Trump is a Threat to National Security

[_Dr Exiled]

You know, I agree with you that our military budget is outrageous. I also agree with you that Hillary was a horrible candidate.

But you do realize that she being a horrible candidate and Russian interference in our election can both be possible at the same time, right?

Of course it is possible. I just don't think it was as extensive or effective as big media made it out to be. Also, let's suppose that Russia was behind the stolen emails. The emails from wikileaks told the truth about how Clinton was a neocon and wall street stooge. It was the truth. I'm uneasy about foreign governments doing this type of espionage, if it happened. However, I like knowing the truth about candidates.

Now, let's suppose that China steals Trump's tax returns (as Clinton recently joked they should do) and/or gets information about Trump's relation with that pedophile Epstein or other dirt on him. Wouldn't you want to know? Would you deliberately not pay attention to the information because the media hypes a China attacked us meme? I would welcome the information and would hope everyone else would as well.

This is one of the reasons I push back on russiagate. I want to know the truth about our lying candidates and really don't care where the information comes from, as long as it is truthful. It's just like when I was leaving the church. I didn't care where the information came from. I just wanted to know the truth about what really happened and was happy to get it.

[_Some Schmo]

I want to know the truth about our lying candidates and really don't care where the information comes from, as long as it is truthful. It's just like when I was leaving the church. I didn't care where the information came from. I just wanted to know the truth about what really happened and was happy to get it.

I can completely relate to wanting to know the truth. I'm just wondering what you're willing to pay to get it.

For instance, what if someone accessed your phone and got all your private emails and your banking information, and with it and some other hacking, was able to drain your bank account while (as a bonus) working out that your wife was having an affair. He then told you about your wife. Would you forgive him for hacking your emails and stealing all your money because he told you a particular truth? In that circumstance, would you not care how he came by the information? It doesn't change the truth, but it's still a violation, isn't it?

He isn't suddenly innocent just because he told you about your wife, is he?

[_Dr Exiled]

I want to know the truth about our lying candidates and really don't care where the information comes from, as long as it is truthful. It's just like when I was leaving the church. I didn't care where the information came from. I just wanted to know the truth about what really happened and was happy to get it.

I can completely relate to wanting to know the truth. I'm just wondering what you're willing to pay to get it.

For instance, what if someone accessed your phone and got all your private emails and your banking information, and with it and some other hacking, was able to drain your bank account while (as a bonus) working out that your wife was having an affair. He then told you about your wife. Would you forgive him for hacking your emails and stealing all your money because he told you a particular truth? In that circumstance, would you not care how he came by the information? It doesn't change the truth, but it's still a violation, isn't it?

He isn't suddenly innocent just because he told you about your wife, is he?

Yes, but the Russians didn't rob someone and then incidentally tell the truth about Clinton. So, your analogy doesn't work. Also, prosecute the guy for the crimes and be glad for getting the cheating spouse information.

Russiagate, if true, is really a kill the messenger campaign. don't pay attention to the email content because the Russians are coming. The emails allegedly stolen were real communications that revealed the truth about Clinton's speech to a wall street bank where she said, in essence, that she needed to have a public view against the banks and private policies that favored the banks. The emails also showed how the DNC colluded with Clinton against Sanders and how Trump was part of a pied piper strategy to get the worst opposing candidate to make the general election supposedly easier for Clinton to win. We shouldn't blame Russia but should rethink DNC election strategy so this doesn't happen again.

[_Some Schmo]

Yes, but the Russians didn't rob someone and then incidentally tell the truth about Clinton. So, your analogy doesn't work.

You don't consider email theft a robbery, especially emails that help one campaign over another? Those can be considered campaign contributions in the form of "opposition research."

[_MeDotOrg]

This is one of the reasons I push back on russiagate. I want to know the truth about our lying candidates and really don't care where the information comes from, as long as it is truthful. It's just like when I was leaving the church. I didn't care where the information came from. I just wanted to know the truth about what really happened and was happy to get it.

If you want to know the truth about our candidates, I think you would want Congress to have the unredacted Mueller report. If you want to know the truth about our President, you don't have to read stolen emails. The Mueller report provides several examples of obstruction of justice.

I want to know the truth about our lying candidates and really don't care where the information comes from, as long as it is truthful.

Take that statement to its logical conclusion. Any foreign government could perform espionage on a candidate if they didn't like that candidates views, as long as the information uncovered was truthful. That's a good thing? The information about our candidates is dependent upon the motivations of foreign actors? Are you saying that you approve of Russians hacking an email server, but think Congress having the Mueller report is somehow intergovernmental espionage?

Right now we have a President who refuses to confront a major adversary about political espionage, while insisting that his OWN government's investigation of political espionage is political espionage.

Exiled, Donald Trump is like no other President in American history. Because his Presidency happens day after day, we tend to get desensitized to the daily assaults he makes on any part of government that he does not see in Donald Trump's best interests. I truly believe that future historians will place Trump's narcissism as the primary motivator of his actions. Donald Trump's idea of altruism is literally buying a painting of himself with money from his charity.

Trump has made his narcissism work. Carl Jung talked of the collective unconscious of the German volk, and how Hitler tapped into it. Some candidates who style themselves as populists are geniuses in tapping into the collective fears and desires of their people. Trump has found his niche. He is very effective at igniting the passions of his base. He is something of a cross between P.T. Barnum and Joe McCarthy. And if you are not snookered in by his sideshow, it is initially hard to understand the enthusiasm of those who buy it.

[_Dr Exiled]

Yes, but the Russians didn't rob someone and then incidentally tell the truth about Clinton. So, your analogy doesn't work.

You don't consider email theft a robbery, especially emails that help one campaign over another? Those can be considered campaign contributions in the form of "opposition research."

Theft is a crime and should be punished.

[_Chap]

Back to the OP (see below).

Nothing I have seen on this thread changes my initial impression that the US is in a serious situation, with a President who behaves in a way that prima facie, suggests that he is under strong influence by people in a foreign country who, to put it mildly, are not acting on an 'America First' basis ... nothing that a previous president has done in recent times matches up to this.

There should be zero doubt in the mind of any sane person that the President of the United States has been compromised.

NBC's Kristen Welker: "Mr. President, did you tell [Putin] not to meddle in the next election?"

Trump: "Excuse me, I'm talking. I'm answering his question. You are very rude."

Trump, pressed again, says he didn't discuss it with Putin.

So after a two year investigation that revealed a widespread Russian attack on our elections, directed by the top government officials, our President of the United States, the guy who is supposed to protect Americans and be a leader, calls up the culprit to say not a damn word about it. They spoke for over an hour, and instead of talking about Russian attacks that are still ongoing, he goes on gossiping about FOX News conspiracies and then spits in the face of his own advisers again by saying Putin has no interest in getting involved in Venezuela, contrary to what our US intelligence has been telling him.

Dare I say that if President Obama has done anything remotely similar to this the people cheering Trump today would be marching on Capitol hill with loaded rifles. Republican supporters of Trump cannot claim to be patriotic anymore. And that's the irony here because part of their shtick is to insist Democrats aren't real Americans.

This is just ____ insane. Even FOX News acknowledges the sophisticated and widespread Russian attacks but the President keeps calling it a hoax! He has never once acknowledged the threat even exists. This is our leader?

Now here's the part where bach and subgenius derail with "look at the economy though." Yeah, you should probably thank Obama.

[_subgenius]

Yes, but the Russians didn't rob someone and then incidentally tell the truth about Clinton. So, your analogy doesn't work.

You don't consider email theft a robbery, especially emails that help one campaign over another? Those can be considered campaign contributions in the form of "opposition research."

wire fraud is a crime, not "email theft"...see also Sarah Palin /Kernell email hack... and check your hair fire in 2010.

[_canpakes]

wire fraud is a crime, not "email theft"...see also Sarah Palin /Kernell email hack... and check your hair fire in 2010.

Cool. Then all of that ‘hair fire’ by yourself and Republicans over emails was really not of any concern to you. : )l

But, you are essentially referring to the same thing as PomM, given that wire fraud charges can result from email hacking.

”Email hacking is one of the most common instances of cybercrime these days, and it is one of the most severely penalized. Depending on the circumstances of the offense, the nature of the charges in some jurisdictions and the intent of the prosecution, the unauthorized access of email accounts can be handled as a misdemeanor or a felony with additional civil liabilities. In other words, the penalties for hacking email accounts can be severe.”

https://thelawdictionary.org/article/cr ... l-hacking/