Bus Driver

Trump/Putin Meeting advice

Recommended Posts

I think he should do exactly what he's been doing - Get nothing meaningful done and then declare a resounding, glorious victory that plays to his base. Since there won't be any media or other diplomats present, he can say anything he wants. And you know he will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bus, you don't usually ask stupid questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He'll tell them to not do it again.

I'm satisfied.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he gets a hard on when guys who make mob bosses piss in their pants let him sit at their table. Putin's gonna use some KY (flattery) and trump's gonna beg for more.He might get Russia to "denuclearize" like NK, to give up their nukes after verifying the rest of the world has done so.

Big win red hats, winning bigly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mike G said:

He'll tell them to not do it again.

I'm satisfied.

 

Hey, it worked for Obama, except for the outcome.  The FBI fucked that up and are trying to make amends now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

Hey, it worked for Obama, except for the outcome.  The FBI fucked that up and are trying to make amends now.

I seriously wonder if you are capable of responding to a post about President Trump without invoking "Obama", or "Hillary", or the "Democrats".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I seriously wonder if you are capable of responding to a post about President Trump without invoking "Obama", or "Hillary", or the "Democrats".

I seriously wonder if you really give a shit about actual issues or just like whining about Trump.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

I seriously wonder if you really give a shit about actual issues or just like whining about Trump.

 

That would be a "no"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

I seriously wonder if you really give a shit about actual issues or just like whining about Trump.

Way to avoid the point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Saorsa said:
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

I seriously wonder if you are capable of responding to a post about President Trump without invoking "Obama", or "Hillary", or the "Democrats".

I seriously wonder if you really give a shit about actual issues or just like whining about Trump.

It’s an interesting idea, shall we try and keep count of the times you do this?

Should we include downright avoidance, cherry picking and complete lack of comprehension as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mad said:

It’s an interesting idea, shall we try and keep count of the times you do this?

Should we include downright avoidance, cherry picking and complete lack of comprehension as well?

Don't forget whataboutism

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mad said:

It’s an interesting idea, shall we try and keep count of the times you do this?

Should we include downright avoidance, cherry picking and complete lack of comprehension as well?

Do what you do.  Turn every thread into personal attacks on those you disagree with.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Do what you do.  Turn every thread into personal attacks on those you disagree with.

 

Saorsa, 

I realize you are old and presumably becoming feeble.  What was suggested is just an accounting, not a personal attack.  Are you going to eat your jello?

Note to others, presumably was a last minute edit from obviously. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Saorsa said:

I seriously wonder if you really give a shit about actual issues or just like whining about Trump.

 

Actually Trump is the President and is having an important meeting with yet another dictator representing YOU. That should be pretty serious in your mind. Seems to be considered so to most sentient people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Actually Trump is the President and is having an important meeting with yet another dictator representing YOU. That should be pretty serious in your mind. Seems to be considered so to most sentient people.

To Saorsa the only issue that matters is cheerleading for Team R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cal20sailor said:

Saorsa, 

I realize you are old and presumably becoming feeble.  What was suggested is just an accounting, not a personal attack.  Are you going to eat your jello?

Note to others, presumably was a last minute edit from obviously. 

Tell ya what.

Go check out every post I ever started.  Start with the last one

Take A look at my participation in the NATO or Pipeline discussion.

I am discussing the issue, I do not bring Trump or anything he has said, tweeted or whatever.  He usually comes up in a response to me where I am accused of supporting him because my own views may parallel his.  I don't respond in support of Trump, I respond in support of my own views.  If someone brings Trump into the discussion, that's not my problem, it's theirs.

  • In regard to NATO, what is the point in being the major contributor to an alliance when your 'allies' are in the process of surrendering?
  • What is the point in having a border an immigration laws if you do not secure the border or follow the laws?
  • What is the point of spending billions on "climate change" when every proposed solution involving CO2 is ineffective unless the entire human race actually does something beyond signing international agreements and then ignoring them?

Those are national issues.  I like the idea of avoiding foreign entanglements and think that at some point they need to be untangled.

I support the right of anyone to love anyone they damn well please.  I also I respect the right of other folks not to like it and don't think the state has any role in marriage whatsoever.  Simply make it a matter of contract law between any number of people.

I support the right of any one to do whatever they want to their body.  I don't think they have the right to expect me to pay for it.

Nobody should be forced to pretend that they like or accept anything they find abhorrent.  But, they should expect to be tolerant and receive tolerance in return.  So long as no one raises a hand against another, dislike, even hate is acceptable.

I'm long past writing long, measured responses which are immediately dismissed without thought; so brief messages are the order of the day.  Fucking around on a BBS populated by fools can be amusing.  It's even more fun when you can lead them by the nose.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Fucking around on a BBS populated by fools can be amusing.  It's even more fun when you can lead them by the nose.

Why the fuck do you expect to be respected or taken seriously when you admit to being a troll? How about you just fuck off?

What's shittier than saying "oh, take me seriously, here are my positions, and oh by the way - I like trolling the fuck out of you guys!"

Fuck you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Tell ya what.

Go check out every post I ever started.  Start with the last one

Take A look at my participation in the NATO or Pipeline discussion.

I am discussing the issue, I do not bring Trump or anything he has said, tweeted or whatever.  He usually comes up in a response to me where I am accused of supporting him because my own views may parallel his.  I don't respond in support of Trump, I respond in support of my own views.  If someone brings Trump into the discussion, that's not my problem, it's theirs.

  • In regard to NATO, what is the point in being the major contributor to an alliance when your 'allies' are in the process of surrendering?
  • What is the point in having a border an immigration laws if you do not secure the border or follow the laws?
  • What is the point of spending billions on "climate change" when every proposed solution involving CO2 is ineffective unless the entire human race actually does something beyond signing international agreements and then ignoring them?

Those are national issues.  I like the idea of avoiding foreign entanglements and think that at some point they need to be untangled.

I support the right of anyone to love anyone they damn well please.  I also I respect the right of other folks not to like it and don't think the state has any role in marriage whatsoever.  Simply make it a matter of contract law between any number of people.

I support the right of any one to do whatever they want to their body.  I don't think they have the right to expect me to pay for it.

Nobody should be forced to pretend that they like or accept anything they find abhorrent.  But, they should expect to be tolerant and receive tolerance in return.  So long as no one raises a hand against another, dislike, even hate is acceptable.

I'm long past writing long, measured responses which are immediately dismissed without thought; so brief messages are the order of the day.  Fucking around on a BBS populated by fools can be amusing.  It's even more fun when you can lead them by the nose.

 

What about the jello?

 

At one time I thought you were thoughtful and then you became a one-note Trumpeter.  

PS  Don't take this place seriously.  We're all a bunch of wannabe actors playing our alter egos. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Come on, Vladimir, I'm doing my best to fuck up NATO like I promised. I'd really appreciate it if you could see your way clear to kill just a few journalists and TV comedians for me. OK, just one please maybe? As a favour?  Please sir?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Do what you do.  Turn every thread into personal attacks on those you disagree with.

 

There’s no attacking, just waiting for you to answer a direct question without a deflection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mad said:

There’s no attacking, just waiting for you to answer a direct question without a deflection. 

I don't see a lot of direct questions.  I see a lot of fishing.  Like "what about Trump ....".  As a lot have pointed out, he doesn't seem to take firm positions on anything.  He's fishing for small changes that aren't hard coded into laws or treaties.  Folks who demand rigidity are either looking for a fight until they get their way or fear change and evolution of a social structure.

I've said before that I see most issues on a continuum, I don't like hard coding my opinion or anyone else's to be an absolute right or wrong.  Once that starts I just leave the topic.  Sometimes I leave because any discussion has dropped into silly one liners posted without thought or just to have the last word as more and more minutia is thrown out.

Is pointing out that Europe is becoming increasingly dependent on Russia for it's energy supplies a deflection from the need for NATO?  Suppose I pointed out that there is the threat of a strike in the Norwegian oil industry?  Would that relate to the energy supply or NATO? 

My positions do no sit on a line that runs only left or right.  They are a point defined by  multiple vectors and as the components of those vectors change, so does my opinion of what it means.  You might compare it to sailing where you trim your sails based on multiple specific items like wind speed and direction, current speed and direction, and desired course and obstacles, and pointing ability of your vessel. 

Those who must have a linear placement will ultimately measure me at some point along a line but it is one where I am seldom on.  To use another sailing analogy, If you are on a windward leg, you may well be on the lay line occasionally  but that is a transient event.  You are only on that line as you tack across it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Saorsa said:

I don't see a lot of direct questions.  I see a lot of fishing.  Like "what about Trump ....".  As a lot have pointed out, he doesn't seem to take firm positions on anything.  He's fishing for small changes that aren't hard coded into laws or treaties.  Folks who demand rigidity are either looking for a fight until they get their way or fear change and evolution of a social structure.

I've said before that I see most issues on a continuum, I don't like hard coding my opinion or anyone else's to be an absolute right or wrong.  Once that starts I just leave the topic.  Sometimes I leave because any discussion has dropped into silly one liners posted without thought or just to have the last word as more and more minutia is thrown out.

Is pointing out that Europe is becoming increasingly dependent on Russia for it's energy supplies a deflection from the need for NATO?  Suppose I pointed out that there is the threat of a strike in the Norwegian oil industry?  Would that relate to the energy supply or NATO? 

My positions do no sit on a line that runs only left or right.  They are a point defined by  multiple vectors and as the components of those vectors change, so does my opinion of what it means.  You might compare it to sailing where you trim your sails based on multiple specific items like wind speed and direction, current speed and direction, and desired course and obstacles, and pointing ability of your vessel. 

Those who must have a linear placement will ultimately measure me at some point along a line but it is one where I am seldom on.  To use another sailing analogy, If you are on a windward leg, you may well be on the lay line occasionally  but that is a transient event.  You are only on that line as you tack across it.

 

Following up on one of these points (Europe dependence upon Russian energy sources) how do you feel about what I feel are similar areas of vulnerabilities which I feel threaten America's national security:

America's fiscal dependence upon China: our debt recently (2014) that country now "owns" 21% of the 6 Trillion that is foreign held, which is about half of what is publicly held. This is up from 6% earlier this century, and steadily increasing. 

Donald Trump's personal reliance upon Russian capital and Jared Kushner's financial entanglements with Saudi and Qatari sovereign and individual funds. Were it not for foreign investments, both of these major architects of current American foreign and fiscal policy would be penniless.

If you are willing to charge our allies with vulnerability to foreign manipulation, don't our own leaders deserve the same scrutiny?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

Way to avoid the point. 

It's what he does.

When you are a fanatical ideologue it's your best option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Those who must have a linear placement will ultimately measure me at some point along a line but it is one where I am seldom on.  To use another sailing analogy, If you are on a windward leg, you may well be on the lay line occasionally  but that is a transient event.  You are only on that line as you tack across it.

Nice analogy - for a guy I've never seen post anything on any of the sailing forums.

In your case though you seem to be firmly stuck on a deep starboard reach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

America's fiscal dependence upon China: our debt recently (2014) that country now "owns" 21% of the 6 Trillion that is foreign held, which is about half of what is publicly held. This is up from 6% earlier this century, and steadily increasing. 

 

OK, this is in general terms because our debt is dealt with by a variety of instruments. 

I don't see us as dependent on China financially.  The bonds they hold are not a problem.  It appears that China only holds about 20% of the bonds held by foreigners and all combined (6.3 Trillion) are pretty small compared to the total 21 Trillion outstanding.  The Bonds China holds are not like US Savings bonds that most folks are familiar with.  The treasury won't buy them back on demand.  They need to be held to maturity before the Treasury pays them off.  They can be sold in the financial markets though and if China wants the cash they need to find a buyer.  El Capitan is not collateral.

The new bonds we will need to issue to whoever wants them to payoff the matured bonds currently held by someone are a different issue.  Those can be bought by anybody so if China doesn't want them somebody else will.  As long as the US seems politically and economically stable someone will buy the bonds we issue.  How much we have to pay in interest is another story. 

The national security problem is the debt.  Not who holds the instruments.  In some ways it might even be considered good that foreigners hold some our government debt because that frees US capital for private investment.  In a way you could see it as our balance of payments deficit being invested in America.  That doesn't mean I think it's a good thing to be as deeply in debt as we are.

The greater national security problem (in my view) from the balance of payments deficit is the part invested in our Treasuries, it is the part that China is investing in the New Silk Road and other ventures allowing them to achieve some level of economic primacy in a lot of the world.  NOT political, economic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Nice analogy - for a guy I've never seen post anything on any of the sailing forums.

In your case though you seem to be firmly stuck on a deep starboard reach.

Whether you've seen me post or not might depend on which boards you frequented when I was an active sailor.  In the Cruising World board I was involved in a lot of sailing and cruising discussions.

I wasn't aware that it was necessary to establish sailing credentials for a political cesspit.  Will this do?

webN5807.JPG

There are more but you aren't worth the trouble.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Donald Trump's personal reliance upon Russian capital and Jared Kushner's financial entanglements with Saudi and Qatari sovereign and individual funds. Were it not for foreign investments, both of these major architects of current American foreign and fiscal policy would be penniless.

 

To this point, I don't actually care all that much.  In case you are unaware, the Russian Oligarchs are everywhere and investing in stuff.  Trump is just a part of it and not a large part at that.  He is a real estate developer and that's what they invest in all around the world.  Should you find any actual evidence of anything feel free to present it but innuendo is inadequate.

Paris

London

Italy (because rome alone brought up too much about Roman Abramovich)

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

To this point, I don't actually care all that much.  In case you are unaware, the Russian Oligarchs are everywhere and investing in stuff.  Trump is just a part of it and not a large part at that.  He is a real estate developer and that's what they invest in all around the world.  Should you find any actual evidence of anything feel free to present it but innuendo is inadequate.

Paris

London

Italy (because rome alone brought up too much about Roman Abramovich)

 

Hmmm. Ducked the question a bit. The question isn't how much of overall Russian oligarch investment goes to Donald Trump, it is how much Trump got out of debt by relying on Russian rubles, and how beholden that might make him to Putin's influence. There is a pattern of Trump needing to be bailed out by others during his "career", and he no longer enjoys the trust and respect of US banks, who have declined to finance his recent projects. He therefore had to turn to foreign money, and the proportion of that requirement which is Russian should be relevant to patriots. We deserve to know if our leaders are financially dependent upon individual foreigners.

Your answer regarding China and US debt was excellent, btw. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Hmmm. Ducked the question a bit. The question isn't how much of overall Russian oligarch investment goes to Donald Trump, it is how much Trump got out of debt by relying on Russian rubles, and how beholden that might make him to Putin's influence. There is a pattern of Trump needing to be bailed out by others during his "career", and he no longer enjoys the trust and respect of US banks, who have declined to finance his recent projects. He therefore had to turn to foreign money, and the proportion of that investment which is Russian should be relevant to patriots.

Your answer regarding China and US debt was excellent, btw. Thanks.

What's this?  Rational discourse?   Off with 'is 'ead!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Is pointing out that Europe is becoming increasingly dependent on Russia for it's energy supplies a deflection from the need for NATO? 

 

Nope. It's just a lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Hmmm. Ducked the question a bit. The question isn't how much of overall Russian oligarch investment goes to Donald Trump, it is how much Trump got out of debt by relying on Russian rubles, and how beholden that might make him to Putin's influence. There is a pattern of Trump needing to be bailed out by others during his "career", and he no longer enjoys the trust and respect of US banks, who have declined to finance his recent projects. He therefore had to turn to foreign money, and the proportion of that requirement which is Russian should be relevant to patriots. We deserve to know if our leaders are financially dependent upon individual foreigners.

there was an interesting piece on Trump Tower Toronto in the financial times yesterday: https://www.ft.com/trumptoronto a quote from it that applies to his political philosophy as well "Donald doesn't do due diligence". Which leads you with the impression that at best Donald deals with a bunch of sketchy/sleazy characters and doesn't care that they are sketchy and sleazy.

they also point out that at the time financing was arranged for the project initially Trump crowed about it as a vote of confidence in him & Trump org personally, but they now say they had nothing to do with financing and no relation to it. A typically convenient Trump double standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Hmmm. Ducked the question a bit. The question isn't how much of overall Russian oligarch investment goes to Donald Trump, it is how much Trump got out of debt by relying on Russian rubles, and how beholden that might make him to Putin's influence. There is a pattern of Trump needing to be bailed out by others during his "career", and he no longer enjoys the trust and respect of US banks, who have declined to finance his recent projects. He therefore had to turn to foreign money, and the proportion of that requirement which is Russian should be relevant to patriots. We deserve to know if our leaders are financially dependent upon individual foreigners.

Your answer regarding China and US debt was excellent, btw. Thanks.

In terms of the US, no one man matters.  Trump can't push the big red button without Mattis giving the OK.

My point was that Russian Oligarchs are involved in real estate investment all over the world.  Trump has been involved in real estate for years.

Given those two facts some point of intersection would be expected.  But, I suspect you would find that the bank makes a lot of commercial real estate loans to a lot of people and tracing the loaned money back to any individual depositor would be problematic. 

Why do you assume that it is some sort of conspiracy?  Surely you or someone would have more definitive proof by now, this has been going on since before the election.  The burden of proof is on the accuser.  Bring out what you have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Nope. It's just a lie.

Europe is becoming increasingly dependent on Russia for their energy needs. 

That's a fact.  Calling it a lie is a wonderful display of your ignorance.

https://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/eu-even-more-dependent-on-russian-gas-1.695131

http://energypost.eu/europe-increasingly-dependent-oil-imports-russia/

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Energy_production_and_imports

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps Europe could increase drilling Brent sea crude and supplement with Iranian oil.

sadly Russia is the only practical/reliable  provider of Natural gas.  They can’t trust the US for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

2015? way to bring the facts, troll.

The first one that you clipped was 2018 dimwit, I guess that's why you dumped it in the quote.

Here, let me post it again.  https://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/eu-even-more-dependent-on-russian-gas-1.695131

The others were 2015 and 2016.  I didn't bother looking for 2017 because the cite you clipped called it a record.  It's clear that the dependence on her Russian masters by Merkel has been going on for some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Addressing the matter seriously given the events of today Trump should call off the meeting. It’s the patriotic thing to do. 

If he goes ahead it should at the very least, not be one on one so details of the meeting can be leaked.

Otherwise Putin is going to roll Trump like a fat girl in flour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

The first one that you clipped was 2018 dimwit, I guess that's why you dumped it in the quote.

No shit Troll? Congrats on googling up some facts for your position. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Saorsa said:

The first one that you clipped was 2018 dimwit, I guess that's why you dumped it in the quote.

Here, let me post it again.  https://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/eu-even-more-dependent-on-russian-gas-1.695131

The others were 2015 and 2016.  I didn't bother looking for 2017 because the cite you clipped called it a record.  It's clear that the dependence on her Russian masters by Merkel has been going on for some time.

Lie. Lie. Lie. You state dependence on Russia for energy, then cite statistics for gas. Lie. Lie. Lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a question.

If Trump's meeting Putin in private..

Who does the security scan in the room where they meet?

And what's the difference between a private meeting and a secret meeting?

good but long article from Rolling stone

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-putin-helsinki-summit-preview-698547/

a snippett

According to Russia expert and Trump advisor Fiona Hill, this innocuous-sounding bit of “KGB jargon,” as she described it in her book, Mr. Putin: Operative in the Kremlin, offers valuable insight into Putin and his leadership of Russia. “Working with people” [rabotat’ s lyud’mi] was a hallmark of the Soviet spy agency under Yuri Andropov, who ran the KGB for much of Putin’s 16-year career there. For a former case officer like Putin, Hill wrote, “it meant studying the minds of the targets, finding their vulnerabilities, and figuring out how to use them.”

 

 

Hill, the senior director for Russian and European Affairs on Trump’s National Security Council, has helped plan the upcoming summit with Putin on July 16th in Helsinki, Finland. She accompanied her boss, National Security Advisor John Bolton, to Moscow last month for a meeting with the Russian president. Few people in the Trump administration understand Putin better than Hill, a British-born, Harvard-educated expert who took a leave of absence last year from the Brookings Institution to join the NSC. But how much attention Trump will pay her in Helsinki is another matter. Not long after Hill was hired, Trump mistook her for a White House clerk and then misread her confusion as insubordination, according to The Washington Post. When Trump met Putin alone at the G20 summit in July 2017 in Hamburg, Germany, he excluded Hill, in part, out of a desire to control potential leaks. It’s already been decided that she won’t be attending the private, one-on-meeting between Trump and Putin in Helsinki.

That, among other things, has become a major point of concern for U.S. experts on Russia. A one-on-one meeting gives the former KGB case officer a “tremendous advantage” over Trump, says Michael McFaul, a former U.S. ambassador to Russia under President Obama. Trump will be the fourth U.S. president Putin has met with in his two decades in office, and the American president could use Hill’s expertise while delving into the thorny issues that divide the two countries: namely, Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election, the presence of Iranian troops in Syria and the status of the Crimean peninsula that Russia seized from Ukraine in 2014.

 

 

For starters, there is the very likely possibility that Trump may agree to something he shouldn’t. When the two men met alone in Hamburg, Trump emerged with a plan for what he called an “impenetrable Cyber Security unit.” It appeared that Trump had joined an effort to thwart election hacking with the foreign adversary that the United States had sanctioned for hacking the 2016 presidential election. (The White House immediately walked the proposal back.) Putin prefers smaller meetings – such as the “POTUS+3” meeting McFaul attended in 2009 with Obama at Putin’s country estate in Novo-Ogaryovo – because he believes he has a better chance of making a personal connection and winning the concessions he seeks. “I’ve been in half a dozen meetings with Putin with various U.S. government officials including Obama and he is an effective communicator of his point of view,” McFaul says. “I worry that with a president like Trump who just doesn’t have that same experience with foreign policy that he could be nodding along with the Putin narrative.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Saorsa said:

I don't see a lot of direct questions.  I see a lot of fishing.  Like "what about Trump ....".  As a lot have pointed out, he doesn't seem to take firm positions on anything.  He's fishing for small changes that aren't hard coded into laws or treaties.  Folks who demand rigidity are either looking for a fight until they get their way or fear change and evolution of a social structure.

I've said before that I see most issues on a continuum, I don't like hard coding my opinion or anyone else's to be an absolute right or wrong.  Once that starts I just leave the topic.  Sometimes I leave because any discussion has dropped into silly one liners posted without thought or just to have the last word as more and more minutia is thrown out.

Is pointing out that Europe is becoming increasingly dependent on Russia for it's energy supplies a deflection from the need for NATO?  Suppose I pointed out that there is the threat of a strike in the Norwegian oil industry?  Would that relate to the energy supply or NATO? 

My positions do no sit on a line that runs only left or right.  They are a point defined by  multiple vectors and as the components of those vectors change, so does my opinion of what it means.  You might compare it to sailing where you trim your sails based on multiple specific items like wind speed and direction, current speed and direction, and desired course and obstacles, and pointing ability of your vessel. 

Those who must have a linear placement will ultimately measure me at some point along a line but it is one where I am seldom on.  To use another sailing analogy, If you are on a windward leg, you may well be on the lay line occasionally  but that is a transient event.  You are only on that line as you tack across it.

 

Thanks for the laugh. You couldn’t even get beyond the first line.  

When are you planning to go back to the UK?  You may have a shock when you do espousing your views. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Saorsa said:

I don't see a lot of direct questions.  I see a lot of fishing.  Like "what about Trump ...."

It might have something to do with the guy having a job he is completely ill-suited and unqualified the hold, along with the examples of just how he is ill-suited and unqualified he demonstrates on a daily basis. 

Then again, some of us see a lot of “what about Obama” from you and your elk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The meeting has to be one on one - have you ever heard of an annual performance appraisal being done in a group setting?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, mad said:

When are you planning to go back to the UK?  You may have a shock when you do espousing your views. 

I imagine, like Trump, there'd be crypto-racist rants about culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Lie. Lie. Lie. You state dependence on Russia for energy, then cite statistics for gas. Lie. Lie. Lie.

Maybe you didn't notice that I said ENERGY NEEDS.  I didn't mention oil, gas or coal.

Are you guys illiterate?

OBTW, in regards to coal

Hard coal

In 2015, the German hard coal market amounted to 57.7 Mtce, of which 38.8 Mtce were used for power and heat generation, while 17.6 Mtce were consumed by the steel industry. The remaining 1.3 Mtce were sold to the residential heating market.

At 55.5 million tonnes, Germany was the EU’s largest hard coal importer in 2015 (43.2 million tonnes steam coal and 12.3 million tonnes coking coal). The most important sources of imported coal were Russia and other CIS countries with a market share of 29.0%, followed by Colombia, the United States, Australia, Poland and South Africa.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

The meeting has to be one on one - have you ever heard of an annual performance appraisal being done in a group setting?

:clap::clap::clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

Maybe you didn't notice that I said ENERGY NEEDS.  I didn't mention oil, gas or coal.

Are you guys illiterate?

OBTW, in regards to coal

 

Why do you lie? You stated energy needs. Then you cited data on gas imports. You’re a liar. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Why do you lie? You stated energy needs. Then you cited data on gas imports. You’re a liar. Period.

Gas, oil, coal, are all supplied by Russia to help Germany meet its energy needs.  Energy needs can be met through any number of methods.  Germany still has a lot of coal powered plants but not much supply of really good hard coal.  I have already provided information on gas, oil and coal.  You have yet to show a lie and cannot accept the truth.

So, here you go again from the EUs official statistics office.  It's been going on for a long time and here is the best available current data.

europe-energy-sources-import-dependency.

You are probably one of those fools who see a stated capacity for wind and solar and think that that equates to supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Gas, oil, coal, are all supplied by Russia to help Germany meet its energy needs.  Energy needs can be met through any number of methods.  Germany still has a lot of coal powered plants but not much supply of really good hard coal.  I have already provided information on gas, oil and coal.  You have yet to show a lie and cannot accept the truth.

So, here you go again from the EUs official statistics office.  It's been going on for a long time and here is the best available current data.

europe-energy-sources-import-dependency.

You are probably one of those fools who see a stated capacity for wind and solar and think that that equates to supply.

Hahaha. No need to debate a liar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Face to face meetings are the deepest violation of Moscow Rules. However sometimes there is simply no avoiding it.

Sometimes dead drops are impossible to pull off and critical information and/or advise MUST be passed. That usually means the operative believes himself to be in some great peril, and is close to panic if not already there.

 I such instances the judgement, skill, and training of a KGB or CIA case officer is tested, and to the nth degree. People who have been talked or maneuvered into betraying their own country can be mighty skittish beasts. The game is, for them, always "all in". 

 

  

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We joke about Putin owning Trump and making him dance.

What if it were proven to be true?  There are sound reasons for believing that the Russians have Trump's financial balls in a vice. Many knowledgeable people believe they have him compromised in other ways re. the 2016 election. How far would he go to keep things sweet with them?

Could a POTUS be accused of treason?  Could a POTUS found guilty of treason get the death penalty? Could the powers that be in the US Government decide to just hush the whole thing up to save face?

It would make a hell  of a movie...….

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Happy said:

We joke about Putin owning Trump and making him dance.

What if it were proven to be true?  There are sound reasons for believing that the Russians have Trump's financial balls in a vice. Many knowledgeable people believe they have him compromised in other ways re. the 2016 election. How far would he go to keep things sweet with them?

Could a POTUS be accused of treason?  Could a POTUS found guilty of treason get the death penalty? Could the powers that be in the US Government decide to just hush the whole thing up to save face?

It would make a hell  of a movie...….

 

 

 

I think that's too terrifying for most people to process.

However, seeing as all Trumps actions in the field of international discourse so far, have quite plainly shown that he Approaches  diplomacy the same way he approached "business deals" 

I wouldn't be at all surprised if he really truly believes that there is no difference. 

I think he thinks that relations with Russia..or anywhere else for that matter are no different than him negotiating with a business Mogul'' win some, lose some..walk away.

No Idea that he can get himself (and his latest company..the USA) trapped..Hell..he's had companies bankrupt before..No Biggie.

He has no sense of ethics or damage control...it's just THE DEAL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone hear that press conference with President Trump yesterday, before the question from Fox about Putin, he said that he wouldn't take a question from CNN because it's "fake news." 

It's one thing to accuse, but when he cuts journalists out of the process, thats a higher level of douchebaggery.

And yet, you know the old reporters from the alternative newspapers like WWD and New Energy Times and Fusion who were shut out of the process in all previous administrations, are finally redeemed, "yeah CNN, that's what it feels like, welcome to our world."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hilarious when you come to think about it.

He gives an interview to "the Sun" then complains about fake news.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Did anyone hear that press conference with President Trump yesterday, before the question from Fox about Putin, he said that he wouldn't take a question from CNN because it's "fake news." 

It's one thing to accuse, but when he cuts journalists out of the process, thats a higher level of douchebaggery.

And yet, you know the old reporters from the alternative newspapers like WWD and New Energy Times and Fusion who were shut out of the process in all previous administrations, are finally redeemed, "yeah CNN, that's what it feels like, welcome to our world."

he also went on about how "nbc is worse than cnn". it's all dog whistling to Dog's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

he also went on about how "nbc is worse than cnn". it's all dog whistling to Dog's.

I can accept that to a degree, it's politics, and politics is a bizarre form of banking, only with approval rather than dollars. One form of approval is purchased at the expense of another.

But he decided that he won't take questions from CNN (and the poor schmuck CNN reporter is left saying "we're news too!) Why? Because CNN and NBC reporters said something true that hurt his feelings at some point, and he carries the grudge. He'll carry the grudge until a new grudge crowds that one out of his brain. I've seen this behavior from him since the 1990s, with his ex-wives, and NYC mayors, other businessmen. He seems to live for the thrill of the feud.

From what I can see, one feud rises above all others, his undying discomfort around Michael Bloomberg. I could be wrong, but signs point to many of his feuds as proxy-feuds to Bloomberg. He is smart enough not to get into a shooting match with Wall Street, so he takes it out on CNN.

Donald Trump would probably rather see anyone other than Bloomberg elected President after him. It would be his apocalypse ... a Jewpocalypse!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

I think that's too terrifying for most people to process.

However, seeing as all Trumps actions in the field of international discourse so far, have quite plainly shown that he Approaches  diplomacy the same way he approached "business deals" 

I wouldn't be at all surprised if he really truly believes that there is no difference. 

I think he thinks that relations with Russia..or anywhere else for that matter are no different than him negotiating with a business Mogul'' win some, lose some..walk away.

No Idea that he can get himself (and his latest company..the USA) trapped..Hell..he's had companies bankrupt before..No Biggie.

He has no sense of ethics or damage control...it's just THE DEAL.

I would say that the model that best fits for predicting his behavior is self-interest. Not US interests, just himself.

 To wit: Trump Corp fell quite largely out of favor with US financial backers quite some time ago, and it appears they filled that gap with mostly Russian oligarch money, which can be much easier to obtain IF you are willing to launder it for them. Those boys know there will be a big "fee" extracted for that service and barely give a shit about that aspect. For such men too much cash on hand is a serious risk and it is difficult for them not to have too much cash on hand. They aren't as worried about getting completely ripped off for that reason, and because they have old-skool "liquidation" of deadbeat borrowers.

  Unless Trump actually believes his own bullshit he is aware his rise to POTUS had made him highly controversial and US and Euro bankers run from that stuff like so many wicked witches run from a bucked of water (Wizard of OZ reference). This has all but certainly slammed the door on any chance of Trump re-establishing his credit line here. What have they got left? The Russian money laundering operation. Period. 

  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Mark K said:

 Unless Trump actually believes his own bullshit he is aware his rise to POTUS had made him highly controversial and US and Euro bankers run from that stuff like so many wicked witches run from a bucked of water (Wizard of OZ reference). This has all but certainly slammed the door on any chance of Trump re-establishing his credit line here. What have they got left? The Russian money laundering operation. Period.   

and in the short term he & his family are cashing in on the presidency any which way they can. in any other administration the President's fixer taking $1 million in cash for laws would be a major scandal https://www.statnews.com/2018/07/13/novartis-michael-cohen-contacts/ so would his son-in-law getting financing for a troubled building from the same company that needs regulatory approval https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/11/business/jared-kushner-business-washington.html or the administration settling a grudge against a network they don't like by selective application of anti-trust law (Time Warner merger)

in trump world nobody gives a fuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

and in the short term he & his family are cashing in on the presidency any which way they can. in any other administration the President's fixer taking $1 million in cash for laws would be a major scandal https://www.statnews.com/2018/07/13/novartis-michael-cohen-contacts/ so would his son-in-law getting financing for a troubled building from the same company that needs regulatory approval https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/11/business/jared-kushner-business-washington.html or the administration settling a grudge against a network they don't like by selective application of anti-trust law (Time Warner merger)

in trump world nobody gives a fuck.

True, but to me their abject lack of character is almost a side show to what I suspect might be going down for the Trumps.

 

 If I had been engaged in money laundering and gad Robert Mueller on my trail with practically unlimited resources? My butt cheeks would be so tight you couldn't get a pea up my ass with a jack hammer. If the US justice dept gets a conviction on that...then ALL assets that might have come by way of illegal activity can and probably will be confiscated. Hotels, resorts, golf courses, you name it. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark K said:

This has all but certainly slammed the door on any chance of Trump re-establishing his credit line here. What have they got left? The Russian money laundering operation. Period. 

  

Trump was already persona non grata with American and Euro financiers - he was done with no road back

1/2 dozen huge bankruptcies will do that to a person.

Not to mention the rest of his rep about stiffing anyone he owed money to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Mark K said:

If the US justice dept gets a conviction on that...then ALL assets that might have come by way of illegal activity can and probably will be confiscated. Hotels, resorts, golf courses, you name it.

That would be the worst thing they could do to him - reduce him to poverty.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

That would be the worst thing they could do to him - reduce him to poverty.

"You want fries with that, belief me!" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone imagine leaving this POTUS alone with a KGB agent for 4 hours..

You may as well dismantle the CIA and FBI right now..their services as spooks kind of redundant after today.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To respond to the original post

I would advise Trump not to get sucked into a photo op shirtless, on horseback, carrying a gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

To respond to the original post

I would advise Trump not to get sucked into a photo op shirtless, on horseback, carrying a gun.

Yep. Giving Putin the shirt off his back would be in character, but not in the national interest.

Nice of America to fund Trump's advertisement for his Turnberry Golf Course that has been losing money ever since he set it up. Under Par indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

To respond to the original post

I would advise Trump not to get sucked into a photo op shirtless, on horseback, carrying a gun.

:lol: Just the thought of it makes my eyes hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Yep. Giving Putin the shirt off his back would be in character, but not in the national interest.

Nice of America to fund Trump's advertisement for his Turnberry Golf Course that has been losing money ever since he set it up. Under Par indeed.

Has there ever been a more corrupt POTUS in the history of the USA?

Even back in the days of Teapot Dome it never got this blatant did it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Yep. Giving Putin the shirt off his back would be in character, but not in the national interest.

Nice of America to fund Trump's advertisement for his Turnberry Golf Course that has been losing money ever since he set it up. Under Par indeed.

Maybe the press shouldn't have covered the visit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no expert on body language, but I do know that Trump understands the finer points of handshakes... he likes the 'tug-of-war' style to show his dominance. 

He's already given Putin the 'upper hand', by offering the submissive shake here:

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR68ikjFMvcF7ITdUG3SFZ

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Has there ever been a more corrupt POTUS in the history of the USA?

Even back in the days of Teapot Dome it never got this blatant did it?

There has never been a more corrupt, dishonest amoral President. Rotten to the core. All he has to do is deny allegations, and that is the end of it.

Here are 5 examples of the way he thinks.

 Now he also, as you probably know, he says he's innocent and I think you have to remember that. He said very strongly...that he says he's innocent," 

"You have to listen to him also" and "he totally denies it," 

"a person I know well" and "a good person" and that he didn't think "Bill did anything wrong.

.

"Some of the women that are complaining, I know how much he's helped them...now all of a sudden, they are saying these horrible things about him, it's very sad because he's a very good person. I've always found him to be just a very, very good person," 

 

"Everybody said nothing happened. Perhaps she made the story up," 

 

 

Trump did not weigh in after Lewandowski was accused of sexual assault by singer and Trump supporter Joy Villa in December 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

summit.jpg

Somebody that posts here is at the summit!  WOW, I'm impressed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Yep. Giving Putin the shirt off his back would be in character, but not in the national interest.

Nice of America to fund Trump's advertisement for his Turnberry Golf Course that has been losing money ever since he set it up. Under Par indeed.

 

2 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Maybe the press shouldn't have covered the visit.

 

I thought the NYT coverage was accurate, "In Trump’s U.K. Visit, Some See ‘Infomercial’ for Money-Losing Golf Resort"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure Saorsa, Dog, TMSail, and whatever name Jack is using these days will dismiss Joe as a RINO.

joe.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I am sure Saorsa, Dog, TMSail, and whatever name Jack is using these days will dismiss Joe as a RINO.

joe.jpg

And, I'm sure you're wrong about one of them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

summit.jpg

What happens in a Trump/Putin meeting stays in a Trump/Putin meeting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before the main business of the meeting, Putin will do a brief review of Donnie's debt position with the Russians. There will be a brief showing of the photos from Donnie's 2013 Moscow visit. A couple of laughs about how they fixed the 2016 election.

Just as Donnie starts sweating through his make-up, Putin rips off his shirt and grins...….

This will not go well for the USA or the world.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump will come out smiling - Putin will give him a Commendable performance review and continue ensuring Trump gets financing from Putin's gangster pals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mark K said:

What happens in a Trump/Putin meeting stays in a Trump/Putin meeting. 

Just wondering if he's going to ask for another $200,000,000 (in cash) to buy his next golf course.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Saorsa said:

And, I'm sure you're wrong about one of them.

 

 

Nah, Dog Will definitely be on board with you that Joe is a RINO. You guys have lost all conservative bonafides...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites