Sonikku
Lifer
- Jun 23, 2005
- 15,916
- 4,959
- 136
Seems to be. The question is why? I suspect because Putin sees him as easily manipulated, Hillary not so much.
Wall street and many others beg to differ.
Seems to be. The question is why? I suspect because Putin sees him as easily manipulated, Hillary not so much.
Clinton inherited a post Cold War world with Russia on her knees, and yet he still managed to provoke Russia into a position of paranoia. Go read up on Russia's seizing of the Pristina airfield as a slap in the face to Clinton for how he handled affairs in the Balkans.It really hasn't been too bad when GWB & the neocons weren't running it. The expansion of Nato while the Soviet Union was in disarray was huge, both unifying Europe & denying Russia those military assets. The Iran deal is a huge victory for diplomacy & the opening to Cuba long overdue. There's more, I'm sure, like the democratization of Burma.
Putin doesn't see Trump as a rational actor but rather as an incompetent, a guy who'd be in way over his head as President.
http://www.businessinsider.com/ever...hillary-clinton-russia-uranium-scandal-2015-4
Russians like the Clinton's too.
Clinton inherited a post Cold War world with Russia on her knees, and yet he still managed to provoke Russia into a position of paranoia. Go read up on Russia's seizing of the Pristina airfield as a slap in the face to Clinton for how he handled affairs in the Balkans.
Our military deployed quite frequently during the Clinton administration. We were fortunate that with the exception of Somalia, none of those deployments got shooty, discounting of course Bosnian snipers.
http://www.businessinsider.com/ever...hillary-clinton-russia-uranium-scandal-2015-4
Russians like the Clinton's too.
Conspiracy theories? It's the FBI who says Russian intelligence is behind this hacking. Is the FBI a bunch of conspiracy cranks now?
A conspiracy theory would be to suggest that the Trump campaign is directly complicit with the Russians. That I absolutely do not believe. For one thing, if his campaign was acting in concert with the Russians, he would never have publicly announced his desire for them to hack Clinton's e-mails. He'd have communicated in private, through back channels, and not called public attention to it.
If the FBI is correct that Russian intelligence is behind this hacking, what do YOU think is their motive? Bear in mind there is no evidence of hacking the RNC or other GOP concerns.
http://www.businessinsider.com/ever...hillary-clinton-russia-uranium-scandal-2015-4
Russians like the Clinton's too.
What's the allegation against Hillary Clinton? The reason this is a story is the potential that there was some quid pro quo involved: that in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation and/or the speech Bill Clinton gave in Russia, Hillary Clinton used her position as Secretary of State to make approval of this sale happen. It need not be explicit, but at the very least there has to be a connection between donations and official action that Clinton took.
What's the evidence for that allegation? There isn't any, at least not yet. The only evidence is timing: people who would benefit from the sale made donations to the foundation at around the same time the matter was before the government.
What's the evidence in Clinton's favor? Even if Clinton had wanted to make sure the sale was approved, it wouldn't have been possible for her to do it on her own. CFIUS is made up of not only the Secretary of State, but also the secretaries of Treasury, Justice, Homeland Security, Commerce, Defense, and Energy, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
The Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Labor are non-voting members, and CFIUS's work is also observed by representatives of other agencies like the National Security Council and the Office of Management and Budget. The idea that Clinton could have convinced all those officials and all those departments to change their position on the sale, even if she had wanted to, borders on the absurd.
Furthermore, the official who was the State Department's representative on CFIUS at the time, Jose Hernandez, told Time magazine that Clinton did not participate in the evaluation of this deal: "Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter," he said.
So in this case, we have no evidence of a quid pro quo, and we don't have evidence that Hillary Clinton took any action at all with regard to this sale, in favor of the interests of the donors or otherwise.

I am talking more about how military intervention in the Balkans became less a UN and more a NATO expansion exercise, which emboldened Kosovo and Montenegro to declare independence and jeopardized the fragile peace in Bosnia. It all culminated in our bombing Serbia but came very close to becoming a ground war, not to mention raising the ire of Greece and angering the Russians. The irony in the Balkans is that we sided with Muslims over orthodox Christians, yet we couldn't translate that into any political capital against Islamic fundamentalismPlease. Troops were deployed in training exercises for the most part. They're staged to not become shooty. None indicated any threat to the integrity of Russian territory. It's not like Nato lined up the guns on the Polish border.
Clinton also exploited the collapse of the Soviet system to expand Nato to nearly all Warsaw pact nations, so Russia had obvious reasons to be paranoid. That loss annihilated much of their military capability & weakened their strategic position entirely.
Russia has drawn the line on Nato expansion at Georgia & Ukraine. They're in the strategic & geopolitical position to do so unless we want to start WW3.
Truth be told, Ukrainian govt has been so astoundingly shitty since independence that the man in the street would probably be better off had they stayed in the Russian Federation. It's been great for a few people, no doubt-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_oligarchs
Warring & power plays among them is what left Putin with an opening to reclaim Crimea & its ~80% Russian population who are probably happy that he did considering all the shit going on in Kiev.
Seems to be. The question is why? I suspect because Putin sees him as easily manipulated, Hillary not so much.
Ok, is it that darn hard to lock down your servers or are they all just using 12345 as their password?
(yes, Manafort is a Russian stooge, so it would make sense)
Russia sees instability in the EU and the rest of the west as beneficial to their existence. This has been their MO in the post-soviet years.
Previously, their intercessions in international elections were exclusively in support of communist-sympathizing parties and individuals. Now, they tend to support or work in favor of whatever party offers the greatest chance of instability.
Trump is a weak lapdog almost entirely owned by Russian oligarchs who are far, far, far wealthier than he (the only entities in teh world that have been willing to lend him money in a decade).
I would actually be shocked if there were direct ties from Trump to Russian intelligence involved in these hacks (yes, Manafort is a Russian stooge, so it would make sense) because Russia has and does act on their own in these matters.
Many reasons, all of them having to do with human frailties. Arrogance, false sense of security, laziness, the need for expeditious solutions, ignorance.....about the only thing I can think of that's not emotionally related is cost factoring.
I don't know if it's just me but I personally would have had the best IT guys in the world securing my shit after the first hack if I were the Democrats. That goes 10 fold for Hillary considering all the email shit.
I don't think Trump works for them. I just think that he's such a fool that Putin prefers him over Hillary. Of the 2 Hillary is far more likely to be the tough one, Trump is so hell bent to think of himself as King Shit that he's more likely to just throw everything out with the bathwater. Including all the Alliances that keeps Russia in check.
If anything, Trump is completely ignorant of how much the Russians seem to be running things for him.
It is rather telling that the only plank at the RNC that his campaign had any interest in was that involving Crimea and US sanctioning of Russian expansion. The single plank that they got involved in and had removed from the republican party platform. This was certainly spearheaded by Mannafort and, I suppose, the overwhelming debt Trump owes to Russian oligarchs.
But obviously, Trump sees this as his doing, his party, his control, his great brain making these great decisions.
The guy is a completely brainless clown--he refuses to read anything that isn't spit out in 140 characters (apparently the only reading he has done in the last several decades), and has already offered the VP position as the actual presidential role. He is perfect for a guy like Putin: an incompetent blowhard that will sow only chaos and disorder in the most powerful country in the world and more importantly for Putin--the most powerful member of NATO.
I don't know if it's just me but I personally would have had the best IT guys in the world securing my shit after the first hack if I were the Democrats. That goes 10 fold for Hillary considering all the email shit.
A Clinton campaign spokesman said in a statement late on Friday that an analytics data program maintained by the DNC and used by the campaign and a number of other entities "was accessed as part of the DNC hack."
Problem is in this country we seem to have an issue regarding employment of the people who are very skilled at net security. Or subverting it.
So you're l33t and can hack your way into almost anything in less than a day? Cool! Oh you have an arrest record? Do your best work with a joint between your lips? There's the door.
In Russia and China that last sentence is closer to "Here's the keys to your new office, plus your signing bonus."
Until we can get over that bullshit and stop denying ourselves the use of real talent, I don't think hiring 'the best' would really be hiring the best. It's one of the reasons the Chinese have done so well looting intellectual property and military tech from us.
Your desire to always post inaccurate info always makes me smile, doesn't even sound like you read your own link. Russians do not like the Clintons, and if you have something that indicates otherwise you should post it, otherwise you're just full of shit as usual.
Hillary compared Putin to Hitler over Crimea, and when asked if she thought Bush 'saw into Putin's soul' she replied that she wasn't sure Putin even had one.
This made the Russians go absolutely fucking ballistic! Putin was livid at Hillary for that, still is. Like his orange American comrade, Putin has an easily dented ego.
Your desire to always post inaccurate info always makes me smile, doesn't even sound like you read your own link. Russians do not like the Clintons, and if you have something that indicates otherwise you should post it, otherwise you're just full of shit as usual.
Hillary compared Putin to Hitler over Crimea, and when asked if she thought Bush 'saw into Putin's soul' she replied that she wasn't sure Putin even had one.
This made the Russians go absolutely fucking ballistic! Putin was livid at Hillary for that, still is. Like his orange American comrade, Putin has an easily dented ego.
Great link! It summarizes nicely the bullshit surrounding the Russian uranium Clinton conspiracy that people like legendkiller constantly push.
However I don't think that link says what you thought it said. Lol
You are correct I didn't read it.
It is still laughable to think that Trump and Putin are in this plot together.
The only one who thinks someone said they are is you.
LOL.
I do agree that of the two Trump is an egomaniac that can be controlled easily.
