has frequently appeared on RT, despite public warnings by American intelligence that the news agency is used for Russian propaganda.

Western intelligence has also obtained reports that a Trump associate met with a pro-Putin member of Russian parliament at a building in Eastern Europe maintained by Rossotrudnichestvo, an agency under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that is charged with administering language, education and support programs for civilians. While the purpose of that meeting is unclear, and there is no evidence that Trump was aware it took place, it has become another fact that has alarmed officials from at least one NATO ally. Finally, Trump’s repeated glowing statements about Putin throughout the campaign—and his shocking comment that the Russians were not in Crimea—have perplexed some foreign officials, who fear that under a Trump presidency, the United States would no longer stand with Western Europe in regard to Moscow.

Trump and his campaign have also spread propaganda created as part of the Kremlin's effort, relying on bogus information generated through traditional Russian disinformation techniques. In one instance, a manipulated document was put out onto the internet anonymously by propagandists working with Russia; within hours, Trump was reciting that false information at a campaign rally. The Trump campaign has also spread claims from Sputnik, another news outlet identified by American intelligence as part of the Russian disinformation campaign. For example, almost immediately after the posting of an article by Sputnik attacking this Newsweek reporter, the Trump campaign emailed a link to the piece to American reporters, urging them to pursue the same story.

...
http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-russia-hillary-clinton-united-states-europe-516895

[Danke]

You Hillary supporters, like Zippy, are getting more blatantly obvious as we approach Nov. 8th.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ynY5NvYsZY

[hells_unicorn]

No Newsweek, Dave Chappelle doesn't smoke crack, try again.

[timosman]

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/1b/1b7af61dfadfae08a8247600044a4349e666de2401cf8fbb7a 8e6c005b02520f.jpg

[UWDude]

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-russia-hillary-clinton-united-states-europe-516895

Notice, this does not have one named intelligence official or agency. it is all anonymous sources and generic "intelligence analysts and specialists" It is loaded with extra adjectives to make the case sound more pressing, but DOES NOT HAVE A SINGLE VERIFIABLE FACT IN IT.

The so-called 17 intelligence agencies refers to a declaration by JAMES CLAPPER, who LIED STRAIGHT TO THE FACE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT NSA WIRETAPPING.

[enhanced_deficit]

There are two possible explanations:

A- They both have this common enemy:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?503353-Assange-Clinton-amp-ISIS-funded-by-same-money-Trump-won%92t-be-allowed-to-win&p=6348403&viewfull=1#post6348403



B- Putin is in bed with Hillary and therefore is supporting her plant



CPU, which explanation you find more credible?




Your Regular Reminder That Trump is Trying to Get Hillary Clinton Elected (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?500469-Your-Regular-Reminder-That-Trump-is-Trying-to-Get-Hillary-Clinton-Elected&)



So you say:

Trump is trying to get Hillary elected

Putin is backing Trump


What you are really saying is, Putin is trying to get Hillary elected?

[RonPaulMall]

Hillary is openly calling for World War III. She is the more anti-Russian than any politician in US History and at a time when there isn't even any legitimate reason to be anti-Russian. Putin would support anybody over her.

And it isn't as if it is just Putin. Everyone in Russia despises her and is rooting for Trump:

http://i.imgur.com/rrqNM5C.jpg

[Mike4Freedom]

Hillary is openly calling for World War III. She is the more anti-Russian than any politician in US History and at a time when there isn't even any legitimate reason to be anti-Russian. Putin would support anybody over her.

And it isn't as if it is just Putin. Everyone in Russia despises her and is rooting for Trump:

http://i.imgur.com/rrqNM5C.jpg

Trump is a lot better on his Russian stance. Putin does not want to deal with hillary because he knows she will want a pay off. If the clinton bribe fund(foundation) gets a big enough "donation" she will probably tone down her anti Russia rhetoric.

Putin knows Trump is ego and wealth driven so he will be more predictable in that sense. Trump will just want some business connections and can do the rest on his own(Trump).

I do not think either will start WW3. If hillary wins you will just see massive "donations" sent her way and chelsea will probably be getting million dollar speaking fees at random companies.

If not, you better buy a radiation suit, lol.

[Origanalist]

http://images-cdn.9gag.com/photo/a97GwWj_700b.jpg

[Origanalist]

Quick! Look out your window CPU'd!

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTvKXrIGoAVtR_D2ZwZX4yyfEWfT_kCK j1OsEz1yq2GxgyU9sqP

[AngryCanadian]

Putin is in bed with Hillary and therefore is supporting her plant

Hillary is like Obama lol should she win i can say this. Theres going to be a lot of upset NeoCons and voters.

[CPUd]

Follow the money to see why Putin wants a Trump victory

Mark MacKinnon

MOSCOW — The Globe and Mail

Published Friday, Nov. 04, 2016 10:10PM EDT
Last updated Saturday, Nov. 05, 2016 9:26AM EDT



Vladimir Putin likes the idea of Donald Trump as president of the United States. But what the Kremlin wants most from the U.S. election is chaos.

Analysts and diplomats in the Russian capital say undermining U.S. democracy – thus weakening the appeal of the country’s soft power around the world – is the real goal of the Kremlin’s efforts to influence the Nov. 8 election via the alleged hacking of Democratic National Committee e-mails, as well as the extensive coverage by Kremlin-friendly media of Mr. Trump’s claims that the election is rigged against him.

“They would be happy to show that the situation in the U.S. is not ideal, that it is crumbling … that before giving lessons to Russia, they have to fix their own problems,” said Sergey Utkin, head of foreign and security policy at the Moscow-based Centre for Strategic Research.

A discredited U.S. leadership – particularly in the event Mr. Trump carries through on his threat not to concede defeat if Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton is declared the winner of the election – strengthens the Kremlin’s hand in its showdowns with the West over Syria and Ukraine, and weakens the argument of those calling for political change in Russia itself.

An actual victory for Mr. Trump would be icing on Moscow’s cake.

To understand why Mr. Putin is rooting for the American billionaire, you have to follow the money – and not just Mr. Trump’s alleged links to Russian businesses.

The Kremlin, analysts here say, is running out of money fast, and needs to find a way to end the Western sanctions that were levelled against it in 2014 over its actions in Ukraine. Mr. Trump, they believe, may be the man to bring about the financial relief Moscow needs.

Not because the Kremlin is expecting he would immediately lift sanctions – though there have been reports that top Russian officials met with Mr. Trump’s adviser Carter Page to discuss just that – but because a Trump victory is expected to shatter the unity of the West and send European governments looking elsewhere for leadership in the world.

“They like to think that if Trump wins, then there is no hope for unity in the West, and if something is bad for the West, then it is good for Russia,” said Nikolai Petrov, an independent political analyst.

Two years ago, Russian troops were entering Crimea ahead of its annexation from Ukraine and the Kremlin was activating its separatist allies in the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk. At the time, Russia’s Reserve Fund – largely accumulated during Mr. Putin’s first decade in power when oil prices were frequently more than $100 (U.S.) a barrel and the domestic economy was growing – stood at nearly $90-billion.

Today, as oil prices linger below $50 a barrel and the economy contracts for a third consecutive year – all while Russia is pouring funds into Crimea, and waging war in faraway Syria – the Reserve Fund is worth just over $30-billion, having been depleted by $6-billion to cover overspending in August alone.

A draft budget submitted last week to Russia’s parliament, the Duma, called for steep cuts to health services, education and even previously sacrosanct defence spending, which has risen in past years as Mr. Putin has modernized his country’s army and deployed it abroad. Even still, Russia’s Finance Ministry expects the Reserve Fund to be completely depleted some time next year, just ahead of presidential elections in 2018, when Mr. Putin is widely expected to run for another six-year term.

...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/follow-the-money-to-see-why-putin-is-rooting-for-a-trump-victory/article32690746/

[donnay]

RE: Why Vladimir Putin’s Russia Is Backing Donald Trump

Duh, because he does not want to go to war-- which Hillary said she would. Hell she is blaming Russian for everything, and Putin is no idiot.

[CPUd]

Even people at his rallies have started to notice:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzXPGA0nlN4

[AuH20]

Kurt Eichenwald (the author of this piece) is an interesting fellow.

https://sputniknews.com/us/201610191046476430-newsweek-journalist-claims-intelligence-conspiracy/

Eichenwald admitted who he works for.


"You need to ask yourself — how does someone like me who is deeply wired into the intelligence community know so fast that you had posted this? It’s not like I was sitting around reading Sputnik. Others are though, and they are not reading it 24-hours a day in real time for the purpose of keeping abreast of the news.”


Let the threats begin from the Spook Journalist.

“I guarantee you one thing: there is already a file on you in one of the security intelligence divisions of the FBI,” Eichenwald wrote. “You have been playing in a sandbox surrounded by very large, and mostly unseen, players, engaged in games you don’t recognize.”


When Eichenwald got caught as a propaganda organ for an intelligence agency, he tried to bribe Moran with a job.


“What I was going to discuss with you was places you should consider working in Washington — ones that won’t serve to taint your reputation for the rest of your career,” Eichenwald offered.

[CPUd]

Interesting read, from an international perspective:



Trump, Putin, and the Alt-Right International

In boosting Trump and funding fringe parties in Europe, Russia has helped construct a new kind of "comintern"—and it's even more effective than the Cold War version.


One of the double-edged aspects of being a writer is that you can become known in all kinds of unlikely circles. That was what I was thinking when I pulled a large envelope out of my mailbox. The return address was Germany; the cover letter (in German) announced that I was the recipient of Compact magazine, and more oddly, requested that I should send an email confirming receipt.

The magazine itself, also in German, was about politics. A superficial look might suggest it was the anti-American manifesto of some fringe left-wing German group (“Heil Hillary! Candidate of US Fascism” reads one headline), but closer inspection revealed it came from the other end of the ideological spectrum.

A glance at a political profile of Jürgen Elsässer, Compact’s purported editor, discloses that he had been an extreme leftist who opposed German reunification and worked for Neues Deutschland, once the official newspaper of the East German Socialist Unity Party, the client Communist Party ruling East Germany in the interests of the USSR. Yet at some point in the 2000s, he migrated to the far right, and is now aligned with the new anti-immigrant party, Alternative für Deutschland. The prestigious newspaper die Zeit flat out calls Elsässer a Kremlin propagandist.

Elsässer’s shift from one political extreme to the other suggests that that he is an apparatchik whose first loyalty has likely always been to Moscow. When the USSR represented an authoritarian version of the left, he was a leftist; when the party line of the successor Russian state changed to right-wing authoritarianism, he obediently tacked right—a circumstance which shows that “left” and “right” are often arbitrary categories, particularly when considering the fringes.

This year, the German public television network ZDF produced a documentary tracing the ideological and financial ties between Russia and extreme right-wing elements; among those elements was Elsässer. His own blogs show an over-the-top enthusiasm for the Russian regime, such as comparing Putin’s bombing of Aleppo with the Russian defense of Stalingrad. Whatever the realities of the situation in Syria, Russian intervention in the conflict hardly merits comparison with the decisive turning point of the Second World War.

There were other suggestions of Russian fingerprints on Elsässer’s magazine. It was printed on coated stock, with lots of photos and fairly high production values. Fringe parties generally can’t afford the production costs of this sort of thing—unless they are getting a bit of financial help. The editorial tone was a kind of unholy marriage between Breitbart.com and the Russian-funded website Sputnik, with a little Völkischer Beobachter thrown in for good measure (there was generous use of the term “Lügenpresse”—the lying press, a term popularized by the Nazis.) More to the point, it was written in the breathless, apocalyptic manner of the Soviet anti-NATO propaganda I used to see as a national-security analyst in Congress in the 1980s—with one exception.

Classic Soviet propaganda always treated Democrats and Republicans as essentially indistinguishable and interchangeable components of the bourgeois power structure, both equally worthy of denunciation. Compact, however, had several articles explicitly endorsing Donald J. Trump as an all-around swell guy, with one explaining how a President Trump would improve U.S. relations with Russia.

The propaganda message of this magazine crossed a threshold of sorts. The hacking of the Democratic National Committee that has been attributed to the Russians by the U.S. government is obviously intended to damage the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, but the Russian government, and Vladimir Putin above all, have been careful to avoid being seen publicly praising or attacking either candidate.

Yet Putin, or at least his European allies, apparently see it as worth their while to spend money attacking Hillary and talking about Trump in terms so flattering that Caesar would have blushed, in a country whose citizens don’t have a vote in America’s election in any case. The Soviet Union’s goals in attempting to rouse the European (and above all, German) public against, say, NATO’s deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe in the early 1980s was straightforward and understandable, but why would an ideological ally of Russia puff up Donald Trump to a German public that cannot vote for him?

...
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/trump-putin-alt-right-comintern/506015/

[AuH20]

The 'news agency' that Kurt Eichenwald works for is very key in understanding the nature of this particular article.

http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php



At Newsweek, Agency sources reported, the CIA engaged the services of' several foreign correspondents and stringers under arrangements approved by senior editors at the magazine. Newsweek's stringer in Rome in the mid‑Fifties made little secret of the fact that he worked for the CIA. Malcolm Muir, Newsweek's editor from its founding in 1937 until its sale to the Washington Post Company in 1961, said in a recent interview that his dealings with the CIA were limited to private briefings he gave Allen Dulles after trips abroad and arrangements he approved for regular debriefing of Newsweek correspondents by the Agency. He said that he had never provided cover for CIA operatives, but that others high in the Newsweek organization might have done so without his knowledge.

"I would have thought there might have been stringers who were agents, but I didn't know who they were," said Muir. "I do think in those days the CIA kept pretty close touch with all responsible reporters. Whenever I heard something that I thought might be of interest to Allen Dulles, I'd call him up.... At one point he appointed one of his CIA men to keep in regular contact with our reporters, a chap that I knew but whose name I can't remember. I had a number of friends in Alien Dulles' organization." Muir said that Harry Kern, Newsweek's foreign editor from 1945 until 1956, and Ernest K. Lindley, the magazine's Washington bureau chief during the same period "regularly checked in with various fellows in the CIA."

"To the best of my knowledge." said Kern, "nobody at Newsweek worked for the CIA... The informal relationship was there. Why have anybody sign anything? What we knew we told them [the CIA] and the State Department.... When I went to Washington, I would talk to Foster or Allen Dulles about what was going on. ... We thought it was admirable at the time. We were all on the same side." CIA officials say that Kern's dealings with the Agency were extensive. In 1956, he left Newsweek to run Foreign Reports, a Washington‑based newsletter whose subscribers Kern refuses to identify.

Ernest Lindley, who remained at Newsweek until 1961, said in a recent interview that he regularly consulted with Dulles and other high CIA officials before going abroad and briefed them upon his return. "Allen was very helpful to me and I tried to reciprocate when I could," he said. "I'd give him my impressions of people I'd met overseas. Once or twice he asked me to brief a large group of intelligence people; when I came back from the Asian‑African conference in 1955, for example; they mainly wanted to know about various people."

As Washington bureau chief, Lindley said he learned from Malcolm Muir that the magazine's stringer in southeastern Europe was a CIA contract employee—given credentials under arrangements worked out with the management. "I remember it came up—whether it was a good idea to keep this person from the Agency; eventually it was decided to discontinue the association," Lindley said.

When Newsweek was purchased by the Washington Post Company, publisher Philip L. Graham was informed by Agency officials that the CIA occasionally used the magazine for cover purposes, according to CIA sources. "It was widely known that Phil Graham was somebody you could get help from," said a former deputy director of the Agency. "Frank Wisner dealt with him." Wisner, deputy director of the CIA from 1950 until shortly before his suicide in 1965, was the Agency's premier orchestrator of "black" operations, including many in which journalists were involved. Wisner liked to boast of his "mighty Wurlitzer," a wondrous propaganda instrument he built, and played, with help from the press.) Phil Graham was probably Wisner's closest friend. But Graharn, who committed suicide in 1963, apparently knew little of the specifics of any cover arrangements with Newsweek, CIA sources said.

In 1965‑66, an accredited Newsweek stringer in the Far East was in fact a CIA contract employee earning an annual salary of $10,000 from the Agency, according to Robert T. Wood, then a CIA officer in the Hong Kong station. Some, Newsweek correspondents and stringers continued to maintain covert ties with the Agency into the 1970s, CIA sources said.

Information about Agency dealings with the Washington Post newspaper is extremely sketchy. According to CIA officials, some Post stringers have been CIA employees, but these officials say they do not know if anyone in the Post management was aware of the arrangements.

All editors‑in‑chief and managing editors of the Post since 1950 say they knew of no formal Agency relationship with either stringers or members of the Post staff. “If anything was done it was done by Phil without our knowledge,” said one. Agency officials, meanwhile, make no claim that Post staff members have had covert affiliations with the Agency while working for the paper.6

Katharine Graham, Philip Graham’s widow and the current publisher of the Post, says she has never been informed of any CIA relationships with either Post or Newsweek personnel. In November of 1973, Mrs. Graham called William Colby and asked if any Post stringers or staff members were associated with the CIA. Colby assured her that no staff members were employed by the Agency but refused to discuss the question of stringers.

[enhanced_deficit]

Kurt Eichenwald (the author of this piece) is an interesting fellow.

...
When Eichenwald got caught as a propaganda organ for an intelligence agency, he tried to bribe Moran with a job.


Strange stuff:

http://gawker.com/242699/kurt-eichenwald-has-some-splaining-to-do

[CPUd]

Everyone writing their Putin-Trump stories this week:


When Donald Trump Was More Anti-NATO Than Vladimir Putin
Everything you always wanted to know about Russia and Trump but were afraid to ask (like, when’s World War III?)—Part I.
Michael Weiss


This is the first of a series of articles examining all facets of Donald Trump’s alleged ties or political sympathies with the Russian government. In this installment, Daily Beast Senior Editor Michael Weiss looks at the way Trump has refashioned Ronald Reagan’s Republican Party, largely out of his own conviction, into a helpmeet of the Kremlin.

Michael Morrell, a former acting director of the Central Intelligence Agency, broke dramatically with the protocol of most ex-spies when he used spook parlance to describe Republican nominee Donald Trump as “an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation,” albeit in the course of endorsing Hillary Clinton for president.

The colloquial term for the sort of person Morrell was talking about is “useful idiot,” someone enlisted in the Kremlin’s cause through sympathy, or shared interests, or, indeed, ignorance, without actually intending to be a pawn. But, as Putin certainly knows, the problem with useful idiots is that they tend to be insecure and erratic, whereas witting agents are tutored in how to be disciplined and self-controlled.

Trump is too illogical and self-contradictory to be of much use to a hostile foreign power except as a naturally occurring battering ram against the very institutions and beliefs that power would like to see weakened or destroyed. Trump’s opponent (whom Putin assuredly does not want to see inhabit the White House) and U.S. democracy at large are the truer objects of a Russian state-run information and cyber-espionage program. That Trump’s vulgar and demoralizing campaign is ripping apart America on the path to making it “great again” is simply an added bonus for the former KGB colonel.

Without dismissing the gravity of the Trump-Putin alignment, what our reporting makes clear is that the Republican does genuinely admire the Russian, but the feeling is not necessarily mutual. Putin has been discreet, if not cryptic, in his characterization of Trump. (See the next installation in this series for more.) One might say the relationship between the two is that of an amateur authoritarian taking cues from an aloof and bemused professional, but the performance delivered, to any outside observer, looks more like an oblivious farce than a credible imitation.

What is remarkable, however, is how consistent Trump’s most illiberal, and seemingly pro-Russian, stance on America’s undergirding of postwar European security has been, dating back to before Putin was even master of the Kremlin.

...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/04/when-donald-trump-was-more-anti-nato-than-vladimir-putin.html

[AuH20]

Everyone writing their Putin-Trump stories this week.



Almost like a lever was pulled by an unseen force.

[UWDude]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/follow-the-money-to-see-why-putin-is-rooting-for-a-trump-victory/article32690746/

"follow the money" a bastardization of the term by the media of lies. These people are so dishonest.

An article full of allegations, "allegedly"s, and claims. A bunch of nothing. Putin wants trump because he may end sanctions. Am I supposed to be upset about this? Putin wants Trump because Trump said he would partner with Putin, instead of antagonize Russia.

Stupid Russia, don't they like being antagonized by NATO?

And because Putin obviously prefers Trump, now I am supposed to believe he hacked Podesta's emails? This is all WW III agenda driven lies.


When Donald Trump Was More Anti-NATO Than Vladimir Putin

GOOD! What now!?

[CPUd]

"follow the money" a bastardization of the term by the media of lies. These people are so dishonest.

An article full of allegations, "allegedly"s, and claims. A bunch of nothing. Putin wants trump because he may end sanctions. Am I supposed to be upset about this? Putin wants Trump because Trump said he would partner with Putin, instead of antagonize Russia.

Stupid Russia, don't they like being antagonized by NATO?

And because Putin obviously prefers Trump, now I am supposed to believe he hacked Podesta's emails? This is all WW III agenda driven lies.



GOOD! What now!?

I take it you disagree with the authors. Now can you go outside, count to 10 and come back to give a coherent response as to why?

[UWDude]

I take it you disagree with the authors. Now can you go outside, count to 10 and come back to give a coherent response as to why?

I said what I meant the first time.

[CPUd]

I said what I meant the first time.

https://i.imgur.com/4Wq6Lkv.jpg

[Brian4Liberty]

It's today's DNC talking point. Some DNC pundit on Fox earlier was pushing it. IIRC, one his lines was that Trump will "make America Russia".

Some guy on Fox News right now talking about Russia hacking the elections.

[RJB]

Classy. Was that you at the rally, CPUd?


Even people at his rallies have started to notice:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzXPGA0nlN4

[timosman]

It's today's DNC talking point. Some DNC pundit on Fox earlier was pushing it. IIRC, one his lines was that Trump will "make America Russia".

Some guy on Fox News right now talking about Russia hacking the elections.

Great job avoiding taking position on CPUd. :)

[RJB]

It's today's DNC talking point. Some DNC pundit on Fox earlier was pushing it. IIRC, one his lines was that Trump will "make America Russia".

Some guy on Fox News right now talking about Russia hacking the elections.

Glenn Beck is strongly pushing it too.

[Brian4Liberty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkoQnbpiWyg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkoQnbpiWyg

[Brian4Liberty]

Two years ago, Russian troops were entering Crimea ahead of its annexation from Ukraine and the Kremlin was activating its separatist allies in the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/follow-the-money-to-see-why-putin-is-rooting-for-a-trump-victory/article32690746/

The "separatist" regions, where the new US backed Ukrainian government unilaterally replaced the governors with a couple of oligarchs right after the recent "revolution".

Let's follow that money...

An oligarch who was given his own region, and given the thumbs up from everyone involved to fund and arm a militia and send them to attack neighbors.


Ukraine's Secret Weapon: Feisty Oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky
New Governor of Dnipropetrovsk Takes on Pro-Russia Separatists, but Critics Worry About Growing Power of Oligarchs

http://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraines-secret-weapon-feisty-oligarch-ihor-kolomoisky-1403886665

Would it be juicier if Joe Biden's son (Hunter Biden) (http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/05/r-hunter-biden-declare-owns-new-ukrainian-employer-burisma-holdings.html) and a John Kerry connected banker (http://www.theguardian.com/business/shortcuts/2014/may/14/hunter-biden-job-board-ukraine-biggest-gas-producer-burisma) (Devon Archer) both were on the Kolomoisky payroll?


A multibillionaire, Kolomoyskyi is rated as the second or third richest person in Ukraine (after Rinat Akhmetov and/or Viktor Pinchuk) since 2006.[12][13] and 377th richest person in the world by the Forbes (as of 2011).[9] In March 2015 The Economist listed his net worth as $1.36 billion.[10] Kolomoyskyi is the leading partner of the Privat Group and a de facto chairman of the FC Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk.
...
Through PrivatBank he controls Aerosvit Airlines, Dniproavia and Donbassaero.[20] Through the asset management company Mansvell Enterprises Limited, he controls Skyways Express, City Airline, and Cimber Sterling aviation companies.[21] He also has media interests in the 1+1 Media Group, which operates eight Ukrainian TV channels.

Part of his vast business empire is Burisma Holdings Ldt, Ukraine’s largest private gas firm. Shortly after Russia annexed Crimea, while U. S. Vice-President Joe Biden was engaged in diplomatic talks with Ukraine, Burisma announced that Hunter Biden joined the board of the company.
...
Kolomyski has used Privat's "quasi-military forces" to enforce hostile takeovers of companies, sending a team of "hired rowdies armed with baseball bats, iron bars, gas and rubber bullet pistols and chainsaws" to forcibly take over a Kremenchuk steel plant in 2006,[26] and has used "a mix of phony court orders (often involving corrupt judges and/or registrars) and strong-arm tactics" to replace directors on the boards of companies he purchases stakes in.[27] Kolomyski was criticized by Mr Justice Mann in a court case in London involving an attempted hostile takeover of an oil company, with the judge stating that Kolomyski had "a reputation of having sought to take control of a company at gunpoint in Ukraine" and that there were "strong grounds for doubting the honesty of Mr Kolomoisky"
...
In March 2015, after the dismissal of Oleksandr Lazorko, who was a protege of Kolomoysky, as a chief executive of UkrTransNafta, Ukraine's state-owned oil pipeline operator, men reported to be Kolomoyskyi's personal militia raided the UkrTransNafta's headquarters to expel the new government-appointed chief from the office. While Lazorko was in charge the state-owned pipelines had been delivering oil to an Kolomoisky-owned refinery in preference to competitors.
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ihor_Kolomoyskyi


Then there is Pinchuk...


Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk, 54, has courted the Clintons for at least nine years – in the United States, the Alps and Ukraine.

Earlier this year, he was confirmed as the largest individual contributor to the Clinton Foundation, whose aims include the creation of “economic opportunity and growth”. He also has links to the Tony Blair Foundation and represented its biggest single donor in 2013.
...
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/04/24/hillary-clinton-runs-white-house-and-row-over-ukrainian-benefactors-trade-322253.html

[nobody's_hero]

More fearmongering about Russia on RPFs. Sigh.

[timosman]

More fearmongering about Russia on RPFs. Sigh.

The "moderator" for the n-th time engages in a polite discussion instead of banning the offenders. Everybody's patience is being tested again. Some people say ahhh-fuck-it then turn around and never come back. The trolls win.

[misterx]

If Trump turns out to be more like Putin than Obama, I won't be mad.

Why Vladimir Putin’s People Love Him (http://thefederalist.com/2016/04/13/why-vladimir-putins-people-love-him/)


By certain traditional measures, Russian President Vladimir Putin is the pre-eminent statesman of his time. When he took power in the winter of 1999–2000, his defenseless and bankrupt country was being carved up by its new kleptocratic elites, in collusion with its old imperial rivals. Much as Kemal Atatürk had done in Turkey seven decades earlier, Putin rescued a nation-state from the ruins of an empire and gave it coherence and purpose.

[AuH20]

If Trump turns out to be more like Putin than Obama, I won't be mad.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/04/13/why-vladimir-putins-people-love-him/

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/30/russia-bans-george-soros-charity-as-security-threat.html

[jmdrake]

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-russia-hillary-clinton-united-states-europe-516895

Serious question. What do democrats have against Putin? I mean democrats are tripping over themselves to go see and hug unreformed communist Fidel Castro. Do Democrats hate Putin because Putin is standing up for persecuted Christians in Syria or do democrats hate Putin because he's against gay adoption?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWX44PqYc6c


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fh_G19ZwsA

[jmdrake]

That guy engages in sophistry, and is usually not worth responding to.

Okay. So are you going to respond to me? What do you have against Putin? Why is Trump being friendly to a man who is saving the lives of Christians (Putin) worse than Obama being friendly to a man who is persecuting Christians (Castro)?:

[CPUd]

I'd say he's probably a step up from Boris Yeltsin, Boris pretty much let organized crime take over while he mostly stayed drunk.

[jmdrake]

I'd say he's probably a step up from Boris Yeltsin, Boris pretty much let organized crime take over while he mostly stayed drunk.

How about Castro? Do you think Putin is better than Castro? If not, why not?

And do you give Putin credit, as I do, for saving the lives of Christians in Syria? If not, why not?

[CPUd]

How about Castro? Do you think Putin is better than Castro? If not, why not?

And do you give Putin credit, as I do, for saving the lives of Christians in Syria? If not, why not?

I really don't care too much about either of them.

[jmdrake]

I really don't care too much about either of them.

Do you care about Christians in Syria? If not, why not?

[CPUd]

Do you care about Christians in Syria? If not, why not?

I guess I care the same about them as I do Muslims, Jews or non-religious people in Syria. Which is about the same level as "I have no problem with them".

[jmdrake]

I guess I care the same about them as I do Muslims, Jews or non-religious people in Syria. Which is about the same level as "I have no problem with them".

But they have a problem. They are being persecuted because Bush overthrew Saddam in Iraq, Hillary/Obama overthrew Gaddafi in Libya and Hillary/Obama are trying to overthrow Assad in Syria. There are (were?) 2.2 million Christians in Syria or roughly 10% of the population. Hillary/Obama let over 10,000 Syrian Muslim refugees but only 56 Syrian Christian refugees! This isn't an issue that a person with a conscience can take a "Meh...I have no problem" attitude about. The creep that you voted for has facilitated the ethnic cleansing of Christians in the middle east and yet you have the gall to attack the man standing up against that persecution. Shameful.

http://www.newsweek.com/us-bars-christian-not-muslim-refugees-syria-497494

[CPUd]

But they have a problem. They are being persecuted because Bush overthrew Saddam in Iraq, Hillary/Obama overthrew Gaddafi in Libya and Hillary/Obama are trying to overthrow Assad in Syria. There are (were?) 2.2 million Christians in Syria or roughly 10% of the population. Hillary/Obama let over 10,000 Syrian Muslim refugees but only 56 Syrian Christian refugees! This isn't an issue that a person with a conscience can take a "Meh...I have no problem" attitude about. The creep that you voted for has facilitated the ethnic cleansing of Christians in the middle east and yet you have the gall to attack the man standing up against that persecution. Shameful.

http://www.newsweek.com/us-bars-christian-not-muslim-refugees-syria-497494

How did I attack him? And what does Rand have anything to do with it?

[juleswin]

Do you care about Christians in Syria? If not, why not?

Not just Christians, Putin has saved a lot of non wahhabi sunni, shia, kurd, druze, christian etc etc Syrians by his involvement in the Syrian war. If I truly believed Trump was pro Putin, I would consider voting for him. But I do not believe a word he says.

[jmdrake]

How did I attack him? And what does Rand have anything to do with it?

You said you once voted for Clinton right? And this whole thread itself is an attack as if there is something wrong with Putin backing Trump (if Putin is even backing Trump.)

[jmdrake]

Just just Christians, Putin has saved a lot of non wahhabi sunni, shia, kurd, druze, christian etc etc Syrians by his involvement in the Syrian war. If It truly believed Trump was pro Putin, I would consider voting for him. But I do not believe a word he says.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to juleswin again.

I fully concur. Trump can't be trusted. Hillary can be trusted....to be evil.

[AuH20]

Trump is being advised by the right kind of individuals. The neos are frozen out for the time being, but look for them to try to slither back if he wins.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/11/02/gen_flynn_blasts_msnbcs_stephanie_ruhle_over_putin _criticism_stop_it_with_that_kind_of_stuff.html

[CPUd]

You said you once voted for Clinton right? And this whole thread itself is an attack as if there is something wrong with Putin backing Trump (if Putin is even backing Trump.)

I've never voted for anyone who went on to win the election. And this thread is about an article that claims Putin is backing Trump.

[CPUd]

Trump is being advised by the right kind of individuals. The neos are frozen out for the time being, but look for them to try to slither back if he wins.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/11/02/gen_flynn_blasts_msnbcs_stephanie_ruhle_over_putin _criticism_stop_it_with_that_kind_of_stuff.html

His running mate is a neocon, and his inner circle is now full of them, too.

[AuH20]

His running mate is a neocon, and his inner circle is now full of them, too.

He already refuted his running mate in regard to Syria. That was a big deal.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnVCIyqj5DQ

[CPUd]

He already refuted his running mate in regard to Syria. That was a big deal.



Trump refutes a lot of stuff when he gets caught in a lie.

[jmdrake]

I've never voted for anyone who went on to win the election.

Clinton lost to Obama in 2008. So that means you did vote for her. Who gives a flip if she didn't go on to win the election?: :rolleyes:


And this thread is about an article that claims Putin is backing Trump.

The article itself is an anti-Putin smear as if Putin preferring someone with at least a lick of sense over a witch that wants to impose a no fly zone on her broom is somehow a bad thing.

[jmdrake]

Trump refutes a lot of stuff when he gets caught in a lie.

:rolleyes: Did you even watch the video? You just made yourself look stupid. This wasn't Trump refuting some "lie" he told. This was Trump disagreeing with Pence on Syria. I'm not a Trump fan but a broken clock is right at least twice a day. If Pence supports the intervention in Syria, which Hillary Clinton the loser that you voted for in 2008, supports, then Pence is wrong on that. Trump once half-heartedly supported the Iraq war. And Trump gave full bore support for invading Libya. But I've not seen any documentation that Trump supported the disaster that is the Obama/Clinton policy in Syria.

[CPUd]

Clinton lost to Obama in 2008. So that means you did vote for her. Who gives a flip if she didn't go on to win the election?: :rolleyes:

Trump voted for her + gave her hundreds of thousands of dollars, does that mean he also facilitated ethnic cleansing in Syria?



The article itself is an anti-Putin smear as if Putin preferring someone with at least a lick of sense over a witch that wants to impose a no fly zone on her broom is somehow a bad thing.
Thanks for your input.

[CPUd]

:rolleyes: Did you even watch the video? You just made yourself look stupid. This wasn't Trump refuting some "lie" he told. This was Trump disagreeing with Pence on Syria. I'm not a Trump fan but a broken clock is right at least twice a day. If Pence supports the intervention in Syria, which Hillary Clinton the loser that you voted for in 2008, supports, then Pence is wrong on that. Trump once half-heartedly supported the Iraq war. And Trump gave full bore support for invading Libya. But I've not seen any documentation that Trump supported the disaster that is the Obama/Clinton policy in Syria.

I saw it live when it happened. You are right, a better term would be contradiction, as in 2 different messages coming from the same campaign.

[jmdrake]

Trump voted for her + gave her hundreds of thousands of dollars, does that mean he also facilitated ethnic cleansing in Syria?

Note that I neither voted for Trump nor did I say that you facilitated ethnic cleansing in Syria. If I don't attribute what happened in Syria to you, then why should I attribute it to Trump? There are a lot of real reasons to be against Trump. Being against Trump for Trump being friendly with Putin isn't one of them.

[jmdrake]

I saw it live when it happened. You are right, a better term would be contradiction, as in 2 different messages coming from the same campaign.

But it's not a self contradiction. If Rand Paul had picked Mike Pence as a running mate they would have had the same disagreement.

Now, how about you? Do you agree with Trump on the idea that it's better to work with Russia against ISIS or do you buy the "We must shoot down Russian jets and risk WW 3 because.....it's for the children" propaganda BS?

[UWDude]

That guy engages in sophistry, and is usually not worth responding to.



Trump is trying to get Hillary elected

Putin is backing Trump

What you are really saying is, Putin is trying to get Hillary elected?

Answer the question, fork tongued liar. You've been caught. Clearly you do not believe everything you say. Caught in your lies.
Admit it. Admit you are a liar. Admit it, snake.

[CPUd]

But it's not a self contradiction. If Rand Paul had picked Mike Pence as a running mate they would have had the same disagreement.

Now, how about you? Do you agree with Trump on the idea that it's better to work with Russia against ISIS or do you buy the "We must shoot down Russian jets and risk WW 3 because.....it's for the children" propaganda BS?

The key word there is disagreement, the VP defers to the P in that case, and a Paul/Pence ticket would have discovered that well before the 2nd debate; Pence would not have been going around saying it on the stump, because Rand has made his position clear in almost every extended interview and at least 2 GOP debates. I don't see anything wrong with working with Russia to fight terrorism, but I also don't believe terrorism is as big a threat to US interests as it's being made out to be.

[CPUd]

Answer the question, fork tongued liar. You've been caught. Clearly you do not believe everything you say. Caught in your lies.
Admit it. Admit you are a liar. Admit it, snake.

asked and answered.

[UWDude]

asked and answered.

No you didn't, lying snake. You called someone a sophist. That in no way came close to answering how your two points of views can possibly be true. Which is wrong?


Trump is trying to get Hillary elected

Putin is backing Trump

What you are really saying is, Putin is trying to get Hillary elected?

Is Trump a plant for Hillary, or Putin?

Answer the question, lying snake.

And ask zippy how easy it is to weasel out of this.

Just give up, and go away.

[CPUd]

No you didn't, lying snake. You called someone a sophist. That in no way came close to answering how your two points of views can possibly be true. Which is wrong?


Is Trump a plant for Hillary, or Putin?

Answer the question, lying snake.

And ask zippy how easy it is to weasel out of this.

Just give up, and go away.

careful there.

[tod evans]

Why Vladimir Putin’s Russia Is Backing Donald Trump

There was a video last week (?) in which Putin said it was because Trump wanted to talk and work with Russia...

I'm inclined to take his statement at face value rather than some pundits speculation..

[Danke]

There was a video last week (?) in which Putin said it was because Trump wanted to talk and work with Russia...

I'm inclined to take his statement at face value rather than some pundits speculation..

Just recently I saw him dodge the question of who he likes.

[Brian4Liberty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkoQnbpiWyg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkoQnbpiWyg

If only we had known...

[Brian4Liberty]

The "separatist" regions, where the new US backed Ukrainian government unilaterally replaced the governors with a couple of oligarchs right after the recent "revolution".

Let's follow that money...

An oligarch who was given his own region, and given the thumbs up from everyone involved to fund and arm a militia and send them to attack neighbors.



Would it be juicier if Joe Biden's son (Hunter Biden) (http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/05/r-hunter-biden-declare-owns-new-ukrainian-employer-burisma-holdings.html) and a John Kerry connected banker (http://www.theguardian.com/business/shortcuts/2014/may/14/hunter-biden-job-board-ukraine-biggest-gas-producer-burisma) (Devon Archer) both were on the Kolomoisky payroll?



Then there is Pinchuk...

Follow the money...

[acptulsa]

https://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1762265526158479813

1762265526158479813