Putin does not want war, but he wants to gain advantages (economic and influence) with other countries. — Relativist

What other country does NOT want to do this?

The severs have not, to this day, been analysed by government intel agencies.

This doesn’t strike you as peculiar?

You seem to be completely out of touch with reality, but I'm suspecting that you're just acting that way to make us think you're an average American. You really came here to this forum of brotherly and sisterly love to sew seeds of conflict on behalf of the Russian Empire. Admit it! — frank

Damned both ways. But hey, this does seem to about identifying foes. Not merely those with other facts and disagreements but actual foes.

So please feel free to explain what you mean by “reality”? Are you suggesting reality is what the intel state says it is?

Who are you trolling for? Let's take an outrageous hypothetical example (I find outrageous examples are sometimes a good lens with which to view a main point): I come up alongside you and say in clear and unambiguous terms that unless you pay me a lot and often, I will do horrible things to you, up to and including - and so on. Your argument amounts to your paying the extortion so that we might both be prosperous, and being right to do so! — tim wood

I’m not seeing your point.

It is the right thing for the president to engage with another leader regarded as adversary.

It is what he tried with North Korea and it is even more important with Russia given their greater nuclear capability.

now that he's reversed himself and says he does blame Putin, I presume you will reverse too, and complement him on his magnificent volte-face, which you supported all along. Quick now before he changes his mind again. — Baden

He hasn’t blamed Putin for the dnc “hack”.

He is trying, possibly failing, to get his adversaries to back off.

What is important is this supposed evidence about a dnc hack of emails by who to WikiLeaks.

Evidence proposed doesn’t stack up and the servers involved were not inspected by the FBI. In fact the FBI were denied access to the dnc “hacked” sever BY the dnc.

The Clinton cabal will do anything to hide from this guy’s evidence.

http://charlesortel.com/

So, sure none of us want that but it wasn't going to happen no matter who was President. And it certainly wasn't going to be caused by Trump pointing out to Putin that he wasn't happy with Russia's cyber attacks on the US. It was a low bar which he managed to slide under for no apparent reason — Baden

It appears to me that US and UN opposition to Trump would like conflicts to break out to try to paint Trump as a failure.

Also, conflicts are on the cards to detract from the actual evidence of actual treason and collusions of the Clinton cabal.

I suggest that what Putin wants Trump to do is to not want war."
Putin does not want war, but he wants to gain advantages (economic and influence) with other countries. Putin got his money's worth these last couple weeks by Trump's treatment of allies — Relativist

That’s right. No war means prosperity for most.

Whereas warmongers see war as prosperity for a tiny few.

I simply hope the midterms will be a clear sign of that movement. — tim wood

More disappointment on the way. I don’t say that as some Trump supporter. It is just how things are going.

Trump’s opposition is weak. Now when one takes into account all the negative press on Trump, and then he still wins, it really shows just how weak his opposition is.

So the question should be, why is his opposition so weak?

Well, because they have nothing real to offer.

Unfortunately, Putin doesn't have to be a master to outfox Trump, he only has to be... conscious. A ten-year old child could learn the beat-Trump-on-foreign-policy strategy: flatter his ego and then sit back and watch as he does everything you want him to do. — Baden

I suggest that what Putin wants Trump to do is to not want war.

That should serve everybody. Well, everybody that matters.

What you are doing is no different than religious proselytizing, and on some fourms that is considered ban worthy spam. You show little to no interest in any of the philosophical discourse. Your main interest seems to spread pro Trump spam — Jeremiah

You’re entitled to opinion. I regard your mindless anti trump proselytising as spam.

What's weird is you can't admit your almost-exclusive function here is to promote Trump — Baden

It appears that my function is to moderate politically indocrinated commentators such as yourself.

Case in point. NOW you have moderated to introducing the word “almost”.

My function is functioning successfully.

Anyone ever heard of the goings on called McCarthyism?

I think there is a touch of that virus here.

“Check out”

Check put benkai’s comment box.

I reply to responses. Therefore I attempt to maintain the dialog asked of me by others. You are doing that right now. Weird eh?

They hacked into Hillary's non-secured emails, which was a crime in itself — Hanover

Insert evidence here >…………………<

“But it's odd that you came here apparently exclusively to promote Trump”

You highlight what is the difference between an indictment of someone and of whether that means that someone is guilty.

There is evidence that I have commented on other topics.

Now you also say “talks too much about Trump”. There are two ongoing threads on Trump. Many have contributed to them. And I started neither of them.

My advice is do not start a thread if you don’t want responses.

So commenting on threads others start is odd?

How odd.

1. With regard to the law (prime importance) — Relativist

Which law? If it is of “prime importance” then you would need to state which law.

Was he speeding?

Русский Тролль говорит, что — Jeremiah

Maybe I'm not a Russian troll but just straight Russian.

Indeed, but some people think they are being racist by saying 'black guy'. — GreyScorpio

As long as I know why I use the term I don't care what another tells me why I use it.

You talk about Trump A LOT. I checked your posting history. — Jeremiah

And? Your point?

However, the slaves that were taken from Africa to America have the same pigmented skin - darker skin - hence they contextualized this name to correspond with this particular group of people with this colour of skin. African or not. — GreyScorpio

So the label "African American" appears to correlate directly with slavery of the past.

I think the label "American" for a darker pigmented American brother and sister should do, for the sake of inclusiveness.

I would never use the Af-Am term. If I was asked to describe the look of a darker pigmented American chap I would just say "A black guy".

However, even 'academically correct' names, such as African American — GreyScorpio

Yeah, I wonder how many of our darker pigmented American brothers and sisters from the Caribbean feel about being seen as African American.

All you do is talk about Trump. — Jeremiah

These are the first 3 sentences of this entire discussion thread.

"I'm clueless. What would motivate Trump to try to squash Comey's investigation? Apparently Trump thinks he committed some offense, but what?"

What name stands out most, you think?

All you do is talk about Trump. — Jeremiah

So my response to that would mean I would be talking about Trump, yeah?

You are quite weird.

"Race" is used ideologically.

I think it does, and it is perhaps the single greatest reason that Race (if it exists) — Marcus de Brun

Essentially race doesn't effectively exist. It is ideologies.

Irrelevant, the Rothschilds were not the cause of the 2008 economic crisis. — Metaphysician Undercover

It's an ongoing system. Do you think "economic crisis 2008" randomly sprang up in 2008?

And that economic problem was caused by foreigners or American greed? — Metaphysician Undercover

Are the Rothschilds regarded as American?

Stzrok of dubious character because of his affair — Akanthinos

I never referred to Strzok’s affair and nor do I care who he was sextually humping.

Of which the deficit in 2008 doubled by 2016.

And you have your head in your arse.

Opinions welcome.

that you can't even conceive of the possibility he did something wrong — Relativist

Wrong with regard to what? Everyone has done something wrong whether caught out or not.

What about the many indictments? Are they fiction? — Relativist

Indictments are indictments. What they say are neither fiction or truth.

Then I have no idea why you used Finland and racist in the same short post.

I did answer the question. It just happened to not be your answer, that the dnc was not behind the trump jr/Russian journalist meeting.

What kind of tactic is that, to break an agreement with your closest ally on the claim that they are a threat to national security?

The present American economic problems are not caused by foreigners, they are caused by the greed of American money handlers, bankers, brokers, insurance companies and the lot. — Metaphysician Undercover

American money handlers etc blah blah?

It's a global cabal. There is no "ally of America" when one looks at the current Canadian "leadership".

Trudeau is merely just another global bankers cabal stooge, as Obama was (and is).

America went a long time ago. Some, or many, just want it back.

Of course.

Mueller is the current face of a protection racket. To protect "business as usual".

The "business" does not like anything too unpredictable.

They are not so able to predict the Trump character, whether he be either good or bad for the average, everyday American

But "business as usual" is, in my view, definitely not good for the everyday American. "Swamp" is an accurate term whoever uses it.

Are you a Russian cyber troll? — Jeremiah

This is merely an expression of insecurity. What it is saying is that you FEEL trolled.

Your feelings are not going to be, however, a reflection of reality. Of what is actually real or true. Of what is actually happening.

The other clue as to insecure feelings expressed is this us vs them dialectic. It is as though "Russian" is some mysterious alien and therefore foreboding shadowy creature thing while one's own assumed identity must always be on the side of right merely for being familiar and customary.

It is this type of typical insecurity which buys easily into media and authoritarian narratives which are essentially designed to accentuate the split mindedness of sheeples for the greater ease of political/militaristic actors toward manipulation and society engineering of such plastic subjects.