Politics REAGAN'S SEC. OF STATE ON TRUMP'S PRESIDENCY - Must watch!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Trump is no Reagan.

#neverTrump talking points.
 
Speaking of being duped, it seems like we've seen this October Surmise conspiracy theory before and I have no reason to believe it's going to turn out any different this time.

When Reagan defeated Carter in 1980, the loony left made up this really complicated conspiracy theory that the republican candidate schemed with a foreign power to rig the election against the Democrat. Not only was there this absolutely bogus claim about collusion between the Reagan campaign and the Iranians (our "enemies" at the time), but there was a claim about the Democratic campaign being basically hacked (a "stolen" briefing book). Another similarity is Gary Sick was one of the main undoubted source for the conspiracy back then, now it's some british secret agent.

How'd it turn out back then? Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate and went on their typical fishing expeditions. After it was all said and done, they reported that the conspiracy theory had no merit whatsoever.

The "main stream" media is all over this today as if there's something to it. They were, likewise, behind pushing the conspiracy theory back then.

It wasn't until some honest left wing reporters examined the alleged facts, found the whole thing to be bogus, and reported on it, that the conspiracy theory unraveled. I am dubious there are honest left wing reporters anymore.



You can read about it here:
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/4249

Two congressional inquiries then confirmed these conclusions. The Senate stated that"by any standard, the credible evidence now known falls far short of supporting the allegation of an agreement between the Reagan campaign and Iran to delay the release of the hostages" (Committee on Foreign Relations 1992, 115). The House report went further, declaring that"There was no October Surprise agreement ever reached." It found"wholly insufficient credible evidence" that communication took place between the Reagan campaign and the Iranian government and"no credible evidence" of an attempt by the campaign to delay the hostages' release. The report also expressed concern that" certain witnesses may have committed perjury during sworn testimony" (Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 53; 7-8; 239).
 
Denny Crane said:
Speaking of being duped, it seems like we've seen this October Surmise conspiracy theory before and I have no reason to believe it's going to turn out any different this time.

When Reagan defeated Carter in 1980, the loony left made up this really complicated conspiracy theory that the republican candidate schemed with a foreign power to rig the election against the Democrat. Not only was there this absolutely bogus claim about collusion between the Reagan campaign and the Iranians (our "enemies" at the time), but there was a claim about the Democratic campaign being basically hacked (a "stolen" briefing book). Another similarity is Gary Sick was one of the main undoubted source for the conspiracy back then, now it's some british secret agent.

How'd it turn out back then? Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate and went on their typical fishing expeditions. After it was all said and done, they reported that the conspiracy theory had no merit whatsoever.

The "main stream" media is all over this today as if there's something to it. They were, likewise, behind pushing the conspiracy theory back then.

It wasn't until some honest left wing reporters examined the alleged facts, found the whole thing to be bogus, and reported on it, that the conspiracy theory unraveled. I am dubious there are honest left wing reporters anymore.



You can read about it here:
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/4249

Two congressional inquiries then confirmed these conclusions. The Senate stated that"by any standard, the credible evidence now known falls far short of supporting the allegation of an agreement between the Reagan campaign and Iran to delay the release of the hostages" (Committee on Foreign Relations 1992, 115). The House report went further, declaring that"There was no October Surprise agreement ever reached." It found"wholly insufficient credible evidence" that communication took place between the Reagan campaign and the Iranian government and"no credible evidence" of an attempt by the campaign to delay the hostages' release. The report also expressed concern that" certain witnesses may have committed perjury during sworn testimony" (Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 53; 7-8; 239).
Click to expand...

I love a good surmise conspiracy.
 
Denny Crane said:
You can read about it here:
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/4249

Two congressional inquiries then confirmed these conclusions. The Senate stated that"by any standard, the credible evidence now known falls far short of supporting the allegation of an agreement between the Reagan campaign and Iran to delay the release of the hostages" (Committee on Foreign Relations 1992, 115). The House report went further, declaring that"There was no October Surprise agreement ever reached." It found"wholly insufficient credible evidence" that communication took place between the Reagan campaign and the Iranian government and"no credible evidence" of an attempt by the campaign to delay the hostages' release. The report also expressed concern that" certain witnesses may have committed perjury during sworn testimony" (Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 53; 7-8; 239).
Click to expand...

This is awesome!

You're making a point about how there is no Russian BS going on in our election by citing an article from someone who writes for the Russian controlled news agency, Sputnik.
 
It is my opinion that Reagan did the best at Foreign relations of any President in the last 100 years. Perhaps longer. But then the competition for best ranges from not good to sucks other than Reagan. There are a whole host of critics taking shots a Trump already after only two months on the job. Even Dick Chaney for crap sake, talking about Russia committing an act of War.
Geez, some body take him hunting or something!

I give Trump an A at this point for not taking all the Russian bait and hate in this country. Let see how things go with Korea, maybe give it a year. Nothing says Trump can't be better than Reagan. Not a thing.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
This is awesome!

You're making a point about how there is no Russian BS going on in our election by citing an article from someone who writes for the Russian controlled news agency, Sputnik.
Click to expand...

I quoted the federation of american scientists and the village voice, too. They all seem to agree on the facts.

EDIT: turns out the history news network is a non-profit registered in Washington State and partnered with George Washington University's History Department.

Russian controlled news agency? That's BS.
 
Denny Crane said:
I quoted the federation of american scientists and the village voice, too. They all seem to agree on the facts.

EDIT: turns out the history news network is a non-profit registered in Washington State and partnered with George Washington University's History Department.

Russian controlled news agency? That's BS.
Click to expand...

I said the author of the article writes for Sputnik. I didn't say the website you got it from was Russian controlled.
 
Denny Crane said:
I quoted the federation of american scientists and the village voice, too. They all seem to agree on the facts.

EDIT: turns out the history news network is a non-profit registered in Washington State and partnered with George Washington University's History Department.

Russian controlled news agency? That's BS.
Click to expand...

And it's nice to have you back! So how was Siberia?
 
Trump will never be Reagan and Reagan was an actor who starred in movies with a monkey. Trump had a reality show and lives in his ego like a vampire bat on blood. At least LBJ talked to you when he took a shit. He was real.
 
https://theintercept.com/2017/03/16...-to-expect-evidence-of-trumprussia-collusion/

Key Democratic Officials Now Warning Base Not to Expect Evidence of Trump/Russia Collusion


FROM MSNBC POLITICS shows to town hall meetings across the country, the overarching issue for the Democratic Party’s base since Trump’s victory has been Russia, often suffocating attention for other issues. This fixation has persisted even though it has no chance to sink the Trump presidency unless it is proven that high levels of the Trump campaign actively colluded with the Kremlin to manipulate the outcome of the U.S. election — a claim for which absolutely no evidence has thus far been presented.

The principal problem for Democrats is that so many media figures and online charlatans are personally benefiting from feeding the base increasingly unhinged, fact-free conspiracies — just as right-wing media polemicists did after both Bill Clinton and Obama were elected — that there are now millions of partisan soldiers absolutely convinced of a Trump/Russia conspiracy for which, at least as of now, there is no evidence. And they are all waiting for the day, which they regard as inevitable and imminent, when this theory will be proven and Trump will be removed.

upload_2017-3-30_9-21-4.png

Key Democratic officials are clearly worried about the expectations that have been purposely stoked and are now trying to tamp them down. Many of them have tried to signal that the beliefs the base has been led to adopt have no basis in reason or evidence.

The latest official to throw cold water on the MSNBC-led circus is President Obama’s former acting CIA chief Michael Morell. What makes him particularly notable in this context is that Morell was one of Clinton’s most vocal CIA surrogates. In August, he not only endorsed Clinton in the pages of the New York Times but also became the first high official to explicitly accuse Trump of disloyalty, claiming, “In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.”

But on Wednesday night, Morell appeared at an intelligence community forum to “cast doubt” on “allegations that members of the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.” “On the question of the Trump campaign conspiring with the Russians here, there is smoke, but there is no fire at all,” he said, adding, “There’s no little campfire, there’s no little candle, there’s no spark. And there’s a lot of people looking for it.”

Obama’s former CIA chief also cast serious doubt on the credibility of the infamous, explosive “dossier” originally published by BuzzFeed, saying that its author, Christopher Steele, paid intermediaries to talk to the sources for it. The dossier, he said, “doesn’t take you anywhere, I don’t think.”

Morell’s comments echo the categorical remarks by Obama’s top national security official, James Clapper, who told Meet the Press last week that during the time he was Obama’s DNI, he saw no evidence to support claims of a Trump/Russia conspiracy. “We had no evidence of such collusion,” Clapper stated unequivocally. Unlike Morell, who left his official CIA position in 2013 but remains very integrated into the intelligence community, Clapper was Obama’s DNI until just seven weeks ago, leaving on January 20.

Perhaps most revealing of all are the Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee — charged with investigating these matters — who recently told BuzzFeed how petrified they are of what the Democratic base will do if they do not find evidence of collusion, as they now suspect will likely be the case. “There’s a tangible frustration over what one official called ‘wildly inflated’ expectations surrounding the panel’s fledgling investigation,” BuzzFeed’s Ali Watkins wrote.
 
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-17/democrats-trump-russia-conspiracy-campaign-collapses

The Democrats' Trump-Russia Conspiracy Campaign Collapses

Media figures have similarly begun trying to tamp down expectations. Ben Smith, the editor-in-chief of BuzzFeed, which published the Steele dossier, published an article yesterday warning that the Democratic base’s expectation of a smoking gun “is so strong that Twitter and cable news are full of the theories of what my colleague Charlie Warzel calls the Blue Detectives — the left’s new version of Glenn Beck, digital blackboards full of lines and arrows.” Smith added: “It is also a simple fact that while news of Russian actions on Trump’s behalf is clear, hard details of coordination between his aides and Putin’s haven’t emerged.” And Smith’s core warning is this:

Trump’s critics last year were horrified at the rise of “fake news” and the specter of a politics shaped by alternative facts, predominantly on the right. They need to be careful now not to succumb to the same delusional temptations as their political adversaries, and not to sink into a filter bubble which, after all, draws its strength not from conservative or progressive politics but from human nature.

And those of us covering the story and the stew of real information, fantasy, and — now — forgery around it need to continue to report and think clearly about what we know and what we don’t, and to resist the sugar high that comes with telling people exactly what they want to hear.​

For so long, Democrats demonized and smeared anyone trying to inject basic reason, rationality, and skepticism into this Trump/Russia discourse by labeling them all Kremlin agents and Putin lovers. Just this week, the Center for American Progress released a report using the language of treason to announce the existence of a “Fifth Column” in the U.S. that serves Russia (similar to Andrew Sullivan’s notorious 2001 decree that anyone opposing the war on terror composed an anti-American “Fifth Column”), while John McCain listened to Rand Paul express doubts about the wisdom of NATO further expanding to include Montenegro and then promptly announced: “Paul is working for Vladimir Putin.”

But with serious doubts — and fears — now emerging about what the Democratic base has been led to believe by self-interested carnival barkers and partisan hacks, there is a sudden, concerted effort to rein in the excesses of this story. With so many people now doing this, it will be increasingly difficult to smear them all as traitors and Russian loyalists, but it may be far too little, too late, given the pitched hysteria that has been deliberately cultivated around these issues for months. Many Democrats have reached the classic stage of deranged conspiracists where evidence that disproves the theory is viewed as further proof of its existence, and those pointing to it are instantly deemed suspect.
 
In a related story, WikiLeaks recently released a large number of CIA documents that describe how the CIA uses similar techniques and technologies as the Russians have been accused of using to allegedly hack the DNC et al. One glaring thing about the leak:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/world/europe/wikileaks-cia-hacking.html?_r=0

Another program described in the documents, named Umbrage, is a voluminous library of cyberattack techniques that the C.I.A. has collected from malware produced by other countries, including Russia. According to the WikiLeaks release, the large number of techniques allows the C.I.A. to mask the origin of some of its attacks and confuse forensic investigators.​

I'm not sure we can definitively conclude the Russians did hack the DNC and others. If the CIA can mask the origin of attacks and confuse forensic investigators, so can hackers. Or some elements in the CIA could have as well. Both Assange and the Russians do deny the source of Clinton campaigns and Podesta's damning emails was Russia.
 
Denny Crane said:
I'm not sure we can definitively conclude the Russians did hack the DNC and others
Click to expand...
Well Putin is killing off anybody who could expose him so there's that....with the new culture of so called "fake news" nobody can carry on a valid investigation anymore anyway....#ThanksDonald....pay no attention to the man behind the curtain for I am the great and powerful OZ!!
 
riverman said:
Well Putin is killing off anybody who could expose him so there's that....with the new culture of so called "fake news" nobody can carry on a valid investigation anymore anyway....#ThanksDonald....pay no attention to the man behind the curtain for I am the great and powerful OZ!!
Click to expand...

Why do you believe it's Russians killing of anyone? It's not like our guys don't do those things and lie about what they do.
 
Denny Crane said:
Why do you believe it's Russians killing of anyone
Click to expand...
I actually don't believe anyone...I'm in the cheap seats on the sidelines watching the game....Putin has a long history of eliminating his competition...no coincidence from the point of speculation....moles exist...double agents, plants, all sorts of clandestine operatives..always have. I think the narrative that leads to suspicions between Trump's administration and Putins crew is sort of glaringly apparent at this point. I'd guess that in a chess match, Putin beats Trump in about 6 moves.
 
riverman said:
I actually don't believe anyone...I'm in the cheap seats on the sidelines watching the game....Putin has a long history of eliminating his competition...no coincidence from the point of speculation....moles exist...double agents, plants, all sorts of clandestine operatives..always have. I think the narrative that leads to suspicions between Trump's administration and Putins crew is sort of glaringly apparent at this point. I'd guess that in a chess match, Putin beats Trump in about 6 moves.
Click to expand...

I don't believe anyone either. This Clapper guy, who the democrats seem to love, flat out lied to congress and the people about the NSA surveillance program. He's become famous for it.



The sanctions are still in place, no? That kind of kills the narrative.

upload_2017-3-30_11-55-7.png
 
Denny Crane said:
This Clapper guy, who the democrats seem to love, flat out lied to congress and the people about the NSA surveillance program[/MEDIA]
Click to expand...

Yeah, but Denny! He said there was no evidence of Trump collaborating with Russia! They don't Hear that one.
 
MarAzul said:
He said there was no evidence of Trump collaborating with Russia!
Click to expand...
Trump doesn't do his own dirty work...there is evidence concerning Trump's cabinet and campaign team members...enough to raise flags and cause this investigation....both parties have demanded it...a general lack of honesty and trust is what fuels these things....the longer it drags on the less evidence will exist...one Russian is already dead who was a witness. It doesn't take an agenda or imagination to see that this administration is dysfunctional out of the gate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
The Fairness Doctorine- Socializing the Airwaves
2
Replies
48
Views
4K
Real
Real
yankeesince59
Politics Bob Woodward's new book...
4 5 6
Replies
160
Views
8K
yankeesince59
yankeesince59
SlyPokerDog
Politics Donald Trump's sister says he has 'no principles', 'you can't trust him' and has been 'lying'
Replies
24
Views
1K
Lanny
Lanny
PapaG
List of New Taxes in Senate Healthcare Bill
2 3
Replies
86
Views
5K
barfo
barfo
SlyPokerDog
Politics Roger Stone said Trump's presidency was the 'greatest single mistake in American history'
Replies
5
Views
537
e_blazer
e_blazer

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top