Jump to content


Photo

The NRA and Russia


  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

#1 bmurph44

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 527 posts
  • Joined: 06-December 17

Posted 17 July 2018 - 07:08 AM

Red flags everywhere, time for new leadership and direction.

#2 Raw Power

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 885 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 16

Posted 17 July 2018 - 07:31 AM

It's not a "nothingburger". There are too many un-connected sources for there to be nothing to it.

 

 

The problem isn't just with the NRA though, this kind of dark money is coming into all sorts of campaigns, from all sorts of places. I don't believe it's ONLY the NRA getting money from forces outside of the US. Citizens United opened the floodgates for this kind of thing to happen, and that was a huge mistake, and these are the consequences of it.



#3 ScottFM

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined: 09-January 17

Posted 17 July 2018 - 10:06 AM

It's not a "nothingburger". There are too many un-connected sources for there to be nothing to it.

 

 

The problem isn't just with the NRA though, this kind of dark money is coming into all sorts of campaigns, from all sorts of places. I don't believe it's ONLY the NRA getting money from forces outside of the US. Citizens United opened the floodgates for this kind of thing to happen, and that was a huge mistake, and these are the consequences of it.

You are right, it is not a "nothingburger" at all. I've been reading the indictment and it is chilling! This was an attack on American Democracy and it appears that the NRA was complicit or at the very least dupped! 


--

Beer, it's the reason I get out of bed every afternoon!

 

 


#4 2smartby1/2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 17 July 2018 - 10:34 AM

This is big...especially after the summit presser. 

 

I don't even know where this rabbit hole will go. 



#5 2smartby1/2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 17 July 2018 - 10:37 AM

https://www.politico...closures-690200

 

I mean...really?  So now donors do not need to be disclosed?  



#6 chislinger

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,226 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 13

Posted 17 July 2018 - 11:16 AM

It's not a "nothingburger". There are too many un-connected sources for there to be nothing to it.
 
 
The problem isn't just with the NRA though, this kind of dark money is coming into all sorts of campaigns, from all sorts of places. I don't believe it's ONLY the NRA getting money from forces outside of the US. Citizens United opened the floodgates for this kind of thing to happen, and that was a huge mistake, and these are the consequences of it.

Citizens United simply affirmed that the 1st Amendment is still in force. Free speech is a good thing.

Edited by chislinger, 17 July 2018 - 11:17 AM.

"I'm not worried about following the U.S. Constitution." - Washington County, Alabama Judge Nick Williams

#7 Raw Power

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 885 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 16

Posted 17 July 2018 - 12:27 PM

 

It's not a "nothingburger". There are too many un-connected sources for there to be nothing to it.
 
 
The problem isn't just with the NRA though, this kind of dark money is coming into all sorts of campaigns, from all sorts of places. I don't believe it's ONLY the NRA getting money from forces outside of the US. Citizens United opened the floodgates for this kind of thing to happen, and that was a huge mistake, and these are the consequences of it.

Citizens United simply affirmed that the 1st Amendment is still in force. Free speech is a good thing.

 

 

No, money is not speech.

 

Money is bribes for politicians to vote the way someone with money wants.

Trump promised to drain the swamp. This IS the swamp.



#8 chicagoresident

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 16

Posted 17 July 2018 - 04:28 PM

It's not a "nothingburger". There are too many un-connected sources for there to be nothing to it.
 
 
The problem isn't just with the NRA though, this kind of dark money is coming into all sorts of campaigns, from all sorts of places. I don't believe it's ONLY the NRA getting money from forces outside of the US. Citizens United opened the floodgates for this kind of thing to happen, and that was a huge mistake, and these are the consequences of it.

Not only dark money in but dark goods out.

How great would it be for the Russian small arms industry to begin American exports again through the striking down of a single Bush era executive action?

It's a good deal for those of us that want a real ak74. It's an even bigger deal for one of the biggest global arms resellers, the CIA. If you think this is tinfoil name one administration that hasn't been caught gun running red handed.

People ask questions when sanitized AR15's show up in places they aren't supposed to, but nobody bat's an eye when it's a sanitized Ak47.
https://www.nytimes....icials-say.html

The theft and resale of the arms including Kalashnikov assault rifles, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades have led to a flood of new weapons available on the black arms market.

The CIA can't get around import bans without attracting attention so they broker purchases of torch cut cold war hardware (IE parts kits) through mainstream consumer import and remanufacturing companies then rebuy and resell or give to other places in the world. https://wikileaks.or...MALA1013_a.html

Imagine how much easier it would be for the CIA to have an unlimited supply of brand new Russian military hardware along with the plausible deniability because Russia does the same thing.

Just a theory, but given past history of all parties involved it checks out.

Edited by chicagoresident, 17 July 2018 - 04:34 PM.


#9 ljnowel

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 427 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 13

Posted 19 July 2018 - 01:48 AM


 

It's not a "nothingburger". There are too many un-connected sources for there to be nothing to it.
 
 
The problem isn't just with the NRA though, this kind of dark money is coming into all sorts of campaigns, from all sorts of places. I don't believe it's ONLY the NRA getting money from forces outside of the US. Citizens United opened the floodgates for this kind of thing to happen, and that was a huge mistake, and these are the consequences of it.

Citizens United simply affirmed that the 1st Amendment is still in force. Free speech is a good thing.
 


 
No, money is not speech.
 
Money is bribes for politicians to vote the way someone with money wants.

Trump promised to drain the swamp. This IS the swamp.

money is speech, and corporations are people. The Supreme Court has decided that.

#10 2A4Cook

    Old and Cranky

  • Members
  • 3,142 posts
  • Joined: 17-April 14

Posted 19 July 2018 - 04:21 AM

Now, THIS crap is really crazy! The only reason the Russian government would want to "infiltrate" the NRA would be to disarm Americans. Americans' culture of marksmanship, self-defense and gun ownership would make for a weaker America, an America less able to defend itself against foreign aggressors. THAT is in Russia's interests; not propping up the NRA. Now, this so-called "spy" story. This is some goofy girl that is lone-gunning wanting to be a female 007 in her fantasy world, and Russian intelligence apparatchiks are indulging her because, hey, if it causes crap for the U.S., why stop her?

This is in the same vein as that Russia wouldn't prefer someone who wants to cripple to U.S. energy industry, and whom they have already bribed to get their hands on 20% of our uranium -- to make nukes to point at us -- as U.S. President, over someone who wants to expand our energy industry and export energy to Europe, cutting Putin's throat economically. Russian leaders use policy and tactics to promote Russian interests, as opposed to certain Americans who use their positions to cripple America for personal gain (Shrillary) or to advance their leftist agenda (the Messiah). CNN and MSNBC are great at brainwashing mindless lemmings.

Edited by 2A4Cook, 19 July 2018 - 04:24 AM.


#11 chicagoresident

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 16

Posted 19 July 2018 - 07:59 AM

Now, THIS crap is really crazy! The only reason the Russian government would want to "infiltrate" the NRA would be to disarm Americans. Americans' culture of marksmanship, self-defense and gun ownership would make for a weaker America, an America less able to defend itself against foreign aggressors. THAT is in Russia's interests; not propping up the NRA. Now, this so-called "spy" story. This is some goofy girl that is lone-gunning wanting to be a female 007 in her fantasy world, and Russian intelligence apparatchiks are indulging her because, hey, if it causes crap for the U.S., why stop her?
This is in the same vein as that Russia wouldn't prefer someone who wants to cripple to U.S. energy industry, and whom they have already bribed to get their hands on 20% of our uranium -- to make nukes to point at us -- as U.S. President, over someone who wants to expand our energy industry and export energy to Europe, cutting Putin's throat economically. Russian leaders use policy and tactics to promote Russian interests, as opposed to certain Americans who use their positions to cripple America for personal gain (Shrillary) or to advance their leftist agenda (the Messiah). CNN and MSNBC are great at brainwashing mindless lemmings.

Really, the NRA thing and Uranium one is all about lifting sanctions and Russian company's ability to do business in the US. The misnomer about the Uranium one deal is none of that Uranium is going back to Russia directly (not saying it couldn't happen through intermediaries, but Russia has access to plenty of Uranium).

It's being sold to other 3rd parties. If anything it's done for profits and to raise energy prices.

Russia doesn't want to see the outright collapse of the US, they just want to do more business here.

I say "Russia" rather then naming specific businesses, if you're an oligarch in Russia its because your close to Putin. Otherwise he'll take your wealth and put you in jail. When the Soviet Union fell all the government controlled conpanies were divided up among the old Soviet elites.
Source from the left
https://www.nytimes....rump-tower.html
http://thehill.com/p...russian-nuclear
Source from the right
http://alt-right.com...edia-narrative/

You will never see indictment of Trump or his people (maybe a pardon for low level offenses). It's the same reason the Clinton people like Bill, Hillary, or Podesta (brothers with Tony Podesta, Manafort's business partner) won't get indicted.

Almost all major foreign countries are invested heavily in our media, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Isreal, the EU countries, and major global corporate leaders. The bias in media is made to sell you something.

The swamp will never be drained, it's too lucrative. The left VS right divide is just people shilling for business interests that don't necessarily benefit them. Personally I make good money the way it is, I just don't want to see the collapse of our financial system because people got too greedy.

Edited by chicagoresident, 19 July 2018 - 08:30 AM.


#12 chislinger

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,226 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 13

Posted 19 July 2018 - 09:34 AM

 

It's not a "nothingburger". There are too many un-connected sources for there to be nothing to it.
 
 
The problem isn't just with the NRA though, this kind of dark money is coming into all sorts of campaigns, from all sorts of places. I don't believe it's ONLY the NRA getting money from forces outside of the US. Citizens United opened the floodgates for this kind of thing to happen, and that was a huge mistake, and these are the consequences of it.

Citizens United simply affirmed that the 1st Amendment is still in force. Free speech is a good thing.
 
 
No, money is not speech.
 
Money is bribes for politicians to vote the way someone with money wants.
Trump promised to drain the swamp. This IS the swamp.
Money is and always has been speech. A big part of why freedom of the press is in the 1A is because printing press were being taxed and licensed to limit speech. Would you support a law that says you can't spend more than $10 a year on firearms and ammo on the grounds that money isn't a firearm and therefore no 2A violation?

Edited by chislinger, 19 July 2018 - 09:34 AM.

"I'm not worried about following the U.S. Constitution." - Washington County, Alabama Judge Nick Williams

#13 Archondan

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 39 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 17

Posted 19 July 2018 - 11:19 AM

Money is and always has been speech. A big part of why freedom of the press is in the 1A is because printing press were being taxed and licensed to limit speech. Would you support a law that says you can't spend more than $10 a year on firearms and ammo on the grounds that money isn't a firearm and therefore no 2A violation?

 

 

I think another way to look at is money is about control and power which is exerted over all forms of speech.



#14 chislinger

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,226 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 13

Posted 19 July 2018 - 11:36 AM

Money is and always has been speech. A big part of why freedom of the press is in the 1A is because printing press were being taxed and licensed to limit speech. Would you support a law that says you can't spend more than $10 a year on firearms and ammo on the grounds that money isn't a firearm and therefore no 2A violation?

 
 
I think another way to look at is money is about control and power which is exerted over all forms of speech.
The bottom line is that Congress tried to limit political speech by limiting the money that could be spent on it. Under the rules that were found unconstitutional billionaires could spend unlimited funds, and so could political parties and politicians. If people who weren't rich wanted to amplify their political opinions by pooling their money together (AKA "forming a corporation") they were limited to just $50K.

The law was designed to give the very wealthy and the politicians a monopoly on political speech in the critical period before an election, thus cementing their power. It scares the heck out of me thst 4 justices went along with this scheme as well as a whole bunch of citizens ski reallyt have no understanding of what the case was about. It had nothing to do with campaign donations, and it didn't declare that corporations were people. It affirmed the 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech, and the right of ordinary citizens to pool their money together to counter the outsized influence of the political parties and the ultra-rich.

Best in mind the genesis of the lawsuit was when the government banned s movie from being distributed because it had political content. Is that really what the opponents of the ruling wanted, giving the government the power to censor movies, books, television, radio, the internet, newspapers, etc. based on political content?

Edited by chislinger, 19 July 2018 - 11:37 AM.

"I'm not worried about following the U.S. Constitution." - Washington County, Alabama Judge Nick Williams

#15 Archondan

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 39 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 17

Posted 19 July 2018 - 12:33 PM

I agree with you, it was a bad decision that was used to cerement the power based of the wealthy and further their ability to drown out the power of the people.



#16 chislinger

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,226 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 13

Posted 19 July 2018 - 01:34 PM

I agree with you, it was a bad decision that was used to cerement the power based of the wealthy and further their ability to drown out the power of the people.

I don't think you understood my post at all. It was the right decision and restored power to the people.

Edited by chislinger, 19 July 2018 - 01:34 PM.

"I'm not worried about following the U.S. Constitution." - Washington County, Alabama Judge Nick Williams

#17 2smartby1/2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 19 July 2018 - 01:46 PM

Now, THIS crap is really crazy! The only reason the Russian government would want to "infiltrate" the NRA would be to disarm Americans. Americans' culture of marksmanship, self-defense and gun ownership would make for a weaker America, an America less able to defend itself against foreign aggressors. THAT is in Russia's interests; not propping up the NRA. Now, this so-called "spy" story. This is some goofy girl that is lone-gunning wanting to be a female 007 in her fantasy world, and Russian intelligence apparatchiks are indulging her because, hey, if it causes crap for the U.S., why stop her?

This is in the same vein as that Russia wouldn't prefer someone who wants to cripple to U.S. energy industry, and whom they have already bribed to get their hands on 20% of our uranium -- to make nukes to point at us -- as U.S. President, over someone who wants to expand our energy industry and export energy to Europe, cutting Putin's throat economically. Russian leaders use policy and tactics to promote Russian interests, as opposed to certain Americans who use their positions to cripple America for personal gain (Shrillary) or to advance their leftist agenda (the Messiah). CNN and MSNBC are great at brainwashing mindless lemmings.

Did you read it?

The Russians wanted to infiltrate and influence politics and decisions.  She said that the easiest path was through of all places, the NRA. 

Then again, think about how much the NRA has changed over the last 50 years (especially the last 25 or so). 

 

Russia wants to crumble America from within without ever having to fire a shot.  Have all Americans shoot each other (or themselves) instead. 



#18 Archondan

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 39 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 17

Posted 19 July 2018 - 01:54 PM

 

I agree with you, it was a bad decision that was used to cerement the power based of the wealthy and further their ability to drown out the power of the people.

I don't think you understood my post at all. It was the right decision and restored power to the people.

 

 

 

You're right I did read that wrong.



#19 chicagoresident

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 16

Posted 19 July 2018 - 08:50 PM

Liberals have all the sudden started living in a cold war fantasy about the threat of Russia on America. It's so backwards if you think about it. The cold War was about gaining allies/territory through spreading/forcing the communist ideology. Yet the Obama era CIA director (who accused Trump of treason) voted for a communist, Bernie Sanders and their new darling candidate Alexandria Ocasio-cortez are both socialists.
https://www.cnn.com/...vote/index.html

They literally don't even believe the lies out of their own mouths, but they expect you to.

Russia has 2 goals, to get sanctions lifted and to delegitimize our elections to make Putin look like a democratically elected official (to argue for sanctions to be lifted). They don't want to see the death of America, they want to see some American cash. And like every other company and country they know you gotta spend money on the government to make money in America.

Edited by chicagoresident, 19 July 2018 - 08:52 PM.


#20 2smartby1/2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 20 July 2018 - 09:41 AM

What difference does it make if we are armed in this day an age?

 

 

I have a safe full of AR-15's...they are pretty useless against nukes, planes, tanks, chemical warfare, ect.    But more importantly (and realistically), no other country is invading the U.S. like some Red Dawn scenario.    It would be far easier and cheaper (the Russians JUST DID THIS to another country) to attack us the way do are doing it now.  Cyber-warfare (or hit our power grids and economy) and influence manipulation.  Turn everyone against each other while working their way into positions of influence politically.   Look how tribal we are already.   How many memes and hashtags are created and pushed by Russians?  And they are doing it to both the right AND left. 

 

A difference of opinion on how another country is ATTACKING US and what their motive is makes me a lefty infiltrator?  What am I infiltrating? 

 

I would say Maria (Mariia) Butina meets the actual definition of an infiltrator, that is who your ire should be pointed at IMO.  



#21 chicagoresident

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 16

Posted 20 July 2018 - 10:33 AM

What difference does it make if we are armed in this day an age?
 
I have a safe full of AR-15's...they are pretty useless against nukes, planes, tanks, chemical warfare, ect.   

In an insurgency, defending foreign or domestically overthrowing a tyrant, small arms make a huge difference. A tyrant is not going to use jets, chemical weapons, nukes, etc. against it's own people. If a leader destroyed a country's means of production to put down an insurrection there would be nothing left of the country to lead.

I know you are going to retort "but what about Syria". Well, think long and hard about that and the mainstream media's dialog on the reason for that war.

Which is the point I want to draw you to. The mainstream media often gets the who what where when and sometimes how correct. You can often confirm information that's generally accepted as facts by corroborating between multiple media sources.

Media often misses the "why", or often has different "why's" across different media. Media is heavily editorialized to make you believe certain things that benefit the groups invested in a particular media.

Find out who owns what media publication (majority and large share holders) and it will reveal the intentions of "why". Also look into voice of America and the repeal of the Smith-Mundt Modernization (repeal) Act in 2013 and realize that the US government is also adding their own editorialized bias to domestic media (IE propaganda).

We are already heavily infiltrated by everyone but the average American citizen. It's not about bringing the US to a violent end, it's about getting paid. Follow the money. That greed could bring the US crashing down, but that really doesn't benefit the infiltrators.

A difference of opinion on how another country is ATTACKING US and what their motive is makes me a lefty infiltrator?  What am I infiltrating? 
 
I would say Maria (Mariia) Butina meets the actual definition of an infiltrator, that is who your ire should be pointed at IMO.

No offense, but you may need to up your critical thinking game. You probably do it subconsciously, but you quote verbatim heavily editorialized talking points from certain persuasions of mainstream media. You may be biased to accept certain opinions as facts based on the narrow band of media you consume. I'd recommend stepping outside your comfort zone and start thinking for yourself rather then parroting other people's propaganda. All news is "fake news", it's up to you to piece together the reality.

You can be a leftist who likes guns, nothing wrong with that. Heck, I wish there were more, I'd welcome them. I accept there are certain jobs and financial reasons people vote left that may differ from my motivations to vote right. Critical thinking involves recognizing biases all around.

Unfortunately most leftists lack the critical thinking skills to challenge their party's dialog on guns (along with their party's media propaganda). We are just encouraging you to be smarter then that.

Edited by chicagoresident, 20 July 2018 - 11:02 AM.


#22 2smartby1/2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 20 July 2018 - 11:09 AM

"You can be a leftist who likes guns, nothing wrong with that. Heck, I wish there were more, I'd welcome them. Unfortunately most leftists lack the critical thinking skills to challenge their party's dialog on guns (along with their party's media propaganda). "

 

You just skipped the whole conversation on the actual spy under arrest to bash "leftists" and get int a debate about the mainstream media.

 

Let me repeat, there is SPY under arrest. 

 

We all just watch the surreal exchange on TV between Trump and Putin.    Yet it is "lefties lack critical thought, and mainstream media" in a thread about the NRA and Russia. ...

 

This is called an echo chamber. 



#23 chicagoresident

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 16

Posted 20 July 2018 - 11:26 AM

Don't take this personally because my intention is not to attack but debate. In the spirit of critical thinking I'm pushing you to question your own biases.

"You can be a leftist who likes guns, nothing wrong with that. Heck, I wish there were more, I'd welcome them. Unfortunately most leftists lack the critical thinking skills to challenge their party's dialog on guns (along with their party's media propaganda). "
 
You just skipped the whole conversation on the actual spy under arrest to bash "leftists" and get int a debate about the mainstream media.
 
Let me repeat, there is SPY under arrest. 
 
We all just watch the surreal exchange on TV between Trump and Putin.    Yet it is "lefties lack critical thought, and mainstream media" in a thread about the NRA and Russia. ...
 
This is called an echo chamber.

People are questioning you because you've parroted mainstream media antigun propaganda 3 times (by my count). It's not worth anyone's time debunking because they aren't your own opinions.

I don't dispute the spy in the NRA dialog. I only am disputing what you think is the intention of the spy. It's not to collapse the US, it's to get US dollars. I debunked that in the 1st post I made in this thread.

The lie about trying to collapse the US is leftist cold War propaganda to accuse Trump of being treasonous and justify impeachment.

Is Trump a scumbag businessman turned politician that's funelling money foreign and domestic in pay to play? Yup, in agreement. Find one politician that hasn't done exactly what Trump did. Not an echo chamber.

If we want to throw around the word treason I'd be the first to argue every politician should be put up against the wall. But the current system pays most of us pretty good money so I'm also not advocating for collapse or revolution.

Real question, do you believe a democratically elected president should be impeached? This is accepting the non biased fact that both parties involved unfairly competed in the election. What's not known and probably won't be revealed is whether it was by foreign proxy business interests, unknowingly, or deliberately.
https://twitter.com/...6640758785?s=19

Would you agree that an impeachment with the installation of a non democratically elected official of the opposing party would have massive consequences on our income and stability of the country? Because that's literally the 2018 DNC platform, even if it's a fantasy.

Realpolitiks here, who's worse for the US? The Russians for wanting to make US dollars and get a piece of our economy and GDP? Or the DNC for wanting to undermine what's left of the illusion of democracy?

Edited by chicagoresident, 20 July 2018 - 12:02 PM.


#24 2smartby1/2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 20 July 2018 - 01:10 PM

Don't take this personally because my intention is not to attack but debate. In the spirit of critical thinking I'm pushing you to question your own biases.

"You can be a leftist who likes guns, nothing wrong with that. Heck, I wish there were more, I'd welcome them. Unfortunately most leftists lack the critical thinking skills to challenge their party's dialog on guns (along with their party's media propaganda). "
 
You just skipped the whole conversation on the actual spy under arrest to bash "leftists" and get int a debate about the mainstream media.
 
Let me repeat, there is SPY under arrest. 
 
We all just watch the surreal exchange on TV between Trump and Putin.    Yet it is "lefties lack critical thought, and mainstream media" in a thread about the NRA and Russia. ...
 
This is called an echo chamber.

People are questioning you because you've parroted mainstream media antigun propaganda 3 times (by my count). It's not worth anyone's time debunking because they aren't your own opinions.

I don't dispute the spy in the NRA dialog. I only am disputing what you think is the intention of the spy. It's not to collapse the US, it's to get US dollars. I debunked that in the 1st post I made in this thread.

The lie about trying to collapse the US is leftist cold War propaganda to accuse Trump of being treasonous and justify impeachment.

Is Trump a scumbag businessman turned politician that's funelling money foreign and domestic in pay to play? Yup, in agreement. Find one politician that hasn't done exactly what Trump did. Not an echo chamber.

If we want to throw around the word treason I'd be the first to argue every politician should be put up against the wall. But the current system pays most of us pretty good money so I'm also not advocating for collapse or revolution.

Real question, do you believe a democratically elected president should be impeached? This is accepting the non biased fact that both parties involved unfairly competed in the election. What's not known and probably won't be revealed is whether it was by foreign proxy business interests, unknowingly, or deliberately.
https://twitter.com/...6640758785?s=19

Would you agree that an impeachment with the installation of a non democratically elected official of the opposing party would have massive consequences on our income and stability of the country? Because that's literally the 2018 DNC platform, even if it's a fantasy.

Realpolitiks here, who's worse for the US? The Russians for wanting to make US dollars and get a piece of our economy and GDP? Or the DNC for wanting to undermine what's left of the illusion of democracy?

 

Dude, you actually telling what my opinion is.   "because they aren't your own opinions."

 

I think Russia wants to more than what you've stated.   They would love to increase their wealth and power, hurt the West (that would include us), and weaken NATO.  I think Putin wants to make Russia "the" superpower. 

 

If you are asking should an elected POTUS be impeached?  Yes (technically it has already happened, just not convicted).   So the answer you last question, I think it is far more than Russia "just" wanting dollars....thus, it is worth effort. 



#25 2smartby1/2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 20 July 2018 - 01:26 PM

I'm trying "My Media" and manage attachments...but nothing is working.  I'm trying a free hosting site, but when I preview it, it looks like something is being attached at the end of the pics.  When I was a mod on a different forum, we used to always look for odd links like that and delete them as spam.  I'm getting this error "You are not allowed to use that image extension on this community."

 

 

thumbnail_1.jpg
 
thumbnail.jpg
thumbnail_2.jpg
 
I deleted the tag on the end and it worked (for now...not sure if I have to create an account or how long the pics are hosted).  Sorry for the crappy pic, IPADS's do not have flashes.  I'll post a better one I've taken when the wife wasn't home. 

Edited by 2smartby1/2, 20 July 2018 - 01:36 PM.


#26 2smartby1/2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 20 July 2018 - 01:34 PM

Better pic of what is in the safe. 

 

 

thumbnail_3.jpg



#27 chicagoresident

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 16

Posted 20 July 2018 - 01:51 PM

I think Russia wants to more than what you've stated.   They would love to increase their wealth and power, hurt the West (that would include us), and weaken NATO.  I think Putin wants to make Russia "the" superpower. 
 
If you are asking should an elected POTUS be impeached?  Yes (technically it has already happened, just not convicted).   So the answer you last question, I think it is far more than Russia "just" wanting dollars....thus, it is worth effort.

Beyond impeachment, do you believe that for Trump's people's shenanigans of accepting both money and talking about lifting tarrifs with the Russians (these are generally recognized as facts) he deserves to be removed from office, along with his co-conspirator Mike Pence and the presidency given to the speaker of the house?

How does Putin make money if the US collapses? Remember who owns our debt, if we go down we take the following countries with us. NATO countries spend money on Russian energy because a bunch of EU hippies convinced EU countries that nuclear power was bad. If we go down they go down and they can't heat or power their houses.
https://www.statista...-treasury-debt/

Another thing to consider, Russia has less debt then the US due to other countries not extending Russia credit.
https://kurdeconomy....t-loan-2014.png

Economically it makes sense to lift sanctions on Russia, even if ethically it might not (depending on your opinion if Russia and if Crimea is an invasion or a civil war).

As messed up as it sounds US debt is one of the greatest peacemakers of the world. If we go down we take a lot of people's fiat currency with us, including all the countries who have spent money to increase Russia's GDP. Blame our politicians for putting us in this situation, but here we are, we need to make the best of it.

A bigger threat to the US is those who hold our debt. If we keep sanctions against Russia and lose a trade war with China then China will swap US debt with extending Russia credit. This increases our interest rates while inflation steadily climbs. This is what actual financial collapse looks like.

So choosing between warming up to Russia who's no better or worse then the US and making our economy better VS. financial collapse due to our own politicians reckless spending and debt swapping with foreign countries what's worse (knowing full well our politicians won't address the debt thing)?

Also what country stands to benefit if we along with the EU/NATO countries take a hardline against Russia (especially on energy) and continue to ramp up sanctions?
trump-medal-saudi-arabia.jpg
obama-saudi-arabia_47286438.jpg
Remember when it comes to where you get your news follow the money to find the bias.
http://business.time...-twitter-stake/

Edited by chicagoresident, 20 July 2018 - 02:15 PM.


#28 2A4Cook

    Old and Cranky

  • Members
  • 3,142 posts
  • Joined: 17-April 14

Posted 20 July 2018 - 04:05 PM

"You can be a leftist who likes guns, nothing wrong with that. Heck, I wish there were more, I'd welcome them. Unfortunately most leftists lack the critical thinking skills to challenge their party's dialog on guns (along with their party's media propaganda). "
 
You just skipped the whole conversation on the actual spy under arrest to bash "leftists" and get int a debate about the mainstream media.
 
Let me repeat, there is SPY under arrest. 
 
We all just watch the surreal exchange on TV between Trump and Putin.    Yet it is "lefties lack critical thought, and mainstream media" in a thread about the NRA and Russia. ...
 
This is called an echo chamber.


First of all, it's a kid playing 007 charged with failure to register as a foreign agent-- she is not charged with espionage, therefore, is is NO "spy under arrest."

Second, yoy just show up here suddenly spouting MSNBC talking points while claiming to "have a closet full of AR's." I think you have a closet full of "Infiltrating Second Amendment Organizations for Dummies."

#29 fxdpntc

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 13

Posted 20 July 2018 - 06:06 PM

^^^

I’m just saying that that is a saying the left would use, and it’s a BS argument. It would not be in a hostile nation’s best interest to have an armed populace

Seeing anti 2A posts from several or more posters, on a CCL Forum is a little Twilight Zoney for me.


NRA Life Member

ISRA Life Member

USPSA Life Member

USMC 68-69


#30 2smartby1/2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 414 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 21 July 2018 - 11:58 PM

 

I think Russia wants to more than what you've stated.   They would love to increase their wealth and power, hurt the West (that would include us), and weaken NATO.  I think Putin wants to make Russia "the" superpower. 
 
If you are asking should an elected POTUS be impeached?  Yes (technically it has already happened, just not convicted).   So the answer you last question, I think it is far more than Russia "just" wanting dollars....thus, it is worth effort.

Beyond impeachment, do you believe that for Trump's people's shenanigans of accepting both money and talking about lifting tarrifs with the Russians (these are generally recognized as facts) he deserves to be removed from office, along with his co-conspirator Mike Pence and the presidency given to the speaker of the house?

How does Putin make money if the US collapses? Remember who owns our debt, if we go down we take the following countries with us. NATO countries spend money on Russian energy because a bunch of EU hippies convinced EU countries that nuclear power was bad. If we go down they go down and they can't heat or power their houses.
https://www.statista...-treasury-debt/

Another thing to consider, Russia has less debt then the US due to other countries not extending Russia credit.
https://kurdeconomy....t-loan-2014.png

Economically it makes sense to lift sanctions on Russia, even if ethically it might not (depending on your opinion if Russia and if Crimea is an invasion or a civil war).

As messed up as it sounds US debt is one of the greatest peacemakers of the world. If we go down we take a lot of people's fiat currency with us, including all the countries who have spent money to increase Russia's GDP. Blame our politicians for putting us in this situation, but here we are, we need to make the best of it.

A bigger threat to the US is those who hold our debt. If we keep sanctions against Russia and lose a trade war with China then China will swap US debt with extending Russia credit. This increases our interest rates while inflation steadily climbs. This is what actual financial collapse looks like.

So choosing between warming up to Russia who's no better or worse then the US and making our economy better VS. financial collapse due to our own politicians reckless spending and debt swapping with foreign countries what's worse (knowing full well our politicians won't address the debt thing)?

Also what country stands to benefit if we along with the EU/NATO countries take a hardline against Russia (especially on energy) and continue to ramp up sanctions?
Remember when it comes to where you get your news follow the money to find the bias.
http://business.time...-twitter-stake/

 

To the first part of your question, depending on the outcome of the multiple investigations/suits taking place...Yes, and it will end up with the Speaker of the House.   

 

As for easing sanctions.  No. Considering what Putin has done as of late (meddling in 2016, current meddling, nerve agent in the UK, Crimea, shooting down an airline, etc....), it is a non-starter.  Outside of a few GOP'ers in the House, I doubt anyone else in the House or Senate on either side of the isle would consider easing sanctions. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users