Obama on Russia: Who can?????t Forget!

[_honorentheos]

Again, Markk, you want a smoking gun quote when it comes to Trump while speculating wildly about Obama's negligence despite knowing the FBI was investigating Russia and they took responsive action. Your apparent issue with the Romney quote was discussed on page 1 of this thread which you've yet to directly acknowledge you read, understand, and have a coherent response to that discussion. Yet knowing Trump's campaign was approached multiple times by multiple sources affiliated with the Russian government and Trump's reaction to the investigation was to attempt to obstruct it (amusingly, proving his incompetence as a leader may be his biggest asset...) you just claim to not see it. Ok. You can't see it. That's your problem I guess.

[_Markk]

I am not asking for a smoking gun, I am asking you to back up your assertion with a cf. You couldn't, so you are just searching for it now, wit blanket accusations.

You asked me how I felt about Trump not reporting the Russians to the FBI, and your proof text was basically that Trump did not report to the FBI an article from the Times.

Trump is a idiot of a person, he acts like a child, he is very hard to defend, I get that, but Obama was a very naïve and very weak president on foriegn policy, I also get that. But Trump did not collude with Russia in getting elected, if anyone did anything dirty it was Hillary by a long shot, and she still lost.

Trump won because Hillary was simply that bad of a candidate. Trump was smart and won the states he needed to win, and Russia had nothing to do with it what so ever.

People, in my opinion, need to get over Trump winning and focus on the next election if they want change...but unfortunately, given the meat grinder a person has to go through in order to run for president, our choices do not look so good. If the economy stays strong...it will most likely be another 4 years of Trump, and there will be narrative after narrative from those that hate him why he should go.

[_honorentheos]

Again, Markk, you seem to be quite comfortable asserting some things based on whatever you feel qualifies your belief while setting a standard regarding Trump at odds with the entire reason the Mueller investigation had to look into the collusion question. You conflate Trump being aware of information he should have taken to the FBI as arguing that he was an active ringleader in a scheme to steal the election as if those are the same arguments. Clinton was evil, Obama was bad...it's what it comes down to. Trump is indefensible in certain aspects of his life for you so he gets the "I can see the bad, I can see the good" treatment without ever using that as a launch point for actual discussion on policy or specifics because it isn't about specifics. Given how you handle cf., that appears to be out of necessity. There's been discussion of the Obama Romney debate. You could prove me wrong by engaging that discussion rather than just relying on the existence of a debate exchange to assume you know all you need to about the Obama administration's strategy or thinking regarding Russia.

[_canpakes]

'There's been discussion of the Obama Romney debate. You could prove me wrong by engaging that discussion rather than just relying on the existence of a debate exchange to assume you know all you need to about the Obama administration's strategy or thinking regarding Russia.

Considering the context of the debate exchange referred to by Markk, neither Romney nor Obama were discussing the sort of activity that is being addressed in the Mueller report, and it’s disingenuous to suggest that this exchange is an example of Obama’s failure to not being prescient about all activities by Russians in an Internet 4 years into the future, and comparable to the Trump team being approached by the Russians and told the reason why, and either failing to brief US intelligence of that, or of coming up short of actually engaging the Russians were it not for their overture being based on a ruse.

Here’s Romney’s statement from that debate long ago:

“I’m saying in terms of a geopolitical opponent, the nation that lines up with the world’s worst actors, of course the greatest threat that the world faces is a nuclear Iran, and nuclear North Korea is already troubling enough, but when these terrible actors pursue their course in the world and we go to the United Nations looking for ways to stop them, when [Syrian President] Assad, for instance, is murdering his own people, we go to the United Nations and who is it that always stands up for the world’s worst actors? It is always Russia, typically with China alongside, and so in terms of a geopolitical foe, a nation that’s on the Security Council, that has the heft of the Security Council, and is of course a massive security power — Russia is the geopolitical foe.”

[_Markk]

Again, Markk, you seem to be quite comfortable asserting some things based on whatever you feel qualifies your belief while setting a standard regarding Trump at odds with the entire reason the Mueller investigation had to look into the collusion question. You conflate Trump being aware of information he should have taken to the FBI as arguing that he was an active ringleader in a scheme to steal the election as if those are the same arguments. Clinton was evil, Obama was bad...it's what it comes down to. Trump is indefensible in certain aspects of his life for you so he gets the "I can see the bad, I can see the good" treatment without ever using that as a launch point for actual discussion on policy or specifics because it isn't about specifics. Given how you handle cf., that appears to be out of necessity. There's been discussion of the Obama Romney debate. You could prove me wrong by engaging that discussion rather than just relying on the existence of a debate exchange to assume you know all you need to about the Obama administration's strategy or thinking regarding Russia.

I never said Clinton was evil, or Obama was bad. I said obama was weak on foriegn policy and ignorant on the Russian threat..."naïve" is the term I believe I used. I believe that , and I believe history will confirm it. I also said Trump acts like a child. If you want me to give me my impression of Hillary, just ask. I believe she is bitchy, self centered, and not very likable...she could not even beat Trump.

Obama was in my opinion a non player on most issues...he might have been a good president in "good" times, but given the state that our country was in after 911 and Bush, not a good choice. Maybe he had a plan, but I don't know what it was, if you know it let me know what it was? Say what you will about Trump, and whether it is right or wrong, he has a agenda and plan.

You asked me a specific question..."How is Trump not going to the FBI with what Russia was attempting to do not a major concern for you?"... I simply asked you for a CF.

I can't prove you wrong Hor, it appears your mind is made up that Trump is "evil". I think I am being objective in seeing both sides of Trump, you only see one side, and accuse me of doing what you appear to be doing.

Let me ask you a question...what has Trump done/doing that is good? Has his involvement with Russia been embellished, and has it and is it evolving since certain accusations have gone no where?

What post about the Romney-Obama debate do you want me to respond to?

[_honorentheos]

While I appreciate your testimony regarding your beliefs it continues to underscore how disjointed your approach is to evaluating Clinton or Obama compared to your approach to Trump.

If you want to make a case for something you think is a positive that Trump has done, point it out. I think what Trump is doing to the economy - juicing immediate gains while exploding the debt for no long term benefit - is practically criminal if not literally. Constraining the deficit should have been the primary positive of a conservative government. His claim that the Fed is undermining him and needs to take measures usually reserved for responding to downturns is reckless. Does that constitute evil? I would reserve that terminology to metaphysics. My issues with Trump aren't even idealogical let alone metaphysical. Unless opportunisim is included I guess.

[_subgenius]

While I appreciate your testimony regarding your beliefs it continues to underscore how disjointed your approach is to evaluating Clinton or Obama compared to your approach to Trump.

If you want to make a case for something you think is a positive that Trump has done, point it out. I think what Trump is doing to the economy - juicing immediate gains while exploding the debt for no long term benefit - is practically criminal if not literally. Constraining the deficit should have been the primary positive of a conservative government. His claim that the Fed is undermining him and needs to take measures usually reserved for responding to downturns is reckless. Does that constitute evil? I would reserve that terminology to metaphysics. My issues with Trump aren't even idealogical let alone metaphysical. Unless opportunisim is included I guess.

1. But false price dampening via government subsidies for the ACA was cool - got it!
2. And "positive" accomplishments have been provided ad nauseam but the smoke from your 24 month hair fire is all up in your eyes.
3.But yes, not "ideological" nor "metaphysical" - just hysterical emotional.

got it!

[_Markk]

While I appreciate your testimony regarding your beliefs it continues to underscore how disjointed your approach is to evaluating Clinton or Obama compared to your approach to Trump.

If you want to make a case for something you think is a positive that Trump has done, point it out. I think what Trump is doing to the economy - juicing immediate gains while exploding the debt for no long term benefit - is practically criminal if not literally. Constraining the deficit should have been the primary positive of a conservative government. His claim that the Fed is undermining him and needs to take measures usually reserved for responding to downturns is reckless. Does that constitute evil? I would reserve that terminology to metaphysics. My issues with Trump aren't even idealogical let alone metaphysical. Unless opportunisim is included I guess.

What was Obama's plan..."Hope" was his "MGA" ...what was his plan for for his presidency?

Has his involvement with Russia been embellished, and has it and is it evolving since certain accusations have gone nowhere?

What post about the Romney-Obama debate do you want me to respond to?

[_honorentheos]

What was Obama's plan..."Hope" was his "MGA" ...what was his plan for for his presidency?

This is your response to being asked for specifics regarding what you think Trump is doing right?

Has his involvement with Russia been embellished, and has it and is it evolving since certain accusations have gone nowhere?

By raising the question, does this mean you have something meaningful to share? Or just bearing your testimony against Obama again?

What post about the Romney-Obama debate do you want me to respond to?

Take your pick. They're back on page 1 before you asked posters who were discussing it if they had "read" the OP.

[_Brackite]

I never said Clinton was evil, or Obama was bad. I said obama was weak on foriegn policy and ignorant on the Russian threat..."naïve" is the term I believe I used. I believe that , and I believe history will confirm it.

I do basically agree with you that Obama was weak on foriegn policy, and that he was wrong about Russia during the Presidential debate back in 2012. Obama’s biggest strength as President was getting our country out of the great reccession. The Unemployment rate under him ended up dropping from 7.8% down to 4.7%. Link