It matters that the efforts were funded by Clinton and sourced by Russian intelligence for the same reasons people have been saying Russian influence is a threat to democracy. It’s election meddling. It’s political dirt sourced from Russian spies to damage an opponent. It’s supposed collusion. It’s everything they blamed Trump for but perpetuated by the Clinton campaign. — NOS4A2

But a russian source is not Russian influence. If an FSB agent tells me Putin's favourite meal, that's information sources from russian spies, but basing a decision on it doesn't constitute russian influence.

For any true believer, or anyone interested in a perspective contrary the sensationalism regarding Russian collusion, read this wonderful article by Matt Taibbi.

It’s official: Russiagate is this generation’s WMD — NOS4A2

Interesting article. I read a few other bits and pieces, and the criticism of the way the media dealt with the allegations - and is dealing with the current ones - is at least worthy of serious consideration.

But a russian source is not Russian influence. If an FSB agent tells me Putin's favourite meal, that's information sources from russian spies, but basing a decision on it doesn't constitute russian influence.

That’s true, but contrast these connections to the ones in the Trump campaign, where every Russian was in some way “connected to the kremlin”. FSB agents are quite literally Russian spies, and quite literally gave the DNC dirt for the purpose of influencing an election. There was no investigation or anything, even as this information was literally finding its way into American institutions, literally threatening democracy.

There simply is no law that criminalizes collusion between a political campaign and foreign government. — NOS4A2

There sure is.

Call X a "witch hunt". Build the common false belief that the hunt is looking for "collusion". Perpetuate that belief by continually speaking about it in those terms. Relish in the purported 'charges'. Build their characterization in the public eye. Refuse to talk about it in other terms.

If enough people think in your terms, when no collusion is found by the witch hunt, they will be much easier to convince of your innocence, despite the fact that X never looked for collusion to begin with.

The US may have killed the Leader of ISIS. Good news.

ISIS leader believed dead.

That’s true, but contrast these connections to the ones in the Trump campaign, where every Russian was in some way “connected to the kremlin”. FSB agents are quite literally Russian spies, and quite literally gave the DNC dirt for the purpose of influencing an election. There was no investigation or anything, even as this information was literally finding its way into American institutions, literally threatening democracy. — NOS4A2

But the key difference is that in the case of the Steele Dossier, domestic political players used information of dubious quality for domestic political gain. It just so happened that the information was allegedly based on russian sources.

Meanwhile, the allegation regarding the Trump campaign was that foreign political players directly influenced domestic affairs.

The White House press secretary, Stephanie Grisham, told reporters Saturday that former chief of staff John Kelly "was totally unequipped to handle the genius of our great president."

Cringeworthy.

But the key difference is that in the case of the Steele Dossier, domestic political players used information of dubious quality for domestic political gain. It just so happened that the information was allegedly based on russian sources.

Meanwhile, the allegation regarding the Trump campaign was that foreign political players directly influenced domestic affairs.

True, they weren’t comparable, but the dossier and the Russian dirt within it reached higher levels within our institutions, sowing the discord and meddling that we have been continually told were Putin’s objectives from the get go. Everyone who used it, peddled it, believed in it were the FSB’s useful idiots. It’s classic active measures, and unfortunately it worked.

True, they weren’t comparable, but the dossier and the Russian dirt within it reached higher levels within our institutions, sowing the discord and meddling that we have been continually told were Putin’s objectives from the get go. Everyone who used it, peddled it, believed in it were the FSB’s useful idiots. It’s classic active measures, and unfortunately it worked. — NOS4A2

No doubt Putin does not mind mounting internal divisions in the US. Whether feeding Steele lurid information in order to increase said division was part of a wide-ranging Kremlin plot, or just an accident is ultimately of little importance. Either way, if Putin intended a Trump presidency to reduce the international influence of the US and further weaken it's political system, he clearly succeeded.

Trump would love this discussion so much I should really close it. — Baden

:wink:

The US may have killed the Leader of ISIS. Good news. — NOS4A2

Good news and kudos to all involved in the successful mission to remove a truly evil human from this Earth. :fire:

Leakers have given us their next hero in the impeachment saga. Lt. col. Windman raised concerns about Trump’s call. Here’s his opening statement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/read-the-document-opening-statement-of-lieutenant-colonel-alexander-s-vindman/2573a183-18ee-4036-9638-939677a1b9d6/

There ought be no leaks in a deposition.

Good news and kudos to all involved in the successful mission to remove a truly evil human from this Earth. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Murder and assasination is always good news when it's the enemy. For everyone to be consistent, next time a bunch of terrorists blow up "the enemy" in the US or Europe we should all just celebrate!

Should Trump supporters be treated like addicts? That’s not to say lock them up in rehab or anything like that; just that maybe we should reframe how we engage with them. In order to account for the backfire effect. Ask what it is about trump that makes them feel good, listen to their beliefs about what he is going to do for them personally and instead of going directly up against them, try and find the rational route of the problem and explain how other candidates are genuinely more aware of this problem and have actually shown success in tackling said problem at a smaller scale than national or international and provide evidence that this candidate cares about what they do and can get things done about it, and show them all evidence of trump actually making things worse for the addict.

Obviously it’s not as simple as this; however I think it needs to be said. Trump fans are behaving a lot like addicts when you try and take their drugs away. For example the republicans going all rogue warrior into closed depositions taking devices into a SCIF is the sort of thing you’d expect addicts to do if they were to find out that their family is meeting behind their back plotting to take their drugs away.

Murder and assasination is always good news when it's the enemy. For everyone to be consistent, next time a bunch of terrorists blow up "the enemy" in the US or Europe we should all just celebrate!

It was suicide. The guy blew him self up, but not before taking his wives and children with him. He was not only the enemy; he was evil. There is no comparison between innocent Europeans and Abu Bagdadhi, so I’d be careful making it.

Evil and innocence are in the eye of the beholder.

I have a problem with the celebration of violence and death, regardless of how it comes. His last act was evil; I'd still not say he was evil as otherwise, I'm sure, he wouldn't have had any wives or children to begin with. Plus, I think the civility that we pretend puts us above such barbaric acts is very thin veneer that will come off as soon as life becomes slightly harder. Abu Ghraib, Guantanomo, rendition, torture, etc. etc.

Baghdadi had sex slaves and murdered innocents, including children. He led a murderous death cult throughout the Middle East, killing, maiming, enslaving, raping as he went along. No amount of soft-minded relativism and appeals to hypocrisy can defend that.

Read again. I'm not defending him.

It’s a tacit defense in my mind. The idea that he is perhaps not evil because he had a family is absurd, especially in the context of him having murdered them all.

Ask what it is about trump that makes them feel good, listen to their beliefs about what he is going to do for them personally and instead of going directly up against them, try and find the rational route of the problem and explain how other candidates are genuinely more aware of this problem and have actually shown success in tackling said problem at a smaller scale than national or international and provide evidence that this candidate cares about what they do and can get things done about it, and show them all evidence of trump actually making things worse for the addict. — Mark Dennis

Quite apart from whether or not I think your analogy is apt, you're not going to get far in treating addiction with rationality and evidence. Addicts are not usually ignorant of the negative effects of their addiction, I think.

Concerning the topic at hand, I think it does us no good to consider Trump supporters "addicts", "cult members" or "duped fools". I think it makes more sense to start from the basic assumptions that Trump supporters approve of the things Trump does.

Why do they approve of those things?

Vilification of witnesses in the impeachment enquiry, the latest being Lt Col ALexander Vindman, who joined the procession of officials to cry foul of Trump/Giulani’s extortion racket.

Trump and GOP attack Vindman's record: Former GOP Rep. Sean Duffy said about Vindman: "It seems very clear that he is incredibly concerned about Ukrainian defense." Trump also joined in the criticism of Vindman, claiming without evidence on Twitter that the White House's top Ukraine expert is a "Never Trumper." Vindman served multiple overseas tours as a US infantry officer, including a deployment to Iraq where he received a Purple Heart after being wounded in an IED attack. He has served in Trump's National Security Council since 2018.

However, Republicans have come to Vindman’s Defense: ‘congressional GOP leaders say it’s out of bounds to question Vindman’s patriotism and allegiance to the United States, as some conservative pundits did on Monday night.’

Why do they approve of those things? — Mark Dennis

Perhaps they think compromise and moderation are for pussies. Or they think "progressives" want to destroy men and replace whites. Or they think that their situation is down to the evils of "globalism" and only Trump is willing to actually fight it.

Or they just like anything that makes "the left" angry.

Trump fans are behaving a lot like addicts when you try and take their drugs away. — Mark Dennis

As I argue in my upcoming book, The Cult of Trump: A Leading Cult Expert Explains How The President Uses Mind Control , Trump has gotten where he is today in large part because he has exploited tactics straight out of [the cult leader] playbook. These include his grandiose claims, his practice of sowing confusion, his demand for absolute loyalty, his tendency to lie and create alternative “facts” and realities, his shunning and belittling of critics and ex-believers, and his cultivating of an “us versus them” mindset. These are the same methods used by Moon, Jones, and other cult leaders such as L. Ron Hubbard (Scientology), David Koresh (Branch Davidians), Lyndon LaRouche (LaRouche PAC), and, most recently, convicted trafficking felon Keith Raniere (NXVIM).

Of all these tactics, the “us versus them” mindset is probably one of the most effective. From the moment you are recruited into a cult, you are made to feel special, part of an “inside” group in opposition to unenlightened, unbelieving, dangerous “outsiders.” Playing on ancient human tribal tendencies, cult leaders extend this “us versus them” mindset outwards to an almost cosmic struggle. — Steve Hassan

I have a problem with the celebration of violence and death, regardless of how it comes. His last act was evil; I'd still not say he was evil as otherwise, I'm sure, he wouldn't have had any wives or children to begin with. Plus, I think the civility that we pretend puts us above such barbaric acts is very thin veneer that will come off as soon as life becomes slightly harder. Abu Ghraib, Guantanomo, rendition, torture, etc. etc. — Benkei

I would completely concur. I thought much the same thing upon reading the celebration of killing...

Still flabbergasted by the hypocrisy of the Republicans. They're defending the active solicitation of electoral interference by a foreign power, and a blatant breach of the Constitution, by a sitting President, and one who had only barely escaped indictment on a similar previous charge on a technicality. But the way the Republicans are going about it, is by attacking the impeachment process itself as 'stalinist' or 'undemocratic' - in other words, by treating Congress with contempt - and by trying to wreck the proceedings, as they know they can't defend the actual substance. (The only reason they're not been pursued on contempt is because it would create too much smoke, and the impeachment committee needs to maintain a laser focus on the specifics which they're doing very well).

What will happen if the House indicts Trump and then the Senate acquits him? What could stop him then - from, say, overturning the rule against extending his term, or getting the by-then thoroughly corrupted Justice Department to arrest all of his critics, or suspending the constitution?

Make no mistake, this next few weeks and months is a battle for the preservation of democracy in America, against some extremely dark and dangerous forces that are seeking to bring down the entire system. I'm still hopeful that the good guys will win, but it's far too close for comfort.

...they think that their situation is down to the evils of "globalism" and only Trump is willing to actually fight it. — Echarmion

These are the ones that can be peeled away... but not by the likes of anyone who fosters more globalization, more good paying jobs being outsourced, more low paying jobs being produced, less investment in everyday Americans, more investment in citizens of other countries... etc.

Which of the candidates also looks to put Americans first, but does not have the Trumpian baggage? Which of the candidates knew that mistakes were being made in legislation when they were being made, as compared to those who admit it now, but act as if there's nothing that can be done to redress and/or correct them?

That candidate will peel away the reasonable Trump voters who expect elected official in the government to act in ways that are best for the overwhelming majority of Americans.

Should Trump supporters be treated like addicts? — Mark Dennis

Should addicts be treated with anything less than the utmost care?

It’s a tacit defense in my mind. The idea that he is perhaps not evil because he had a family is absurd, especially in the context of him having murdered them all. — NOS4A2

I simply don't believe people are inherently evil and as such it's a mistake to say "he is evil". He did evil and we all share that capacity to do evil. By saying someone is evil we like to pretend we're never capable of the type of acts he committed. But we are. That's not a defense of his actions at all. That's about keeping our eyes open to our own actions so that we may avoid doing evil instead of assuming that since we're the good guys we can't do evil. The man is a cautionary tale. But so is every shooting in the US. Done of course by "bad" guys with guns. Instead of regular people like you and me.