Trump favours folks who let him do what he wants and Putin certainly did that, anyone who allows Trump to screw over the poor folks is his man, see Putin…
Is he in his pocket? No… And I hate Trump more than most but he thinks he’s in no-ones pocket atm… He’s king of the world ffs and knows it.
Will he sell off America? Well yes that’s a given… To Putin? Well Yes that’s a given.
Is Putin Trumps actual Hero? Now that’s a good question I believe is true and has lead to some questionable manouvers by Team Trump and since the Russians have been throwing $ around the GOP why would they not take it, after all they believed rightly that nothing would happen.
Can you link it all together, we’ll Yes and No as its just a bunch of grifters trying as usual to steal our tax dollors and that has become an international Crime all over the world that atm most all Conservative parties seem to be best at, all the while taking massive campaign $ from the Lobby companies to fund their grifting ways.
Maybe it is all linked… And does it really matter 1 jolt? Again NOPE… because when you have the most currupt person in the world running the worlds most powerful Country we have a problem that must be removed.
The Russians have billions of stolen $ in and around the world banks that need cleaning and the Trump’s are helping them along with others and I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that they stole off the Oligarchy too. Because the Trumps just can’t help it when they have power.
This partnership may end well or it may end in a proxy war and that’s why people like GG are wrong wrt the Trump/Russia partnership…
Is collusion A partnership…Well YES I’m afraid it is Glen.
I believe people are allowed to make mistakes in life and live to see their wrong.
Please explain how the only item Trump actually insisted on adding to his 2016 campaign platform was screwing over Ukraine to the benefit of Russia.
All the rest was ghost-written by the GOP establishment. The one thing Trump wanted was to remove to provide lethal weapons to the Ukraine. He went along with everything else but he was adamant about this one thing. Tell me why.
Trump’s rhetoric has consistently indicated warmth and trust toward Russia and Putin, and Trump has also sent mixed signals about the U.S. commitment to NATO.
On the other hand, post-2014 U.S. policy aimed at Russia has chugged forward in important ways since Trump became president — despite his rhetoric.
“The rest of the executive branch and Congress have actually taken a few tough stands against Russia during the last year,” said Susan H. Allen, director of the Center for Peacemaking Practice at George Mason University’s School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution.
Wasn’t aware of this but I’ll take your word for it. One possibility is some nefarious Russian connection or vulnerability. Another is that it was impulsivity stemming from his bromance with Putin. He is entirely capable of that. It could have been anything.
The test is this: What did Russia get out of it either way? Zilch.
Still following the smoke, looking for the fire.
I think Drumpf would give the frigging nuclear launch codes to the Kremlin in return for a Trump tower in Moscow. Whether he actually did is another matter.
I could easily believe Ukraine has not yet used any US Javelin missiles against Russian tanks.
But selling those weapons is still incompatible with Trump being a Russian asset. A country can overlook a lot of static, but you sell weapons to an enemy, that they notice, that is important. Sell just one Javelin to the Palestinian Authority and see the fuss that kicks up.
The US wanted to give them to Ukraine in 2016. Trump helped stall it until 2019. During those three years Russian forces consolidated parts of Eastern Ukraine to the point where Ukraine stopped trying to regain the territory.
This article is examining a different set of measures than the one I provided. They still stand. And they were not Congressional actions.
Yes, Congress and the Democrats may well pursue more confrontation with Russia than Drumpf. But that doesn’t mean he’s a Russian agent.
I can easily believe that “It’s all in spite of him, not at his behest.” Quite possibly the Pentagon and State Department had epic tantrums to force a harder line against Russia. That still means Drumpf is a piss-poor Russian agent for going along with it. The Kremlin should get its money back.
Trump is evil, he tears children away from parents and puts them in cages to satisfy deplorables. I’m baffled that people get all frothy because there are questions about one facet of his evilness.
And we know this was not due to policy debates in Washington? I mean we have Obama refusing to send arms, so we have a ready explanation for the delay – there were differences in national security circles. This is getting far afield from proving something that needs extraordinary evidence. It is also very conspiratorial to considerable every imaginable link between events and secret plotting to be solid evidence.
Many Republicans have been demanding the Obama administration provide a more robust response to Russia’s incursions in Ukraine.
So Republicans trying to insert arms for Ukraine into the platform are differing with Drumpf in that he is too much like Obama. These differences are still within the Overton window of respectable debate, no pee tape required.
Listen, when the Chinese nationalists were losing their civil war in the late 1940s to MaoZedong, the Truman adminstration had to decide whether to send in troops or something. They concluded that Chiang Kai-shek and the KMT nationalists were a hopelessly lost cause, impossible to save, and let them collapse. Refusing to save the KMT easily supports a narrative of Truman being an agent or “soft on communism.” A lot of rightists said as much. I think Anne Coulter said it again with that stupid book Decades of Treason or whatever it was. The Republicans raised the slogan “Who Lost China?” and hammered the Democrats with it for a generation. But Truman’s decision had absolutely nothing to do with being an agent or conciliatory towards communism. His administration started the frigging Cold War.
Point being, there are all sorts of possible explanations for things, yet our inventive minds create all sorts of parallels and faux coincidences. Claiming someone is an actual agent requires very direct evidence, you need more than just “that decision helped the enemy.”
The accusations that Trump is some sort of agent are comically similar to Cold War red baiting.
The point isn’t that Trump is a Russian “agent”, basically it was asserted that Russia may have leverage over him and his campaign had repeated questionable contacts with Russians and benefitted from their interference. Iirc Greenwald treated all of this like crazy talk. Now Trump has been personally deferential to Putin and his foreign policy decisions have repeatedly benefitted Russia and somehow this shows that Greenwald was right because there’s no peepee tape yet? I have no idea whether the leverage claim has an iota if truth to it but Trump certainly behaves as if it does and that’s my entire point.
