This appears to be normal procedure for CIA Directors to communicate with Russian counterparts. So why is it OK for Brennan to do this back in 2014 but not Pompeo https://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2014/04/14/obama-john-brennan-kiev-russia-ukraine-jay-carney/7705755/
1 Like
It may be a somewhat normal procedure to discuss intelligence matters directly with Russians and yes, Brennan did this in 2014. The question is how the 3 Russians got over here when one was under sanctions which were not enforced. Here’s a quote from Washington Post "Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said they could not recall so many heads of Russia’s espionage and security apparatus coming to Washington at once and meeting with a top American official. They worried the Kremlin could conclude the United States is open to forgiving Russia for its actions and was not resolved to forcefully prevent future meddling. " Pompeo’s loyalist stance w/ T is also a bit of a red flag, defending T at all costs, and one might wonder if the Russian meddling could get a pass like this. From a Conservative perspective, the need for combined intell for counter-intelligence would seem like a good idea. However, one wonders who is playing who? https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-spy-chiefs-met-in-washington-with-cia-director-to-discuss-counterterrorism/2018/01/31/0b761976-068b-11e8-94e8-e8b8600ade23_story.html?utm_term=.f028708bd655
The question is how the 3 Russians got over here when one was under sanctions which were not enforced.
our government invites these Russian Spies for discussions then who is to say if a sanctions was not enforced.
Sanction has two nearly opposite meanings: to sanction can be to approve of something, but it can also mean to punish, or speak harshly to. Likewise, a sanction can be a punishment or approval.
As for Russian meddling getting a pass - looks like that already occurred.
Yes, our government, and the CIA did give permission, to provide a work visa to one or all three of the Russian visitors.
And cumulatively, the Russians are caught with bribes, (as you mention in 2010) but now, they are invading our voter rolls, but as far as we know not altering them. Whatever we deem a greater crime, not sure how we proceed as a nation, with Russian alliances. Obviously they are manipulating and dispersing our data and we are ok with it, despite the sanctions Congress voted on and T is not implementing.
Since this 2017 meeting was discovered via Russian sources, and others as well, there is a pattern with our government to hide whatever it is they are doing. This sends up more red flags and undermines any rules Congress may try to impose because of potential CIA’s/T’s complicity.
Obama closing their embassies, in NY and DC area, and exiting 100 Russian personnel is punishing to the Russians. T keeping the idea open that these may open again is not punishing at all.
Just because the CIA invited some spy’s to gain information does not mean that T is not implementing sanctions.
One thing to keep in mind T is not a career politician and has a huge learning curve. He is informed by his staff as to what is legal and what is not.
We the public may not know the reason CIA had that meeting . The CIA has a job to do. They are doing their job the way they seam fit. Hopefully it is ethically and above board. So far it appears that may not be the case for the FBI. Time will tell if the Russians are playing them.
Obviously they are manipulating and dispersing our data. Where / How / what data/ to whom are they dispersing it to?
Yes there is a pattern that our government does hide what they are doing. Even our past administrations did that. 13 things the government is trying to hide from you | Salon.com
There are no laws of them informing us of their every move.
If you wanted to stay away from a particular person that you did not like would you tell that person “I will be avoiding you because I don’t like you” Probably Not. Or If you came up with the next greatest invention would you announce it to the world what that invention was “before you went to get and received a patent”. If you are in a chess tournament - would you tell your opponent your next move? Do you really want your competition to know your every move?
Why do you jump to the conclusion that there is potential CIA’s/T’s complicity they “undermines any rules Congress may try to impose”.
@Anna check yourself–drumpf has actually stated that he will not impose sanctions, which is kinda against the law.
You are in the wrong forum with this crap.
4 Likes
Re-read the first line of your link’s page. The Trump administration said on Monday it would not immediately impose additional sanctions on Russia.
Immediately impose additional sanctions is not the same as “HE WILL NOT IMPOSE SANCTIONS”.
lol consider yourself on warning friend, I will not engage with this kind of fuckery. If you have nothing better to contribute, stay silent or go off and find a drumpf apologist echo chamber.
y’all are on the same team. let’s stay focused on the things that matter.
a few thoughts:
1/
The “I’m new here” excuse isn’t appropriate for anybody who has a job, but specifically if you’re the president. Trump is responsible and accountable for the people he’s surrounded himself with. Period. Hiring assfarts to counsel you on decisions just makes you an assfart.
2/
Litigating the nuance of intent is pretty 
The facts are: Trump reluctantly signed the bill Congress nearly unanimously passed last year requiring him to implement sanction. He decided not to impose the sanctions because “the mere threat of sanctions will deter Russia’s aggressive behavior.” What about that setup sounds like the administration is making a good faith effort to enforce law or protect the country? It’s not the assfarts fault.
3/
Let’s walk this back
No prob, sorry about that, been on high troll alert and way too sensitive. 
1 Like
1/ I was not aware that there is an other way to learn politics than be involved in it. I’m sure that there was a lot of unknowns that Trump never ever realized were occurring within our government. Just as you and I don’t know the details that goes on in DC. We only know what is filtered to us by the media including the Whitehouse media.
2/ You stated “He decided not to impose the sanctions because “the mere threat of sanctions will deter Russia’s aggressive behavior.”” Are you saying he (Trump) made this statement or someone in his administration?
If you mean someone in his administration then would you also agree that any statement made by any staff member is T’s fault.
If you do a search on “the mere threat of sanctions will deter Russia’s aggressive behavior” you will see it say " The State Department claims". I have not seen Who in the state department made the statement. Do you know who said it cause I’d love to know? It truly is a stupid statement to make.
Do sanctions work? https://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-wagner/do-sanctions-work_b_7191464.html
Do we really want to piss off & alienate Russia and have them become our enemy? I hope not.
What is that saying “keep your friends close and your enemies closer”.
Today’s indictments from Mueller certainly highlight the issue about how the Russians are manipulating and dispersing our data. Where / How / what data/ to whom are they dispersing it to?
Let me count the ways…
It may not be the voter rolls YET, but it could very well happen given that many states have opted to use electronic balloting. (not sure of the ratio, and need to look that up, but now very few voting districts offer paper ballots). (see case for paper ballots - Paper ballots are hack-proof. It's time to bring them back.)
Having Russia use social media to sway opinions with false data and pay for lists that include White Nationalists, Nazi’s, Bernie lovers, Bernie haters, Hillary’s undecided voters is MANIPULATION of our data. There is not a law prohibiting it, nor are social media groups doing an about face on this, but Russia’s intentions has been to stealthily maneuver data and creep into the mindsets of Americans who for better or worse were believers, gullible and/or disaffected in their views towards government.
The fact that the DNC’s emails were hacked (as were the RNC’s but not released to Wikileaks) is in and of itself manipulation of our data. Within those emails, contained private information - opinions, working knowledge of what campaign members were thinking.(see Dick Nixon - dirty tricks) And to have the Russians exploit this information as Mueller and Rosenstein are revealing today to turn the election towards Trump, away from Clinton, and foment discord is beyond alarming.
And from what the NYT’s is writing today about these 13 indictments today - I quote: “The Russians stole the identities of American citizens, posed as political activists and used the flash points of immigration, religion and race to manipulate a campaign in which those issues were already particularly divisive, prosecutors said.” 13 Russians Indicted as Mueller Reveals Effort to Aid Trump Campaign - The New York Times
So, there is a wave of manipulation from the Russians.
The other points in your response to me have already been dissected above and we do not need to go down that path again regarding whether sanctions were willfully ignored by T or not. I do think T should be doing a better job at handling these details, and strongly feel he is not up to the job.
We’ve already reached the ‘sell-by’ date that this Commander in Chief has a strong working knowledge of his job, and even more paramount an ability to lead. He does not…he’s weak on facts; he maneuvers defensively; he calls for Congress to work together, but he defies them as well, but subjecting them to his veto power (see DACA vote) he baits North Korea into some kind of nuclear test: he wants military parades; he shamelessly self-promotes; he returns to his base over and over again, instead of leading the entire country.
1 Like
Matt beat me to it here - completely agree.
Also, to me, actions speak louder than words. Here are the actions re: sanctions:
- 7/25: Congress passed legislation to implement sanctions against Russia, North Korea & Iran with a veto-proof majority
- 8/2: Trump finally signs the bill (begrudgingly); very likely he only signed just because Congress had the votes to override a veto, if he chose to go that route
- 10/1: Trump misses the first deadline re: the Russian sanctions
- It was only after inquires from Senators McCain, Corker and Cardin the administration began the process of what needed to be done right before the deadline (which should have started shortly after the bill was signed, in order to meet the 10/1 deadline).
- 10/13: The Iran sanctions portion of the bill are fully implemented, more than 15 days before the due date (10/31).
- 1/29: Deadline #2 for Russian sanctions
- The day of the deadline, the administration announced that they will not issue the sanction “yet” saying the mere law itself acts as a “deterrent”.
- One of the items due was a list of identified Russian Oligarchs, which finally did late in the day. However the list turned out to truly be a joke, since it was quite literally copied from Forbes.
So all-in-all, simply looking at the actions it’s pretty obvious is clearly intentionally avoiding implementing sanctions against Russia for reasons other than what they finally said (at the 11th hour, at that). No matter how one interprets the actions laid out, it’s impossible to come to the conclusion that they are acting in good faith to protect the country. In addition, he can’t play the “newbie” card because they were able to implement the Iran sanctions well in advance of the deadline.
ABC News has a good timeline, which goes through the October on what’s gone down around this all.
4 Likes
News flash: Russia is already our enemy. Putin is totally against democratic ways- that’s why he
manipulates their “elections” to make sure he wins. How can you ever consider a country that kills
off or imprisons their critics to silence them as any sort of potential “friend” of the U.S.A.? It’s not like comparing apples & oranges…it’s more like, oh I don’t know, comparing apples & tear gas.
Were you aware that back in 2011 Putin blamed the U.S. for interfering in their internal affairs (elections).
Sounds like Russia’s are doing what they accused the U.S. of doing back in 2011. Reading the older articles you get the distinct impression that Putin does not like Hillary. So you could say that Putin may have wanted retribution for 2011? This does not make it right but this is politics. Possibly T was just the fall guy and whom ever was the Republican candidate who ran against her would be in the same predicament.
Yes there has been other manipulation by the Russians as well, between 2009 and 2015(Mikerin) . So there was 7 years of Russian Manipulation on various platforms yet nothing has been done from the prior administration. I know many would like to blame it all on T but the prior administration’s needs to take some responsibility on this as well.
As the Supreme Court said, vote fraud has been present in our elections throughout our entire history.
We can only hope to vote for politicians that will Fix or at least tighten up these issues rather than fight amongst themselves.
shamelessly self-promoting is a job requirement of the President or presidential candidate. Both Obama and Hillary are great at that as well.
I’m just saying do you really want the U.S to start a war with Russia.
I agree to disagree with you. Not down with your assumptions…and particularly this one.
Going on to the next area to explore here. Thank you.
1 Like
The January 2017 DNI report lays out Putin’s motivations, citing heavily his dislike of Hillary. Specifically from the “Putin Ordered Campaign To Influence US Election” section (p. 1):
Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime in late 2011 and early 2012, and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him.
However, just because Putin blames her, does not mean that she actually did anything. There has been no evidence to support Putin’s claims.
Which SCOTUS opinion is this in reference to? Because in 2008, in the Crawford v. Marion County Election Board case, which upheld Indiana voter ID laws, they stated on the record, that the case:
“contains no evidence of any [in-person voter impersonation] fraud actually occurring in Indiana at any time in its history.”
There are tons of studies, legal opinions, etc that voter fraud is extremely, extremely rare: Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth
Nobody wants this, but the implementation of sanctions does not translate to war. Russia is constantly dealing with sanctions, not just with the US - the Magnitsky Act has already been adopted in the UK and Canada, as well as other countries and it’s support keeps growing. But Russia has always been an adversary to the US, dating way back to before the Cold War - even if at times it was a “fre-enemy” situation.
3 Likes
I think it’s safe to say we’re knee deep in the weeds on this and now is a good time to close this topic. 
4 Likes