A Bad Week For Trusting Russian Leaders

-IfIbcYDejOKU57wU67iV-RVGKgG83f4Am32Z3dVlB8As many of you know, I am a history nut and I could not ignore the 100th anniversary of the murder of the entire Romanov family on July 17, 1918.  It is an ironic anniversary after the disastrous meeting of President Donald Trump in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin.  There are perils to trusting some Russian leaders and I am afraid that Putin, the former KBG officer, would be one of those least worthy of trust.

The Bolsheviks promised to treat the family fairly but instead left them in worse and worse conditions while being verbally abused.  They ultimately murdered Tsar Nicholas II, his wife Tsarina Alexandra and their five children OlgaTatianaMariaAnastasia, and Alexei). They also murdered their companions  Eugene BotkinAnna DemidovaAlexei Trupp and Ivan Kharitonov.
They then mutilated their bodies and and burned them. It was one of the most heinous acts by the Communists and a precursor of blood soaked history of the NKVD and later the KGB.
Putin’s record of killing journalists and political enemies shows how little has changed in some quarters of the Russian government.  His well documented history of murders and misrepresentations makes him a particularly lethal and untrustworthy adversary.
The Romanovs trusted their “competitors” in 1918 and it was the last mistake Tsar Nicholas ever made.

591 thoughts on “A Bad Week For Trusting Russian Leaders”

  1. The asylum had another temper tantrum. Does any rational American really care at this point as to their psychosis? No. Pat them on the head and give them their thorazine.

    BUT – the world anxiously await ANSWERS to the actual questions raised at the summit:

    Putin: Should Russia hold the US accountable for everything George Soros does?

    POTUS: “Where is the [DNC] server?

    1. Putin is the Jimi Hendrix of propaganda and disinformation. And INlegaleagle clearly enjoys being played like an electric balalaika.

  2. “The Romanovs trusted their “competitors” in 1918 and it was the last mistake Tsar Nicholas ever made.”

    Trust but verify. __R. Reagan

  3. I would like to apologize for a previous error.
    When an individual repeatedly distorts what others have said, and combines that with half-truths, that person is skating on thin ice.
    When that same person “graduates” to outright lying, that person is falling through the ice.
    I made the mistake of thinking that the individual was smart / clever/ slick enough to realize that, and I admit that I was dead wrong on that point.
    So I’d like to express my regret at that earlier assumption that proved to be dead wrong.

  4. Russia is the West’s bogeyman. When the communists fell, we should have welcomed them into NATO with open arms. We didn’t because we were distrustful. That was a missed opportunity. We trusted the Russians enough in WW2 to make them an ally and they stopped Hitler butt cold at Stalingrad irreparably wounding the Wehrmacht at a cost of 1,100,000 Red Army dead, wounded, missing, or captured. Forty thousand Russian civilians died as well. Russia is a Western nation in many senses both religiously and by attitude. We need better relations with Russia to counter China and Iran — two nations with no Western proclivities.

    1. I agree completely with Mespo’s comment above. The opportunity was missed.

      1. Wait. Let me walk that back. I should’ve said I incompletely agree with Mespo. I misspoke.

    2. “When the communists fell, we should have welcomed them into NATO with open arms. ”

      I wouldn’t have welcomed them into NATO, but I wouldn’t have tried to extend NATO to their borders and I would have tried to open more solid relationships with them recognizing that they were still a major power with tremendous influence especially around their borders.

      Post Soviet Union US foreign policy had no direction.

    3. Last month Kim was their bogeyman.

      Their bogeymen by the month: Paris Climate, Russia, tax cuts, Russia, net neutrality, Russia, Iran deal, Russia, trade, Russia, tariffs, Russia, ICE, Russia, concentration camps, Russia, Stormy, Russia, Michael Cohen, Russia, Trump’s taxes, Russia, Trump’s weight, Russia, Trump’s hair, Russia…….

      1. 🙂 The irony of it all is there is more actual evidence of a conspiracy to undermine the 2016 election by the DNC, Clinton, the AG and the FBI than anything the Russians have done. Don’t forget Obama’s Susan Rice told the Intel community to stand down their efforts on Russia leading up to the election.

        1. ” Don’t forget Obama’s Susan Rice told the Intel community to stand down their efforts on Russia leading up to the election.”

          …And don’t forget rice is binding.😀

      2. Inlegaleagle, it appears that the left has no memory and can’t put together that all we are seeing is a smokescreen to hide the left’s total failure at policy. What is amazing is that this blog’s index of posts demonstrates the same thing.

        1. “all we are seeing is a smokescreen to hide the left’s total failure at policy.”

          Hardly a smokescreen any longer. It is the most beautiful transparency from the left that we have witnessed in decades….

          I am feeling superhero strength that I have survived every ‘millions are going to die’ Trump policy. I feel immortal. I am happy to have returned to this blog to find a few others have survived as well …………

    4. It’s pathetically stupid and/or naïve for liberal progressives to condemn Putin’s murders. Take a look at the USA’s decades long record of assassinating and taking out legally installed world leaders. Do libs think we did that to “spread democracy?”

      A modern example of liberal hypocrisy is the Al Saud crime syndicate now running Saudi Arabia, the world’s most evil and pernicious dictatorship, who beheads more annually than the rest of the world combined including ISIS. Liberal progs: how did your demigod Geezis Soetoro Obama treat Saudi Arabia? He sold them weapons they used to commit multiple uncharged war crimes in Yemen? But you’re cool with that, right?

      1. Take a look at the USA’s decades long record of assassinating and taking out legally installed world leaders. D

        What’s blocking my view is your collection of paulbot fantasies.

      2. I don’t get into moral debates involving statecraft. Morality is awfully subjective and fluid and then there’s the problem of necessity to deal with.

        1. There’s also the problem of historical accuracy to deal with. Jones and Kurtz spend their time demonstrating that paulbot memes are no more valid than red haze memes.

          1. What’s a paulbot meme btw? not sure what that refers to. I guess I am too dumb to understand all your sophisticated references.

    5. I would say NATO should not have expanded past absorbing East Germany when the wall fell. It was a mistake to break the promises we now know were made.

      I can’t imagine however, how NATO should have included Russia. Russia is a geopolitical adversary. Just because of geographic factors if nothing else. But it should not be treated like an enemy. I think Trump chose a good word in competitor

      I do agree that China is a bigger adversary.

      Iran is close to Russia and they have outflanked us easily given that fact of reality and our bad history with them. Like Mogassedek or whatever you spell it.

  5. No, no, it’s the EU, NATO, free elections and democracy that you can’t trust! Despots, oligarchs, dictators, thieves, frauds, and strongmen are trustworthy. SAD!

    1. Yeah, I really think this contract is ideal for the world and humanity: Putin attacks Montenegro (which you couldn’t find on a map if your life depended on it) and the result is nuclear winter.

      Yeah, a great deal for humankind, if you make and sell war machines and debt.

      It’s amazing the degree to which liberal progs transformed into such war mongers since Geezis Soetoro Obama took office.

      1. Russia has no common border with Montenegro. Montenegro has about 700,000 residents. Some Montenegrins were participants in the Bosnian war, but otherwise the country has no history of violent conflict outside its borders in the last century. I don’t think it has a diplomatic stance antagonistic to Russia either.

  6. I saw a very interesting interview with Stephen Cohen, Russia expert. He voted for Hilary, he’s married to a very left wing liberal woman. He is comparing the treatment of Trump by the msm and the political establishment to an out of control mob. Mr. Cohen feels that the relations between the US and Russia are at a more dangerous state than during the Cuban misled crisis. Cohen felt that most presidents go to meet Russian leaders to ratchet things down an reduce tensions.

    1. Bob: are we to believe that the disaster in Helsinki was really mainstream media’s fault? Like Trump was only trying ‘reduce tensions’..??

      Comically you try to endow this view with legitimacy by claiming that some ‘liberal’ made this observation.

      1. If Obama sucked up to Putin in the fashion trump did, he would be an anti-American, communist sympathizer, Muslim apologist, Kenyan, anti anti Christ, Neville Chamberlain. trump sucks up to Putin and he is a great statesman on a mission to simply cool things down. Bizarroworld..

        1. Lloyd seems unaware of Obama’s presidency and unaware of the present. He seems to be in some sort of a fog. I will try to help him out so that in the future he can appear to be more knowledgeable.

          From the Brookings Institute, not a friend of Trump and more of a friend to the left.

          “Throughout his presidency, Obama consistently underestimated the challenge posed by Putin’s regime.
          But not everything is relative; we should not slip into collective amnesia over the Obama administration’s weak and underwhelming response to Russian aggression. Throughout his presidency, Obama consistently underestimated the challenge posed by Putin’s regime. His foreign policy was firmly grounded in the premise that Russia was not a national security threat to the United States. In 2012, Obama disparaged Mitt Romney for exaggerating the Russian threat—“the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War’s been over for 20 years,” Obama quipped. This breezy attitude prevailed even as Russia annexed Crimea, invaded eastern Ukraine, intervened in Syria, and hacked the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Obama’s response during these critical moments was cautious at best, and deeply misguided at worst. Even the imposition of sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine was accompanied by so much propitiation and restraint elsewhere that it didn’t deter Russia from subsequent aggression, including the risky 2016 influence operation in the United States. Obama, confident that history was on America’s side, for the duration of his time in office underestimated the damaging impact Russia could achieve through asymmetric means.

          Obama’s cautious Russia policy is grounded in three conceptual errors: a failure to grasp the true nature of the Russian threat, most clearly visible in his administration’s restrained response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014; a “long view” of historical trends which in his view inexorably “bent” toward liberalism; and the perception that formidable domestic political obstacles stood in his way when it came to crafting a response to Putin’s assault on the elections in 2016.”

      2. Bob don’t listen to the Shill. He doesn’t know what he is talking about. Trump did a great job. I can’t support everything 100% which is par for the course but overall it was a tremendous success.

        There is no actual quote only a paraphrase of a famous Churchill statement: “Better to talk jaw to jaw than talk war”

        People like the Shill don’t understand that. Trump has placed more pressure on Russia in a short time period than Obama did in 8 years when people like Shill were dazzled. In any event, Trump corrected the major problem everyone saw that to me wasn’t a very big problem except Democrats need a Trump failure even if that brings the US closer to war.

    2. . Mr. Cohen feels that the relations between the US and Russia are at a more dangerous state than during the Cuban misled crisis.

      He didn’t say that, did he?

      Russia’s an irritant, not a peril. The real task is to manage the transition to a multipolar system where we aren’t the premier power. We do not have a choice about it. The task is coming to some understanding with China whereby competition between the two of us maintains certain boundaries. The challenges posed by Russia are of secondary or tertiary importance.

      1. Professor Stephen F. Cohen in his own words as excerpted from the article linked downstream:

        “Putin is not a thug,” he declared on CNN. “He’s not a neo-Soviet imperialist who’s trying to recreate the Soviet Union. He’s not even anti-American.” The defense extends to the U.S. president, who has had some nice things to say about Putin. “The number-one threat to the United States today,” Cohen told Fox News, is the continuing investigation of Trump’s ties to Russia: “There is no evidence there was any wrongdoing.”

      2. Stephen F. Cohen in somebody else’s paraphrased words from the same article linked downstream:

        Cohen thinks we are closer than we have ever been, closer than we were during even the Cuban missile crisis or Able Archer. And the idea that he is unable to stop the downward spiraling of U.S.-Russian relations is nothing short of agonizing. A nuclear war between Russia and the United States is his biggest fear.

      3. Trump had been in office c.3 weeks when Maxine Waters complained about Trump’s relationship with Putin.
        “Why is Trump wrapping his arms around Putin while Putin is continuing to advance in North Korea?”, 😄😃Maxine asked.
        It was perhaps that concern that later motivated Rep. Waters to later advise,” after we impeach Trump, then we need to go after Putin”.😆😀😂
        Impeachment is a serious, unpleasant, and often divisive procedure.
        If Maxine’s House of Representatives initiates impeachment proceedings against Putin, there would likely be unprecedented complexity and confusion in that process.
        Ms. Waters experience with confusion would make her the ideal Representative to spearhead the impeachment attempt targeting Putin.

  7. There was a claim made c.6? weeks ago in a JT thread that “the attendees of the Trump Tower meeting gave “Congressional testimony” that damaging information about was to be exchanged for sanctions relief against Russia.
    So those “attendees”, according to a serial liar who posts here, not only agreed to this quidpro quo deal, but stated that in Cingressional testimony.
    This morning we are presented with another version about “what really hapoened” at the Trump Tower meeting.
    It’s not that big of a challenge to make up one’s own version of events that are contrary to established fact.
    “Selling” these should be difficult, but a lack of integrity on the part of the ” seller”, coupled with a reader, can seal the deal in some cases.

    1. More than one thing happened at the Trump Tower meeting. We can talk about them separately so that you won’t get too confused. Or we could talk about them all at the same time, which will no doubt compound your current confusion wherein the simple fact that more than one thing happened at the Trump Tower meeting supposedly means that “a serial liar who posts here . . . [has made up her] own version of events that are contrary to established fact.”

      P. S. I see you have just as much trouble using the archives as you have keeping track of the established fact that more than one thing happened at the Trump Tower meeting even according to the attendees at the meeting who testified to Congress.

      1. Or…a chronic liar can keep inventing new versions of events as it suits her purpose.
        Then cloud the issue and draw attention away from current, or previous, lies by saying that more than one thing happened.
        Late4Dinner, Lies for Breakfast buried in filibusters.

        1. Of course “more than one thing happened”…that doesn’t alter the fact that outright lies have been posted here, and it’s a lame attempt to cloud the issue and dustract from the lies.

  8. Putin is after 1 thing. The lifting of US sanctions. The ball is in Putin’s court.

    The question is, will Putin throw his intelligence under the bus?

    Specifically, the 12 Russian intelligence officers that were indicted by Mueller. Putin may do nothing or maybe Putin does a magic trick & pulls a rabbit out of the hat. Those intelligence officers are expendable commodities in Putin’s world.

    1. “will Putin throw his intelligence under the bus?”
      No, of course not. Putin trusts HIS intelligence people.

      1. ““will Putin throw his intelligence under the bus?”
        No, of course not. Putin trusts HIS intelligence people.”

        Putin will have them shot or poisoned.

  9. “after the disastrous meeting of President Donald Trump in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin.”
    Can someone please explain what was so “disastrous” about it?? I’ve watched it 3 times, if you wacko liberals mean Trump was courteous and cordial, then you brainwashed, brain dead idiots need to stop sucking up to the deep state media. What makes this even worse, is you idiots have no idea what was said between them in private. Turley, you need to back up before you loose all credibility. I swear, Turley’s blog is getting more and more like CNN everyday. Just sickening.

    1. On July 9th, 2016, Natalia Veselnitskaya offered members of the Trump campaign information damaging to Hillary Clinton in return for the arrest and extradition to Russia of Bill Browder based on Kremlin-fabricated evidence. At their recent joint press conference in Helsinki, Putin offered Trump an interview between Mueller and the 12 GRU officers indicted for the hack of the DNC in return for the arrest and extradition of Bill Browder based on Kremlin-fabricated evidence.

      The great deal artist, Trump, failed to reject Putin’s offer at the Helsinki meeting. That same great deal artist, Trump, had previously coughed up a second-draft cover story for the Trump Tower meeting in which Trump Jr., Kushner and Manafort supposedly rejected Veselnitskaya’s offer because there was nothing those members of the Trump campaign could do with respect to the arrest and extradition to Russia of Bill Browder on Kremlin-fabricated evidence.

      To review: Trump failed to reject Putin’s offer and the Trump campaign supposedly rejected Veselnitskaya’s offer. The only operative difference between Putin’s offer versus Veselnitskaya’s offer is an interview between Mueller and the 12 GRU officers indicted for hacking the DNC versus information damaging to Hillary Clinton. The request from Russia for the arrest and extradition to Russia of Bill Browder on Kremlin-fabricated evidence is identical in both Putin and Veselnitskaya’s offers.

      Except for one other difference: Veselnitskaya also requested an end to The Magnitsky Act and/or relief from The Magnitsky Sanctions. And the four Russians in attendance at the Trump Tower meeting each testified to Congress that Trump Jr. allegedly agreed to revisit The Magnitsky Act and The Magnitsky Sanctions after his father won the election.

      Now, for those of you keeping score at home, as well as for those you wondering out loud what was so disastrous about Trump’s performance at his joint press conference with Putin at the Helsinki meeting, Trump and Putin just revisited The Magnitsky Act and The Magnitsky Sanctions on a public stage in front of cameras and microphones after Trump was elected thereby confirming the truth of the Congressional testimony of the four Russian attendees at the Trump Tower meeting who said that Trump Jr. promised to revisit The Magnitsky Act and The Magnitsky Sanctions after his father won the election. And that means that the Trump campaign did not truly reject Veslnitskaya’s offer anymore so than Trump, himself, truly rejected Putin’s offer.

      1. Important correction: The Trump Tower meeting took place on June 9th, 2016.

      2. L4D enables David Benson – if you listened, there is a treaty in effect and Mueller would have to make an application under that treaty. The Russians would do the same and expect to be treated equally. Do you want the 12 GRU officers? We want Browder. The Russian evidence is no more manufactured than the FBI’s. I say that with HIGH confidence.

        1. Had you listened yesterday, you would have heard me telling you that The United States of America does not arrest the citizens of another country [The United Kingdom in Browder’s case] for the purpose of acceding to unruly demands from Russia to extradite that non-US citizen to Russia based upon Kremlin-fabricated evidence presented at a Kremlin show-trial conducted in absentia that has already convicted that non-US citizen. But in the interests of clarity and for emphasis now here this:

          It is the avowed policy of The United States of America never to negotiate with terrorists.

          1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

            McFaul tweeted Wednesday: “I hope the White House corrects the record and denounces in categorical terms this ridiculous request from Putin. Not doing so creates moral equivalency between a legitimate US indictment of Russian intelligence officers and a crazy, completely fabricated story invented by Putin.”

            The White House has not corrected the record nor denounced the “completely fabricated story invented by Putin.” In fact, the White House says it is considering Putin’s offer. The State Department, however, has called Putin’s offer and Putin’s accusations against 11 Americans “absurd.”

            1. L4D enables David Benson – The State Dept who allowed Hillary Clinton to have an unencrypted server in her home is now playing “holier than thou.” Pleeeez.

    2. Well, that’s your opinion. My opinion, is that you, and others of your ilk, are nervously rearranging the deck chairs as the day glo bozo steams full ahead into whatever’s out there–of which he has not a clue or a care. You don’t squawk because (1) you like the idea of putting “those people” back in their place, which this buffoon would surely be steered to do if only the klan wannabees surrounding him could figure out how to get around the Constitution; or (2) because your “feelings” are hurt because those “city slickers” make fun of your one-stoplight-town existence and utter inability to spell the King’s English; or (3) you’re a gullible oldster or loner who believes that Hannity gives two sh*ts about you so you buy all the nonsense Pravda Faux News, Rush and the other vaudevillians are swilling. Pro tip: if the basket fits, climb on in.

      this is to “I have a ‘Hannity was here’ tattoo across my lower back” ronnie

  10. A broad issue which gets sidetracked is how both the U.S. and The Soviet Union and now Russia employ a variety of tactics to change the mindsets of the public on the opposing sides. Russians had Radio Moscow and we had Voice of America and Radio Free Europe. These days the whole focus is on the internet meddling. America still has Voice of America sending propaganda to the Russian people. We are trying to woo them to our side. Since the fall of the Soviet Union the notion of Communism has subsided in Russia. They have individual Capitalists who are quite wealthy. China went a similar route. Monopoly Capitalism at its height.

    So when we talk with great derision about Russian meddling in our elections we must not overlook the fact that we have huge resources engaged in American meddling in Russian politics by our use of things like the Voice of America and other propaganda outlets.

    Putin and Trump probably talked a bit about golf. My God! What did Trump give up there?

  11. President Trump is prepping and manipulating Putin. President Trump hasn’t even started the relationship yet. He most certainly is not done yet.

    1. George – where is the server and where is the $400 million?

  12. “Putin’s record of killing journalists and political enemies…”

    Seth Rich

    Joseph Rago








    1. Well, at least you’ve finally chosen a side; hold out for a Dacha on the Black Sea. здоровье!

      1. As far as the scale of atrocities, Putin is a piker compared to any of his Communist predecessors.
        He currently does not have the “cover”, the excuses that many far left-wing Americans made for the brutal repression and wide-scale atrocities of the Communist dictators.
        Because those atrocities were commited for the “right reason”, a noble goal.

  13. Personally, I thought President Trump was just trying to keep the peace for 40 minutes. It would have been truly disastrous to pubicly chew-out a tyrant like Vladimir and embarrass him, in my opinion. What is the matter with being civil and diplomatic? Trump has never been accused of that, but I guess the Left was not ready to see him in that light. If he had acted hostile and bellicose, the Left would have said that he’s a lunatic, trying to start WW3.
    I heartily agree with Prof Emeritus (Russian Studies) Stephen Cohen, a Democrat, who likened the media’s response on Monday to mob violence.

    1. From someone who also has to practice a ‘diplomacy’ of sorts every day in the court room……. and teach it to the youngsters coming in to the firm……. this article is spot on highlighting the brilliance of the Helsinki summit.

      “The high professional quality of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin’s performance at their Monday press conference in Helsinki contrasts sharply with the obloquy by which the bipartisan U.S. ruling class showcases its willful incompetence.

      Though I voted for Trump, I’ve never been a fan of his and I am not one now. But, having taught diplomacy for many years, I would choose the Trump-Putin press conference as an exemplar of how these things should be done. Both spoke with the frankness and specificity of serious business. This performance rates an A+.

      Putin: The Cold War is ancient history. Nobody in Russia (putting himself in this category) wants that kind of enmity again. It is best for Russia, for America, and for everybody else if the two find areas of agreement or forbearance.

      Trump: Relations between the globe’s major nuclear powers have never been this bad—especially since some Americans are exacerbating existing international differences for domestic partisan gain. For the sake of peace and adjustment of differences where those exist and adjustment is possible, Trump is willing to pay a political cost to improve those relations (if, indeed further enraging his enemies is a cost rather than a benefit).

      In short, this was a classic statement of diplomatic positions and a drawing of spheres of influence……..”


      1. INlegaleagle…this is an excellent article..Thank you for posting it.
        And I have been married to a trial attorney for 46 years, so I understand and appreciate your profession!

      2. When did Trump cede the nuclear football to Mueller? Was it Trump’s idea? Or Putin’s idea? Who is currently threatening the world with nuclear annihilation?
        A) Putin.
        B) Trump.
        C) Mueller.
        D) Professor Stephen Cohen and his wife, Katrina vanden Heuvel.
        E) None of the above.

        Extra credit: Given a choice between Global Thermonuclear Warfare at the hands of Vladimir Putin of The Russian Federation versus Trump pardoning himself for offenses against The United States, who amongst us would fail immediately to drop to his or her knees begging and pleading with Trump to please, please pardon himself already?

        Extra extra credit: Given the same choice above, who amongst us would not adamantly demand that The Nobel Committee should award The Nobel Peace Prize to Trump if only Trump will please, please pardon himself already for offenses against The United States so as to save the world from the menace of Vladimir Putin’s obvious threat to launch Global Thermonuclear Warfare against Bill Browder, Ambassador McFaul and Robert Swan Mueller the Third, who self-evidently will not be otherwise deterred?

  14. I couldn’t wait to get to the comments to hear what a wonderful week Trump had, all the NATO members are thrilled, the Prime Minister of England was pleased at his interview with the Rupert Murdock owned “Sun” and of course, except for one mistaken word that it should have been obvious what he really meant. The press conference after the private meeting with Putin was a big hit.

    Russia is already gearing up to implement the things Putin and Trump agreed to with regard to Syria. You don’t know what they agreed to? We’ll all find out at the same time.

    This is where I come to find the people who think everything Trump does is wonderful. That Trade War is going to work out just fine just you wait. And that Russia thing… a witch hunt that nothing will come out of.

    1. We’re hoping for a change in that very struggle – starting with the actual participants found not in a collusion ..stupid word….but some form of conspiracy – left over from the successful but not concluded counter revolution of 2016. The one positive note .. it was fought with ballots not bullets. Mostly. So far. and the winners had a zero dollar budget,

    2. The Trade war you mention may be one of the biggest worries of the oligarchy. The attempt to benefit American workers by Trump endangers the monopolistic profits of the globalists. thank you Enigma for mentioning this interesting subtext

      1. Trump has no interest in benefiting American workers. If so he would have fairly paid the American (and Polish, Mexican and various Central American) workers he’s stiffed over the years.

        1. Enigma, make sure you read to the end: “For decades, Trump was seen as a hero for African American workers in New York City, but all of that changed when he decided to run for president.”

          “New York Times Article In 1984 Predicts Trump Could One Day Be A Great President

          By Rusty | Featured Contributor | July 11, 2018 9:32AM
          A column appearing in the New York Times in 1984 has resurfaced, in which it discusses real estate mogul Donald Trump’s uncanny ability to engage in successful negotiations, and even openly wonders if he might one day disarm hostile countries as President of the United States.

          It’s funny since the Times has now morphed into thinking the once brilliant negotiator is an incompetent clown.

          Reality dictates otherwise, with the President engaged in talks to disarm North Korea and bring peace – a once unimaginable concept – to the Korean peninsula. (RELATED: Historic Handshakes Compared: Trump Exudes Strength, Obama Oozed … Something Else).

          In the lengthy Times article, Trump is hailed repeatedly by friends and business rivals alike as a master negotiator. (RELATED: After Obama Failed, Trump Finally Brings World Cup to America).

          “Our company has given up trying to negotiate costs with him,” the head of a construction company explains. “We just say: ‘Tell us what you want, you’re going to get it anyway.’”

          The column then shifts to how this ability might translate on the biggest stage – negotiating with hostile countries as leader of the free world. The country they bring up at that time in Syria, but the task at hand remains the same, and the Times clearly believes he has the ability to become the negotiator-in-chief.

          In 1984, the New York Times told us that Donald Trump would be our best president.

          They forgot.

          — Johnny Ray (@johnnyrwhitsett) 12:15 AM – Jul 4, 2018
          “What does it all mean when some wacko over in Syria can end the world with nuclear weapons?” Trump asked when talking about his future plans.

          The column continues:

          His greatest dream is to personally do something about the problem and, characteristically, Donald Trump thinks he has an answer to nuclear armament: Let him negotiate arms agreements – he who can talk people into selling $100 million properties to him for $13 million. Negotiations is an art, he says and I have a gift for it.

          Does he ever.

          Donald Trump is a lot of things. Stupid ain’t one of them. Look at what the New York Times said about him in 1984. This is amazing.https://www.nytimes.com/1984/04/08/magazine/the-expanding-empire-of-donald-trump.html?pagewanted=all

          — John Steigerwald (@Steigerworld) 3:44 PM – Jul 8, 2018
          While some believed that these were the dreams and optimism of a naive Trump, the newspaper surmises that “through years of making his views known and through supporting candidates who share his views, it could someday happen.”

          Fortunately, it did happen. And the United States, along with the rest of the world, is a better place for it.

          President Trump has since been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following a summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un.

          Trump has “taken a huge and important step in the direction of the disarmament, peace, and reconciliation between North and South Korea,” Norwegian lawmakers wrote in their nomination letter.

          Who would have thought that the New York Times of all places called it 34 years ago?

          For decades, Trump was seen as a hero for African American workers in New York City, but all of that changed when he decided to run for president. During an event in 1999, the Reverend Jesse Jackson happily praised Trump’s contributions to the black community saying “We need your building skills, your gusto . . . for the people on Wall Street to represent diversity.” Jackson also called Trump a “friend” who “embraced “the under-served communities.” In addition, Jackson also commended Trump for giving opportunities to African Americans in New York: “When we opened this Wall Street project . . . He gave us space at 40 Wall Street, which was to make a statement about our having a presence there.””

          1. Trump was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by 18 House Republicans. BTW, most love black New Yorkers ever had for Trump died after his Central Park Five full page ad, advocating for the deaths of five teens who DNA later proved innocent. That he was able to get Jesse Jackson to take his contributions (Jesse took everyone’s money) means little.
            Trump was looked up to by rappers who liked how he rolled. No accounting for taste.

            1. I would guess Trump has employed a lot of black construction and casino and hotel workers.

              On the other hand, there was a big FHA case against Fred Trump so people think his dad was racist he must be as well.

              Maybe everybody likes their own kind and suspects “the other” at least a little. I think people are free to pick politicians that suit their perception of their ethnic interests. I would allow that to blacks or asians or mexican americans and I would allow it to white folks too.

              I will say this: given the differential levels of education, for whatever reasons, and how a lot of the migrants take unskilled jobs, I suspect more blacks approve of Donald’s “secure the borders” policies than the media would admit.

              1. Couple of thoughts, the two times the Federal Government sued Fred Trump for Housing Discrimination, Donald Trump was President of the company and involved in every aspect (“C” for colored on rental applications).
                Also, the unskilled jobs on the lower end taken by many migrants aren’t displacing black workers to any great degree. My opinion is that black people can readily recognize the inhumanity of watching families torn apart as it is such a part of their history. Certainly, there are some who object, but there also exist Diamond and Silk, and Pastor Mark Burns for whom I have little explanation except money.

                1. enigma – you are just jealous that Diamond and Silk have a bigger audience than you. 😉

                    1. “Selling my soul for a bigger audience isn’t an option.”

                      Enigma of course not. You did that long ago.

                    2. enigma – if Diamond and Silk believe in what they are doing, how is that selling their soul? Trump has done more for blacks than any President in my memory. I get the #WalkAway videos and it is amazing the number of blacks who are walking away.

                  1. right on Paul! Diamond and Silk are very entertaining. My fav moment was when Cenk of TYT interviewed them during the RNC convention. Oh my. Cenk is a fake progressive anyhow, but those ladies easily cleaned his clock. Fortunately for him they had another engagement =)

                2. “Couple of thoughts, the two times the Federal Government sued Fred Trump for Housing Discrimination, Donald Trump was President of the company and involved in every aspect (“C” for colored on rental applications).”

                  What Enigma leaves unmentioned is that the Federal Government could have gone after almost any NYC developer and chose Trump because he was a known figure. The end product was that the Federal Government had to drop the case because they did not have the proof. As far as “(“C” for colored on rental applications)” Enigma likes to tie the Trumps directly to that accusation, but like most of the things of this nature Enigma is bending the truth. There was no proof the Trumps had anything to do with those applications that might have existed with the C nor do I know if that even existed outside of a single person’s journal who at best might have been one individual out of hundreds or thousands.

                  I think most educational is the Howard Root video posted before. I advise anyone who has not to look up his videos choosing the one just under an hour and listening to it. That video provides enough knowledge to make one sweat when one hears the term “federal investigation”. Mr. Kurtz, if you have not heard it you will find it quite exciting. It starts off slow but catches up speed with a dramatic finish that requires all the information provided throughout the video.

                  People like Enigma will continue to use innuendo. He wants to find something against Donald Trump. He tried to do so with a 1920’s NYTimes article that when I looked up said absolutely nothing about Donald Trump who wasn’t even born at the time. It didn’t even say anything bad about Fred Trump if the person involved was even Fred Trump. All it said was that there was a disturbance and people were arrested and released on bail awaiting a hearing. A Fred Trump was simply released because apparently, he had done nothing wrong.

                  1. The government did not “drop” either case. There were settlements which required specific actions of the Trump company. Failure to comply with the first settlement led to the second Federal lawsuit.

            2. Your history is always a bit distorted. I don’t like the NYTimes so when it has some agreement with me I am totally surprised. Loads of people liked Trump. Even Hispanics and Asians. Your recent discoveries about Trump are purely based on ideology not common sense and not reality.

              When you called him a racist the first time you based that on a news article in the 1920’s that didn’t discuss anything about his father being a racist. And from that story where it is not even known if Trump’s was the one being talked about you wove a story to convict him of racism before he was born. That is your nature. You like to arm yourself with hate rather than deal fairly with those that have opinions differing from your own. It is your type of hate that created the racism seen in this country that cannot be wiped out because of people like you.

              1. It is you describing what I’ve written that’s distorted. Since everything I’ve communicated is in writing, why not produce what I actually wrote?

                1. “Since everything I’ve communicated is in writing, why not produce what I actually wrote?”

                  I did that at the time you made the comments and you spent hours failing to resurrect yourself. I don’t know where the beginning actually started but somewhere in that time frame I added a comment summarizing all or almost all the arguments made to that date. I told you where my comment was more than once and you left it apparently because you were unable to correct the record. To recognize the nature of your innuendo one needs to review a lot of your comments to get the full flavor.

                  This was my comment:

                  “I don’t think it is fair to convict the son based upon sins of the father. I don’t believe Trump’s father was racist either even though you wish to paint the racism claim with the broadest of brushes. If we use your logic then in Germany almost all people above a certain age would be considered Nazi’s and responsible for the murder of millions of people including gypsies, Jehovah Witnesses. Jews and other groups. Are you going to call that entire group racist? Do we wish to indict all the children of murders and racists. If not, tell me you retract this portion of your argument.

                  “From what I know about Trump he’s a lifelong racist”

                  Then it should be easy for you to list the things you know about Trump that make him a life long racist. You have listed a few circumstances which if extended to the general population would make all people black or white or others, racist. Look at the black communities and how they react to other minorities in their midst.

                  We have already discussed landlords and a small part of their problems. I am sure some of the people working for Trump might have been racist and some of the black people working for Trump might have been anti-Semitic and racist as well. We also know that black landlords tried to prevent black people from renting. Were those black landlords racist against blacks? In the days of slavery there were blacks that also owned slaves which makes things a little less clear. (Thomas Sowell wrote a book which explained the financial aspect of claimed racism which wasn’t true. It includes red lining, loans and some other housing issues. You sound like you have a chip on your shoulder so you should read it and then decide. The raw facts demonstrate something completely different than rampant racism. (not saying racism doesn’t exist). You would do well reading Thomas Sowell.)

                  The 5 kids let go by D’Blasio for rape probably were guilty though some of the 5 more so than others. There is a lot more to that case. Your conclusion in this case means that every white person in a jury that finds a black person guilty is a racist should the jury vote find the black person innocent. That is not racism. A $40 Million payoff by the city was not appropriate.

                  “didn’t want black people counting his money.”

                  This sounds more like heresy. Provide the source of the quote with the quote and why this should be considered an accurate statement. People’s memories are short and this sounds like a long term memory.

                  If we use your evidence to brand Trump a racist then everyone is a racist. Trump said it right, he is among the least racist persons. I believe him because I ***don’t have sufficient evidence*** to prove otherwise. In my mind people are innocent until proven guilty. You haven’t proven your case, but you have proven that people will make accusations of racism that are unfounded.”

                  1. “e I added a comment summarizing all or almost all the arguments made to that date.”
                    This is where you began to wrong… you made a summary.

                1. enigma – there is NO proof that Putin ordered the hacking. It is even likely that there was no hacking. I think Putin’s offer to Mueller was brilliant.

                  1. Paul – You can claim no proof because you weren’t given it by the intelligence agencies. It would seem a particularly inopportune time for Trump to claim, “They told me but I didn’t believe them!”

                    1. enigma – our ‘intelligence agencies’ and I use the terms loosely are not very intelligent. Remember they found WMDs in Iraq, they missed the Arab Spring, they missed the fail of the Berlin Wall, etc. Their failures have been epic. I do not put a lot of confidence in our intelligence agencies.

                    2. Then you, as is your right, don’t have faith in the intelligence agencies. Donald Trump doesn’t seem to believe in anyone/anything with one exception. He goes against his intelligence agencies, his advisors, his allies, the only person he is never out of step with is Vladimir Putin. Wonder why?

                    3. Enigma,…
                      Trump said that as head of state, Putin is responsible for Russian meddling in our elections.
                      You must have missed this w eek’s CBS interview euth Trump.

                    4. I saw that! It came across as Putin was responsible as a technicality. Not that he personally ordered the hacking which we learned Trump was told of by his intelligence agencies, two weeks before the inauguration.

                    5. Enigma,
                      Both the questions and the answer were non-specific, as I recall.
                      I think that the question was “do you hold Putin responsable for 2016 election meddlling”?
                      I’d have to review the tape to be sure, but that’s my recollection of the Q.&A.
                      I don’know if Trump has been directly asked if Putin himself ordered the Russian activity in 2026.
                      Putin has denied involvment, and has suggested that those activities may have been undertaken independenly by “patriotic Russians” 😃😀😄

                    6. I think that I saw part of that of that video on the news as I was walking out the door, Enigma.
                      But that was yesterday, Enigma. What did he say TODAY? 😄
                      This isn’t an administration where you can just listen to a statement one day and that same statement just hangs out there with the same words, same meaning, getting stale.
                      Yesterday’s statements may “no longer be operative” the next day, and possibly even later on in the same day.
                      Do try to keep up, Enigma!😉😃😄

                    7. Tom Nash – Today, he invited Putin to the White House which effectively wiped out comments from the day before. Of particular interest was Dan Coats reaction who was being interviewed by Andrea Mitchell on live television when she broke the news. Trump’s strategy is to do so much crazy stuff that nobody can keep up. Mueller has the staff to simply follow the money which is where Trump’s real interest will always lie.

                  2. Paul – BTW, how exactly would Putin’s offer work regarding the Americans he wants to interview? Would they be arrested and charged with crimes? How long could they be held? Perhaps just swept off the streets and released if they perform satisfactorily. Perhaps America could become just like… Russia?

                    1. enigma – there is a treaty in force, we would deal with through the treaty.

                    2. PC Schulte,.,
                      Putin may even be willing to loan Mueller some of his former KGB colleagues to assist the Special Counsel team.
                      i suppose that there could be some downsides to this arrangement, but it might balance out some of the biases of the current composition of those on the SP team.

                    3. Tom Nash – they couldn’t be worse than the team Mueller has now and they may have actually insight into Russian collusion and who did it. 😉

                    4. PC Schulte,
                      – Additionally, it might be the only way that the Mueller team would take an overall interest in the 2016 campaign.

                    5. enigma – the treaty cuts both ways, they have to be accused of a crime and it an extraction treaty. What Putin said was that if Mueller would put through the paperwork, which would include some proof, Russia would look at honoring the claim. He is basically calling Mueller’s bluff.

                    6. Paul – GThe indictments seem to outline plenty of proof against the Russians, I’m asking by what grounds are we going to round up American citizens to be interrogated by Russians?

                    7. enigma – I would assume (and that is an assumption) that Russia would have to specify crimes by individuals and ask to extradite them.

                    8. Paul – I know, that it took four days for Trump to finally turn down the Russian offer (Even the US Senate voted 98-0 in a resolution against it) without any suggestion of crimes committed by the Americans on their list.

                    9. Enigma,
                      You mentioned your objection to making Americans available to Russian investigators, “without any evidence that they had committed any crimes”.
                      I don’t see that as a major probkem;. if the Russian investigators display the same Mueller-Weinstein determination and hyper -agressiveness, I’m sure that they’ll be able to find “something” illegal.
                      For those where they can’t turn up
                      any crimes, the Russians can say that they were “subjects”, not “targets”, of their investigation.

                    10. Tom Nash – It does appear that Mueller has real evidence, down to the computer the individuals used for each action. We should require the same, or would you turn over Americans for political reasons? Quite the slippery slope.

                    11. enigma – Mueller has 16 Democratic attorneys and has yet to deliver any evidence of collusion. After the Strzok and Page hearings it seems clear there was no basis for an investigation, it was a Witch Hunt and Mueller is the Witch Hunter General. And yet he has not found a witch.

                    12. Paul – That the evidence hasn’t been delivered yet does not mean it doesn’t exist. I may be one of the few that have said there may be no evidence that Trump himself conspired, although Donald Jr, Jared and a few more will go down on conspiracy charges. In my opinion, it is 100% certain Trump is guilty of serious financial crimes, along with defrauding the government, and obstruction. We can agree to disagree and in this case, time will certainly tell.

                    13. Hi Enigma,….
                      I probably didn’t clearly express what a I was getting at.
                      ( Like I said, this is all hypothetical….the Russians aren’t going to be allowed. ti “help” with the investigation).
                      In your exchange with Paul, I think you were the one thatbmentiinef the lack of an extraditiin treaty with Russia, and the lack of any treaty that would allow Russians to participate in our investigations, or the U.S. in there investigations.
                      If that’s not an accurate summary of what you were saying, let me know.
                      My point was/ is that the lack of a treaty, or other formal, reciprocal agreements with Russia ( or any other country) re extradition or investigations does not prohibit/ prevent an extradiction request from being granted.
                      I.E, let’s say that we have no extradition agreement with Brazil.
                      A violent BrBrazilian whose crimes in Brazil include murders, is arrested in tge U. S. for robbery.
                      Brazil says I know that there is no extradition agreement between our countries , but we’d really like to have this guy sent back to our country to face justice there.
                      I don’t think that the lack of an extradition agreement would prevent the U.S. from granting their request.
                      Similarly, the lack of an extradition treaty ( or an agreement granting the right for one country to participate in an investigation conducted by another country) would not prevent those two countries from jointly working on an investigation.
                      Unless there is a statute prohibiting these agreements, the lack of treaties or other formal agreements would not bar the countries from working together.
                      As far as turning over witnesses to the Russians for questioning, it’s unlikely that U.S. authoities would allow unrestricted and unconditional access to suspect’s or witness es.
                      So I’m not arguing for Russian participation in these investigation s.
                      Also, the people that Putin would chose to partipate may prove to be as biased as the Mueller team.

                    14. Tom – I’m saying that the Russians Mueller might wish to talk to have been charged with crimes and indicted in the United States. The Americans the Russians want to interrogate have been charged with nothing. Not even the same circumstance. By what authority will Trump round up and/or turn over these Americans for interrogation? If Russia “Trump’s up” some charges, doesn’t America have some duty to find some credibility behind the charges before presenting them for questioning?

                    15. Enigma,…
                      I’ll focus on a question that you asked; “By what authority will Trump round up these American and turn them over to Russians for interrogation?”
                      ( I think that quote is verbatim…I’d have to back out of the reply box and hunt for it to be 100% sure it’s verbatim).
                      #1. It’s not going to happen, so we are discussing hypothetical s….anyone who believes zRussian investigators will actually horn in on the Mueller investigation is worrying over nothing
                      #2. I’d put the odds of Trump rumning and being re-elected in 2020 at c.30-35%.
                      In the very unlikely event that Trump is indeed under Putin’s thumb, there will be signs that Trump is going to “Russianize” America before he takes extreme measures to suppress any opposition to his “Russianization” program.
                      E.G.–The White House will be remodeled to resemble a Kremlin building.
                      — All of the signs in the DC area will be in both English and Russian.
                      — most of the White House staff/ servants will be repkaced by Cossacks.
                      I could list more warning signs, but those who fear the Trump-Putin relationship already know what to look for. ( I’m not saying that you’re in that group….I think that you lack the required hysteria and paranoia to qualify)
                      So, back to your question. At this point, Trump has no authority to round up American witnesses and suspect for interrogation by Russians.
                      Not yet achieving dictatorial powers, Trump is basically a bystander in directing the Mueller investigation.
                      Rod Rosenstein arguably has that authority.
                      There would obviously be an uproar if Rosenstein invited the Russians into the investigation…but he’s the man calling the shots on the Mueller probe.
                      If he so desired, Rosenstein could probably wright another secret memo to Mueller expanding Muellers staff to include Russians from the Moscow Prosecutor General’s office.
                      So instead of secretly expanding thevscope of this sprawling investigation, he’d merely is expanding the staff to include Russians who want to get to the bottom of this mess.
                      And it might speed uo the conclusion of the investigation.
                      So,in short, I think we agree that Trump lacks the authority to invite in Russian investigators.

                    16. Tom – I’m concerned with the people here, many of them lawyers, who think it’s a wonderful idea? Af for other signs of the Russian apocalypse… Putin is coming over to inspect the home he’s bought and paid for. The White House!

                    17. Enigma,…
                      – I probably haven’t skimmed the comments closely enough to pick up on widespread support for bringing in Russian investigators.
                      My main point in the exchanges with you is that it “could be” done, and I think legally done.
                      I never criticised Rosenstein for appointing a Special Counsel.
                      Trump’s comments after firing Comey made a Special Counsel investigation inevitable.
                      I take issue with his choice of Mueller, who has close professional ties and a personal friendship with a key player in this mess.
                      There are other missteps,
                      and overreaching by both Rosenstein and Mueller IMO…
                      I’ve typed enough and I have to leave shortly, so I’ll leave it at that for now.
                      Or this for now….I think Rosenstein has the legal authority and cover to do about any damn thing he wants to do, mostly though Mueller and Rosenstein’s ability to unilaterally decide the original scope, then the expanded scope, of the SC investigation.
                      He has no reason or desire to bring in Russian investigators….what I was saying is “if” Rosenstein did want Russian investigators, he’d probably just issue another memo and order it done.

                    18. That the US could interview the Russians if permitted to I don’t doubt. I am waiting to hear by what power, US citizens not charged with a crime can be compelled to appear before Russians?

                    19. “Trump’s comments after firing Comey made a Special Counsel investigation inevitable.”

                      Tom, that is a very easy statement to make but doesn’t hold much substance. A lot of things could be said to have made ” a Special Counsel investigation inevitable” especially since many on the opposing side doesn’t think this is an illegitimate Presidency. There was no need for a Special Counsel since we had the necessary organizations in place to do any investigations required. We did not need a politicized Special Counsel and I believe that has done great damage to the nation.

                    20. enigma – if anyone sold him the house it was Hillary and Barack.

                    21. Paul – We should perhaps wait for the final tally of Russian money that has accrued to Trump. Starting with the Russian portion of the $30 million he got from the NRA. No clamoring for investigations about that?

                    22. enigma – did Trump or the GOP get the 30 mil? I am not disputing they spent the 30 mil, but how about the SEIU, or the CIO? How did Hillary accumulate 1.2 bil?

                    23. Trump got the $30, a huge increase from the $12 million Romney got the previous cycle. If the SEIU and CIO got undisclosed money, we should call them out as well. I can’t really think of any good reason for undisclosed political contributions?

                    24. enigma – clearly the NRA thought Trump was a better candidate than Romney. 😉 The SEIU and AFL/CIO donated to Hillary. How much?

                    25. PC Schulte,…
                      If Hillary had been able to raise and spent more than that measley $1,2 Biliion to Trump’s c$,650,000, maybe she could have won.
                      But a mere nearly 2-to1 spendjng advantage simply was not enough.
                      I think she also had about a 10-to-1 lead in campaign contributions from Wall Steet

                    26. Here are all the union contributions. Are you comparing those to Russian money?

                      Political Action Committee Total Contributed
                      American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $18,743,624.00
                      American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $4,743,030.00
                      American Federation of Teachers $4,067,400.00
                      American Federation of Teachers $3,800,872.00
                      Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union $516,210.00
                      Office & Prof Employees Interntl Union $507,412.00
                      1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East $341,030.00
                      National Assn of Letter Carriers $300,730.00
                      Painters & Allied Trades Union $171,920.00
                      Civil Service Employees Assn $89,658.00
                      AFL-CIO $70,396.00
                      Ironworkers Union $70,000.00
                      National Assn of Letter Carriers $69,882.00
                      Bricklayers Union $65,218.00
                      Amalgamated Transit Union $60,092.00
                      Sheet Metal Workers Union $60,000.00
                      National Education Assn $60,000.00
                      United Transportation Union $60,000.00
                      Laborers Union $56,000.00
                      Boilermakers Union $54,600.00
                      International Assn of Fire Fighters $50,042.00
                      Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union $50,000.00
                      Communications Workers of America $50,000.00
                      Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $50,000.00
                      Bricklayers Union $50,000.00
                      Office & Professional Employees Union $46,000.00
                      Laborers Union/New York $45,216.00
                      American Postal Workers Union $40,000.00
                      Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers $40,000.00
                      Transport Workers Union $39,000.00
                      Service Employees International Union $37,500.00
                      National Air Traffic Controllers Assn $35,000.00
                      Carpenters & Joiners Union $35,000.00
                      United Auto Workers $34,700.00
                      United Steelworkers $34,000.00
                      United Food & Commercial Workers Union $33,290.00
                      National Treasury Employees Union $33,200.00
                      AFL-CIO $32,068.00
                      New York State Public Employees Fedn $30,940.00
                      Seafarers International Union $30,000.00
                      Plumbers/Pipefitters Union $29,000.00
                      UNITE HERE $27,840.00
                      New York State United Teachers $21,784.00
                      UNITE HERE $20,000.00
                      Assn of Flight Attendants $20,000.00
                      American Federation of Govt Employees $20,000.00
                      American Maritime Officers $20,000.00
                      International Longshoremens Assn $19,000.00
                      Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen $17,000.00
                      Sheet Metal Workers Union $16,836.00
                      Local 32BJ SEIU Afl-cio $16,004.00
                      Transportation Communications Union $16,000.00
                      National Assn of Postmasters $15,000.00
                      Asbestos Workers Union $14,000.00
                      National Rural Letter Carriers Assn $14,000.00
                      National Elevator Constructors Union $14,000.00
                      Teamsters Union $14,000.00
                      AFL-CIO Bldg/Construction Trades Dept $13,000.00
                      Ohio Council 8, AFSCME $12,788.00
                      Air Line Pilots Assn $12,000.00
                      Council of School Supervisors & Admins $12,000.00
                      Directors Guild of America $12,000.00
                      Intl Longshoremen’s/Warehousemen’s Union $12,000.00
                      Plumbers/Pipefitters Union Local 773 $11,600.00
                      United Pilots PAC $10,000.00
                      IBEW Local 98 $10,000.00
                      Operating Engineers Local 324 $10,000.00
                      Electronic Machine Furniture Workers $10,000.00
                      Intl Alliance Theatrical Stage Employees $10,000.00
                      Transport Workers Union Local 100 $10,000.00
                      Allied Pilots Assn $10,000.00
                      Operating Engineers Local 17 $8,000.00
                      New York City Stagehands PAC $7,000.00
                      United Mine Workers of America $7,000.00
                      Professional Airways Systems Specialists $7,000.00
                      National Assn of Postal Supervisors $7,000.00
                      Marine Engineers Beneficial Assn/Dist 1 $6,000.00
                      National Alliance of Postal & Federal Em $6,000.00
                      Operating Engineers Local 832 $6,000.00
                      Teamsters Local 115 $6,000.00
                      Operating Engineers Local 138 $5,000.00
                      Operating Engineers Local 487 $5,000.00
                      American Federation of Musicians $4,800.00
                      Maintenance of Way Employees $4,000.00
                      Paper Allied-Ind Chem/Energy Wkrs Union $4,000.00
                      Mason Tenders District Council of NY $4,000.00
                      Plumbers/Pipefitters Union Local 519 $4,000.00
                      Marine Engineers Beneficial Assn/Dist 4 $4,000.00
                      Plumbers/Pipefitters Union Local 1 $4,000.00
                      Steamfitters Local 638 $4,000.00
                      Operating Engineers Local 545/545C/545D $3,000.00
                      Glass Molders Pottery Plastics Workers $3,000.00
                      Suffolk County Police Benevolent Assn $2,840.00
                      Assn of Professional Flight Attendants $2,500.00
                      Plumbers/Pipefitters Union Local 475 $2,000.00
                      Carpenters Union/New England $2,000.00
                      Asbestos Workers Union Local 12 $2,000.00
                      Operating Engineers Local 68 $2,000.00
                      IBEW Local 349 $2,000.00
                      Bakery, Confectionery & Tobacco Workers $2,000.00
                      National League of Postmasters $2,000.00
                      Operating Engineers Local 15 $2,000.00
                      Plumbers/Pipefitters Union Local 9 $2,000.00
                      Graphic Communications Union $2,000.00
                      Utility Workers Union of America $2,000.00
                      American Postal Workers Union AFL-CIO $1,846.00
                      Operating Engineers Local 106 $1,400.00
                      Carpenters Union/Nassau County $1,400.00
                      Amer Federation of Musicians Local 802 $1,000.00
                      Federal Managers Assn $1,000.00
                      National Assn of Air Traffic Specialists $1,000.00
                      National Weather Service Employees Org $1,000.00
                      International Assn of Fire Fighters $808.00
                      Subway Surface Supervisors Assn $800.00
                      Intl Fedn of Prof & Technical Engineers $200.00
                      Electrical Radio & Machine Workers $0.00
                      Retail, Wholesale & Dept Store Union -$8,000.00

                    27. enigma – my friend, you are past $30 mil by the time you get to the fifth contributor. 😉

                    28. “Trump got the $30, a huge increase from the $12 million Romney got the previous cycle.”

                      Accuracy is not your strong point Enigma. Firstly total expenditures for this election cycle increased tremendously so one expects to see the higher increases. Most of that $30Million went to defeat Hillary Clinton.

                    29. “I’m sure there’s some point you’re trying to make Allan. No need for me to lie when the truth will suffice.”

                      Enigma, in this case, I didn’t call you a liar. I just stated that accuracy wasn’t your strong suit. I think I might have to add reading comprehension. The $30M was split between Trump and defeating Hillary so your $30Million lacked accuracy. No need to quote Vanity Fair. I got the numbers from a data source a type of source you ought to learn how to use.

                    30. Allan – Think real hard on this one. What is the difference between helping Trump and defeating Hillary? Is there any scenario where that wasn’t one and the same? Did Jill Stein (another friend of Russia) have a chance? Try harder…

                    31. “Allan – Think real hard on this one. What is the difference between helping Trump and defeating Hillary?”

                      For those with more than a simple mind, there is a big difference. The NRA was voting with its money more to defeat Hillary than it was to support Trump. If there had been a different Democratic candidate who strongly supported the second amendment the NRA might have supported that other candidate and certainly wouldn’t have spent that type of money to defeat such a candidate.

                    32. Making things up again Enigma.

                      That is how you got to the point of accusing Donald Trump of racism. You claimed his father at age 21 was a racist and proven in the newspaper. The actual reprint of the news article you referred me to proved that your claim was totally false. If you have fact proving your contentions let’s hear it but from experience most likely your fact is a falsehood.

                    33. It’s always amusing to hear your version of things I wrote. The actual article says that Fred Trump was arrested with 6 others at a Klan/police riot. They gave the correct home address for Fred Trump (for Donald and others that claim it wasn’t him) and he was represented by the same lawyer as the other Klansmen. I give him far more credit for running a company that discriminated against black renters (Donald was the President of the firm so let’s include him) and their managers marked applications from black applicants, “C” for colored to ensure they were denied. That plus other statements he’s made are proof enough for me.

                    34. “It’s always amusing to hear your version of things I wrote.”

                      Enigma, you will never resurrect yourself on this issue. The actual article listed people that were arrested. We cannot even be sure if the Fred Trump that was arrested actually was Donald Trump’s father. It happened at age 21 about 20 years before Donald Trump was born. Bail was set for each person mentioned but Fred Trump was simply released which indicates he wasn’t involved in anything.

                      You don’t know that the arrested individuals were either for or against the KKK. Likely the lawyer was a public defender representing everyone but I don’t know and I doubt you know. We don’t even know that the “fictitious” lawyer you discuss represented Trump in anything.

                      That was your primary argument for calling Donald Trump a racist. If I remember correctly your rationalization was something like ‘an acorn doesn’t fall far from the tree, but in this case, the tree wasn’t even found to be racist. Anyone can clearly see that you find no problem accusing anyone of racism if it suits your victimhood status.

                      The housing case was discussed in full. In your words here you are stretching the truth again so that what you say is actually a lie. In the end, the housing authority found nothing to charge the Trumps with and the case was closed. The managers the Trumps had managing buildings must have been in the thousands. To my knowledge, the accusation of writing C for colored involved one “manager”.

                      It is distasteful when a woman cries rape when she wasn’t raped and just as distasteful when one clinging to victimhood status cries racism when it didn’t occur.

                    35. Enigma, you guys are something else. I looked over the article and what it essentially says is rumors of Enigma being a male prostitute have never been proven or disproven so we will never know if Enigma is a male prostitute.

                      The article from the NYTimes that they show intentionally blocks out the preceding line and 3 lines later so so it can read as if Fred Trump was released on bail even though without the red line it reads much more clearly that the bail was for someone else and Trump was discharged.

                      This is the type of lying and deception that Enigma engages in all the time. He proves himself to be totally untrustworthy.

                      As far as the right address, how many of you that have children have seen their children or their friends change their ID’s to a different name and address just so they can go to a bar if they are underage? Enigma, how did you ever get so old being so naive?

                    36. I provided the whole article without editing, in my own blog https://enigmainblack.wordpress.com/2016/05/03/the-sins-of-the-fathers/ I thought I was quite fair, including Donald’s entire silly lie of a defense. His defense was only topped by your excuse for the correct address for Fred Trump being listed, except in this case, someone made up a false ID in case they got picked up in a Klan riot? If you want to hang your hat on Donald Trump not being racist, you better hope the tapes Mark Burnett has from The Apprentice never come out, one never knows what Michael Cohen has on tape as well?

                    37. “I provided the whole article without editing, in my own blog”

                      Trash and that is being kind. … (writing in the style of your article) You were never a male prostitute, you were never arrested. This never happened. You were never arrested for male prostitution, never convicted and never even charged. But you make wild accusations about Trump and how racism jumps from one generation to another based on fallacious documentation.

                      Enigma, you live in a glass house we all know the dirt that you have written here. Time to clean up your act.

                      Everyone has witnessed your casual relationship with the truth and can decide on whether you are a male prostitute or just a liar. I won’t say as you did “like father like son” because I wouldn’t attach such a stigma to your child that I am sure is a completely decent fellow.

                      Isn’t that how your article went?

                    38. Again, no need to make wild accusations about Trump. The truth will suffice. I can’t wait to hear the tapes of him negotiating to pay off the Playboy Playmate. I wonder how many others exist? And if those Apprentice tapes include what has been alledged…

                    39. “Again, no need to make wild accusations about Trump. The truth will suffice. I can’t wait to hear the tapes of him negotiating to pay off the Playboy Playmate. I wonder how many others exist? And if those Apprentice tapes include what has been alledged…”

                      Again, no need to make wild accusations about Enigma. The truth will suffice. The truth is something Enigma seldom provides.

                      We have already had a couple of dozen claims against Trump and they have been proven wrong. Now your hope is that he might have paid off a Playboy Playmate and you fantasize about potential tapes that exist of Trump not breaking any laws but being embarrassed. So what? How does that affect the economy or unemployment?

                      You have some bizarre voyeuristic sexual fantasies. Maybe you will share and enlighten us a bit more about your deviant behavior.

                    40. Trump’s lawyers have already unblocked the tape where Trump and Cohen discuss paying off the Playmate. Do try to keep up with the news. While I do hope to see the video of Trump meeting with Putin. I have to surrender to the fact that only Putin has that.

                    41. You already heard the tape, Enigma? I haven’t.

                      But, already you are starting to paraphrase what the tape says. Gradually you will produce your usual lies based on evidence that doesn’t exist.

                      Will the tape produce anything unknown when Trump was elected? No. Your voyeurism has created a sickness that is taking you in the wrong direction.

                    42. It wasn’t known that Trump was involved in the $150,000 payoff to Karen MacDougal because guess what? Trump lied about it. I have said far less than Guiliani has said about the tape, that Trump and Cohen discussed the payment has been asserted by all sides. Give me an example of where I paraphrased anything?

                    43. “It wasn’t known that Trump was involved… Give me an example of where I paraphrased anything?”

                      Take note of the fact that I asked you if you heard the tape. You didn’t seem to answer yes. That means that at best you were paraphrasing another or copying a quote in full context which you didn’t do. Therefore, at best all you did was paraphrase a paraphrase from a dubious primary source.

                      Do you know what a paraphrase is?
                      Do you know what a primary source is?

                    44. Describing something it contained isn’t nearly the same thing as paraphrasing. If it was you could have come up with an example, it was only a few posts back, not hard to find. If I said your posts were full of contentious dribble, that isn’t the same as paraphrasing your post. Try harder, or better yet, retire from your weak trolling.

                    45. “Describing something it contained isn’t nearly the same thing as paraphrasing.”

                      Enigma, I don’t have an issue with that though you do both inaccurately and out of context.

                      What I said in my last post was: “Take note of the fact that I asked you if you heard the tape. You didn’t seem to answer yes. That means that at best you were paraphrasing another or copying a quote in full context which you didn’t do. Therefore, at best all you did was paraphrase a paraphrase from a dubious primary source.”

                      The operative statement is “at best you were paraphrasing another or copying a quote in full context which you didn’t do.”

                      In Fred Trump’s case, you made up the circumstances for him being a part of the KKK march when in fact your own newspaper article didn’t link Trump to that at all. You said he used the same lawyer as the others, but you don’t know if he used a lawyer or not and you don’t know who the lawyer was. Quite likely it was a public defender who represented everyone and had nothing to do with Trump. Further, Trump didn’t need a lawyer as he was released which is what happens to innocent people. Moreover, you like to show sites that show a newspaper article with red ink obstructing some of the lines so that one might believe “Fred Trump” was released on bail when he was released, as an innocent bystander. You don’t even know if that was the real Fred Trump. Everything about you protecting your ideology is disingenuous and if not a lie is a truth that has been spun to represent a lie.

                2. “Since you’re willing to consider the NYT as a source. Trump has had proof since before the inauguration that Putin ordered hacking.”

                  No, Enigma, I do not find the NYTimes a good source when there are PC issues or political issues. I feel its reporting has gotten worse over the years. The NYTimes doesn’t report completely or inaccurately and one frequently doesn’t know if the source is legitimate. Whatever Trump knew was known by Obama before Trump even became a candidate. With all the crazy things that have happened at the FBI, DOJ, IRS and elsewhere its hard to draw conclusions about anything. That is why all the data needs to be released yet the DOJ and FBI are obstructing such release. Some of the stuff that was withheld and later released had nothing to do with national security. It was self-protectionism so we as a people cannot draw any firm conclusions except that inappropriate actions took place at the FBI and DOJ. For a democratic republic that can be lethal.

  15. I must disagree with our host on this.

    Many suggest that President Trump showed marked weakness in not confronting President Putin on various issues, implying that he threw the CIA under the bus and sidestepped injustices prosecuted by Mr. Putin’s regime.

    I propose instead that President Trump acted deliberately in the objective he wished to convey to the public in the announcement portion of the meeting. We do not know of course exactly what transpired in full during the closed door meetings and I do not foresee this as being any form of sell-out on our demands.

    We need to have a background to understand the type of negotiation tactic.

    At the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis President Kennedy essentially faced two existential choices: bomb Cuba and face WWIII; or find a way out of the crisis through some form of negotiation.

    Each of the three leaders, Castro, Khrushchev, and Kennedy among their own advisors had both hawks and doves attempting to sway their leaders to their side. Kennedy had his hawk in General Lemay–who pressed for a 1000+ sortie air campaign the first day of the attack.

    On the other side was “Tommy” Thompson Jr., who served as ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1957 to 1962 and had a personal relationship with Nikita Khrushchev. Now serving on the Executive Committee of the National Security Council, Mr. Thompson suggested that Kennedy allow Khrushchev a face saving way out of the crisis which all three leaders wanted to end without war. To this he segued the situation where his opponent could say to the Soviet People and the hawks that their leader made a strategic victory and saved Cuba from a US Invasion. Later, the US removed intermediate range nukes from Turkey as a condition.

    I believe we are seeing something similar here. Regardless of what is happening elsewhere such as in the case with Crimea, Syria and other areas of contention between Russia and the West, it appears President Putin perceives the Russia election interference issue as not only a thorny matter but probably an insult. It might agitate him, for better or worse, and as a result he might throw up a wall. He has displayed many times in the past that he will fight when confronted and especially when backed into a corner.

    We also have to accept the fact that despite how ruthless the Russian president is toward some of his own people and his enemies, for the purpose of bilateral negotiation he IS the leader of Russia. Barking at him in beginning a negotiation is not going to work with him in this environment.

    In the Cuban Crisis, we had to take some of the pressure off Khrushchev so that he could negotiate effectively with us. This probably is in some form the case today with the Helsinki summit. If President Trump took this perceived greatly contentious issue away by declaring it was irrelevant it might make President Putin more amenable toward deescalating the tension between the two governments, who’s leaders both declared several times publicly over the past year that relations were at an all time low and this was a dangerous situation. We have to take both at their word considering the consequences of a fuse being lit.

    The best thing we can do is to allow the matter to float for a few weeks and allow for some shuttle diplomacy to occur. I believe we have the potential to come close to moving away from a destructive future if we simply allow the leaders the time and opportunity to achieve a success.

    1. Awesome. I’ll lay the odds that the day glo bozo would be forced to use his “lifeline” if asked to identify “Cuban Missile Crisis.”

      this is to “ya, he’s a traitorous imbecile, but this time it’s part of the plan” darren

        1. Ultimately, that depends on who’s doing the counting; does it not? I find it immensely valuable; and a signpost of such significance that future generations will likely study it–most likely in an upper-level seminar. Thanks for your contribution.

          1. Marky Mark Mark – having taken a lot of upper-level seminars, as you like to call them, I can tell you from my experience, no one is ever going to study your work, They are not going to study my work either if that makes you feel better. 😉

            1. Some day your Cheeto-stained basement will be uncovered, let us hope you are presentable.

              1. YSNOT…, I think Markum’s mother cleans up after him, so I don’t think she let’s her basement that Mark lives in get Cheeto-stained.
                Besides, I think Markum prefers another snack over Cheetos.

        2. What else is new? His “statements” rarely contain anything of value.
          A.- That’s not his objective
          B.- It’s probably beyond his capacity to really contribute anything
          C.- when he expends so much energy being an *******, it’s unlikely he that he has time for anything else.

          1. A.–There is no missile crisis to be averted by Trump’s reputed brinksmanship at Helsinki with Putin.
            B.–Mark M.’s arrows objectively hit the bull’s-eye on his targets every last time.
            C.–There’s no objective evidence to indicate that Mark M. has expended so little as one drop of sweat drawing his bow.

            Besides, the entertainment value of Mark M.’s archery remains positively priceless.

            1. L4D enables David Benson – geez, your easily entertained. You must have loved the class clown in school. That kid who disrupted the classroom. I would hate to see what your reading list is. 😉

            2. I think support groups can be wonderful, even for low-life trolls.
              They even have their own cheerleaders.

              1. Comment was about the “archery”BS, and trolls of a feather, sticking together.

            3. Thanks. We do what we can with the simple tools that providence so graciously provides.

              1. You’re welcome, Mark M.

                P. S. Keep the tendon on your heel well covered.

        3. Darren Smith,

          “Marky Mark’s NPD”

          Narcissistic personality disorder — one of several types of personality disorders — is a mental condition in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of extreme confidence lies a fragile self-esteem that’s vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

          A narcissistic personality disorder causes problems in many areas of life, such as relationships, work, school or financial affairs. People with narcissistic personality disorder may be generally unhappy and disappointed when they’re not given the special favors or admiration they believe they deserve. They may find their relationships unfulfilling, and others may not enjoy being around them.

          Treatment for narcissistic personality disorder centers around talk therapy (psychotherapy).

          Signs and symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder and the severity of symptoms vary. People with the disorder can:
          Have an exaggerated sense of self-importance
          Have a sense of entitlement and require constant, excessive admiration
          Expect to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it
          Exaggerate achievements and talents
          Be preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate
          Believe they are superior and can only associate with equally special people
          Monopolize conversations and belittle or look down on people they perceive as inferior
          Expect special favors and unquestioning compliance with their expectations
          Take advantage of others to get what they want
          Have an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others
          Be envious of others and believe others envy them
          Behave in an arrogant or haughty manner, coming across as conceited, boastful and pretentious
          Insist on having the best of everything — for instance, the best car or office

          At the same time, people with narcissistic personality disorder have trouble handling anything they perceive as criticism, and they can:

          Become impatient or angry when they don’t receive special treatment
          Have significant interpersonal problems and easily feel slighted
          React with rage or contempt and try to belittle the other person to make themselves appear superior
          Have difficulty regulating emotions and behavior
          Experience major problems dealing with stress and adapting to change
          Feel depressed and moody because they fall short of perfection
          Have secret feelings of insecurity, shame, vulnerability and humiliation

          ***When to see a doctor***

          People with narcissistic personality disorder may not want to think that anything could be wrong, so they may be unlikely to seek treatment. If they do seek treatment, it’s more likely to be for symptoms of depression, drug or alcohol use, or another mental health problem. But perceived insults to self-esteem may make it difficult to accept and follow through with treatment.
          If you recognize aspects of your personality that are common to narcissistic personality disorder or you’re feeling overwhelmed by sadness, consider reaching out to a trusted doctor or mental health provider. Getting the right treatment can help make your life more rewarding and enjoyable.

          *** Emphasis

          1. Amazing. All this cut-and-pasting and he acts as if he doesn’t realize he’s diagnosed the day glo bozo to a T.

            this is to “‘Doc’ georgie”

            1. Marky Mark Mark – and this from the King of cut-and-paste. Methinks you do project too much. You should stop complaining about others cut-and-pasting until you stop doing it. Maybe one in two hundred of your posts is original. The rest are regurgitated bilge.

              1. You’re maybe on to something. Many of my missives entertain the hell out of me, but I haven’t put in the time to figure out how to locate them after the passage of time. If I could find them, I would certainly save a little time from my current practice of lovingly hand-crafting virtually each and every post; then launching them out into the cold cruel world–hopefully sufficiently equipped to survive and thrive in the ever-demanding marketplace of ideas.

                this is to “wherever I go, paulie apparently goes” paulie

                1. Marky Mark Mark – it is not personal, I read every comment or at least skim them. Some I respond to, most not. Don’t get full of your self. If it was personal, I would respond to each and every one of your comments. However, I don’t. I pick the windmills I want to tilt at.

      1. Marky Mark Mark – the President, yours and mine, would have had no trouble with the Cuban Missle Crisis, he lived through it, just like I did. That is when I kissed my a$$ goodbye. You wouldn’t even have been a twinkle in your father’s eye. Remember, we finally learned that Kennedy secretly traded pulling back missiles from Turkey for stopping the missiles in Cuba?

        1. I was beyond the twinkle stage. I had recently made my grand entrance onto this mortal coil. Coincidentally, I took an upper-level seminar on “The 60s” wherein we spent a delicious amount of time on the Cuban Missile Crisis. I’ll never forget my professor; he never once said the name “LBJ” without prefacing it with “son-of-a-bitch.” Priceless.

          1. Yup, LBJ totally wrote off the USS Liberty – didn’t wanna embarass his “allies” dontcha know. What a dick. Uber warmonger Vietnam horror. Disgusting human being. In comparison, the “day glo” prez you deride is thus far a true prince.

          2. Mark M. – I have to agree with your professor about LBJ, although I do think he was a first-rate politician, he was a terrible person, I was in college, in Omaha, near Offut, home of SAC, during the Cuban Missile Crisis and we knew we were a target. And it those days a missile was accurate if it hit within 20 miles of the target. Omaha was a goner. There were at least 3 B-52s in the air above Omaha the whole time the Crisis was going on. Those were the SAC command bombers, designed to take over in case of a nuclear strike.

    2. I agree with Darren in that I do not believe Trump misspoke. He is a negotiator, marketer and salesman. That’s how he operates. He flatters people, smooths over differences, and softens people up to ultimately get what he wants. He comes from a business background and is not a life-long politician, which is what his voters were looking for. I don’t see anything wrong with trying to have a positive relationship with Russia. Most of us were raised on Cold War, ‘Russia is always the enemy’ propaganda. Even as children we watched Boris and Natasha Badanoff cartoons. But the world has changed and interests have realigned. I wish that Trump had not backtracked his statement. He should have told his detractors that he’s the Prez and they’re not so wiz off. We don’t have to trust Putin, but the world will be a safer place if we try to get along with him, which is not going to happen by being insulting and confrontational to his face. Besides, Trump would have been trashed no matter what he did, by those seriously afflicted with TDS.

      1. TIN – I think he did misspeak because I noticed how tired he looked at the presser. One misstatement and a correction the next day is not the end of the world as we know it. However, the meltdown was coming anyway. Regardless of what he said or did he was going to be attacked. And the entertainment value of the meltdown was worth it. They are all singing from the same songbook. The words used were all the same. Someone did a mash-up of all the pearl-clutchers and the verbiage was exactly the same. Same words, different order.

        Now you notice that no one is asking about Hillary and the $400 million. Wonder why that is? Or the missing DNC server that the FBI never saw? Or that Lisa Page seems to be singing like a canary?

          1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

            First off, CrowdStrike, the company the DNC brought in to initially investigate and remediate the hack, actually shared images of the DNC servers with the FBI. For the purposes of an investigation of this type, images are much more useful than handing over metal and hardware, because they are bit-by-bit copies of a crime scene taken while the crime was going on. Live hard drive and memory snapshots of blinking, powered-on machines in a network reveal significantly more forensic data than some powered-off server removed from a network. It’s the difference between watching a house over time, carefully noting down who comes and goes and when and how, versus handing over a key to a lonely boarded-up building. By physically handing over a server to the FBI as Trump suggested, the DNC would in fact have destroyed evidence. (Besides, there wasn’t just one server, but 140.)

          2. L4D enables David Benson – where are the servers? Politico is wrong. Any number of computer experts, even on here have poo-pooed the FBI and Crowdstrike.

            1. There’s 140 servers, Caviler. The next article down from here says that one of is in a office in D. C. They didn’t say which server. And they didn’t say what office. They did, however, say that the physical server are utterly irrelevant. And that’s the main point. Your demand for the servers is identical to your demand for citations from Dr. Benson. The minute Dr. Benson gives you your citations you will deny that Dr. Benson acceded to your demand and then demand anew that Dr. Benson accede to your unruly demand for citations. Likewise, you demand that the FBI prove that DNC was hacked and so soon as the FBI proved that the DNC was hacked you deny that the FBI proved that the DNC was hacked and then demand anew that the FBI prove that the DNC was hacked. You never get tired of your demand, deny, demand anew routine. You are no longer an ancient Greco-Roman demigod bull. You re just another common Whack-A-Mole mole. Just like your dementor, Trump.

                1. The VIPS analysis of the speed-limit on data transfer rates would be valid if, and only if, all of the data was transferred all at once. It wasn’t. The data was ex-filtrated over the course of roughly one month to a server in Arizona then routed through a network of at least ten servers overseas then sent back to a server in Illinois for storage. There was no valid application for the VIPS analysis of the speed-limit on data transfer rates under that scenario.

              1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

                The indictment also sheds new light on the hack of the DNC and the DCCC. This is the intrusion that cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike was called in to clean up. In June 2016, Guccifer 2.0 claimed that this breach happened by means of a “zero-day vulnerabilty,” but we now know this is not true. The initial intrusion into the DCCC network took place on April 12, 2016, using the credentials of a DNC employee obtained by spearphishing. Using these stolen credentials, GRU officers Kozachek and Yershov implanted “X-Agent” malware on at least 10 DCCC computers, and using this access, the hackers stole passwords, monitored computer activity, and took documents from the DCCC network to distribute later.

              2. Also excerpted from the article linked above:

                According to the indictment, the Russians designed their hacking operation to use an overseas computer to relay communications from their malware via a GRU-leased server in Arizona. By June of 2016, the hackers monitored DCCC employees’ computer activity—logging keystrokes and taking screenshots—on at least 10 different computers and transmitted this information to the Arizona server. The conspirators used their access to the DCCC network to hack into Democratic National Committee in mid-April 2016. Overall, the hackers accessed about 33 DNC computers by the end of June using stolen credentials. As they had with the DCCC, they used malware to explore the DNC network and steal documents, the indictment claims. As they explored the networks and removed data, the indictment alleges, the Russians deleted computer logs and files to obscure evidence of their activities.

                1. The GRU ex-filtrated data from the DNC and DCCC from April 12, 2016, through the start of June of 2016, to the rented servers in Arizona and Illinois. That’s a little over one month. And that’s why the VIPS analysis of the speed-limit for data transfer rates is no longer valid. The GRU had plenty of time with which to work.

                  1. that’s your opinion. let me know if william binney or the other experts who have asserted that the leak was a leak and not a hack, retract their statements.

                2. “the Russians designed their hacking operation…”

                  All that has been demonstrated is that countries spy on one another ever since countries existed. That would mean smart people would be careful how they hid their secrets. What we have really learned is how dumb many of the leaders in the Democratic party are. Podesta’s password was “password”. The Pakistani Awan wasn’t appropriately vetted and when it was known there were potentially serious problems continued to have access to how many Democratic computers? Hillary Clinton set up an unsecured server to send classified information. The DNC computers were “hacked” and continued to be used.

                  How can anyone not see how dumb the leadership of the Democratic party is?

          1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

            I called up Thomas Rid, professor of strategic studies at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies to help explain the technical details behind this type of forensic investigation. Rid, who wrote a detailed explanation about why Russia was likely behind the DNC hack for Motherboard in July 2016, told me that “from a forensic point of view, the question of a server at this stage doesn’t make any sense.”

            “To really investigate a high profile intrusion like the DNC hack, you have to look beyond the victim network,” Rid said. “You have to look at the infrastructure—the command and control sites that were used to get in that are not going to be on any server … looking at one server is just one isolated piece of infrastructure.”

            “For decades, it has been industry-standard forensic and digital evidence handling practice to conduct analysis on forensic images instead of original evidence”

            Even so, what CrowdStrike gave the FBI is likely better than if it had seized and analyzed a physical box.

            “To keep it simple, let’s say there’s only one server. CrowdStrike goes in, makes a complete image including a memory dump of everything that was in the memory of the server at the time, including traffic and connections at the time,” Rid said. “You have that image from the machine live in the network including its memory content, versus a server that someone physically carries into the FBI headquarters. It’s unplugged, so there’s no memory content because it’s powered down. That physical piece of hardware is less valuable for an investigation than the onsite image and data extraction from a machine that is up and running. The idea a physical server would add any value doesn’t make any sense.”

          2. Also excerpted from the article linked above:

            “You have groups that are wondering why the FBI never took the server?,” Trump said. “Why was the FBI told to leave the office of the Democratic National Committee? I’ve been asking it for months and months. Where is the server? I want to know where is the server and what is the server saying?”

            The short answer is that “the server” that Trump is referring to is sitting in a DNC office in Washington, DC—the New York Times has a photo of it here.

            Go to the linked article and click on the word “here” at the end of that last sentence. Thar blows the answer to Trump and Schutle’s stupid, stupid question.

        1. Paul — and the Awan brothers who infiltrated the Dems in the House courtesy of Medusa, um Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

          DWS is a total Zionist which begs the question – was Israel involved in getting those Pakis into the House to spy for them?

          1. Autumn – what kind of deal did Awan get that he got less than a slap on the wrist? What is going on there?

          2. “DWS is a total Zionist ”

            DWS is a J Street Bafoon who so happens to represent a Jewish district. On a videotape she was proven to lie about support for Israel. If DWS was what Israel had to rely on for its survival Israel would not survive.

            “was Israel involved in getting those Pakis into the House to spy for them?”

            Typical of a certain type of person that will create a conspiracy without any proof and one that makes little sense. Did Autumn read this somewhere? Probably, in her search for Jewish conspiracies. After all that is what the haters do, they create and then write conspiracy theories for dummies.

    3. Very good post Darren. There was no way President Trump was going to receive favorable remarks from the Left regardless of what was said or done at the summit. We are 4 months from the midterms and the Democrats would not have time to shift opinion if they gave President Trump anything other than what they are giving him. These final months of the elections season will be all about bombshells. This particular one was a dud.

      More popcorn please.

    4. Darren, I agree with you. You don’t place a lion in a corner and advance towards him expecting the lion to lie down. It isn’t in the lion’s blood or in Putin’s blood. Putin knows the limitations of his own nation and is smart enough not to exceed them which means careful management can lead in the direction of peace. We have to be careful of backing Russia into a corner.

      All the talk we hear from the media is just talk and meaningless political nonsense. I think both Putin and Trump realize that and Trump, in particular, is willing to face the political attacks by the media and the left in order to provide a plan for peace.

      Thank you, President Trump;.

    5. Darren Smith said, “At the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis President Kennedy essentially faced two existential choices: bomb Cuba and face WWIII; or find a way out of the crisis through some form of negotiation.”

      Mr. Smith’s argument above more closely resembles the following–courtesy of The Smithsonian Magazine:

      On September 7, 1964, a 60-second TV ad changed American politics forever. A 3-year-old girl in a simple dress counted as she plucked daisy petals in a sun-dappled field. Her words were supplanted by a mission-control countdown followed by a massive nuclear blast in a classic mushroom shape. The message was clear if only implicit: Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater was a genocidal maniac who threatened the world’s future. Two months later, President Lyndon Johnson won easily, and the emotional political attack ad—visceral, terrifying, and risky—was made.

  16. Do you remember that we invaded Russia at the end of WWI? We don’t exactly have clean hands when it comes to Russia. The Tsar’s cousin refused to give him asylum which would have saved all their lives. Do you remember that? I am sorry that they were killed, however, there are casualties in any war. Rasputin was killed because he supposedly had too much influence over the Tsarina, but a new book as shown he actually had little. Millions of Russians were killed in WWI and millions more were injured. And to what purpose? To protect Serbia, who had helped assassinate Archduke Ferdinand.

    1. At least you and georgie can shovel snow together. The farewell posted above fits here, too..

      Well, at least you’ve finally chosen a side; hold out for a Dacha on the Black Sea. здоровье!

      this is to “but stoli fights off the chill” paulie

      1. Marky Mark Mark – was there something I said that wasn’t true? Did I pick a side by pointing out the facts? How horrible of me. Well, it is going to happen again, sometime, very soon. I just cannot help it. I love to puncture balloons and pull the wings off flies. And I do love playing the Devil’s Advocate.

          1. You’re about the last person who posts here regularly who is in a position to question anyone’s intellect. You might try offering something other than adolescent jabs, for starters.

    2. Two invasions actually ordered by their own Comrade Woodrow Wilson his second and third action besides WWI in Europe. One took place up in the
      Baltic and the other in Siberia.

      These three marked the beginning of the great Socialist Wars where they all struggled for supremacy and it still goes on to this day. between the three principal factions. Participation by the Progressive Socialist element is what put the former Democrat Party tens of thousands of American dead ahead of their main competitor in the USA which turned out to be a fairly peace loving group over the next 100 years. At least the Democrats out warred them by well over ten to one. in wars and over a thousand to one in war dead.

      Interesting reading for the serious reacher are the New York Times World Almanac and Book of Facts published annually. I really hadn’t realized until 9/11 what the score was .

      But as any good soldier knows don’t go to war under a Democrat President the odds are very much not in your favor.

      That sentiment held true until the two parties came very close to being one party a move which eventually led to the counter revolution of 2016.

      Extricating from this last 17 year go round though is proving, as the movie stated, ‘thornier than one might have suspected. ‘

    3. 20 million Russians killed in WWII, 20 million during the Bolshevik revolution and consolidation of power.. plus more in the surrounding years. Bolshevik by the way means the majority or winners and Menshevik means the opposite.

    4. Paul…Yes, the Tsar’s cousin, who was the great and great-great grandfather of the royals who snubbed our President during his visit to England. Rather puts their classless act in perspective, in my opinion.

    5. Like the French Revolution which followed our own that whole area was ripe for war but as we’ve seen when the bulk of the citizens have no concept of self government it leads to Napoleons and Madame Guillotine or Gulags or what we ourselves flirted with up until 2016.

      In the end the last one standing turned out to be the Chinese who used the simple expedient of turning market capitalist for the economic side of the answer and a replacement of communism with a form of social consciousness or a social conscience. The emerging winners seem to combine both that ecnomic form with a version of that social form and vaying degrees of self governing citizens

      China had the advantage of the mandarin background

      So far the fight between the two systems still goes on in other parts of the world.. our own not excluded.

      1. L4D enables David Benson – my response was to JT, not to Benson. And you were kind enough to supply the links, thank you. However, I thought it was common knowledge which does not require a citation.

        BTW, neither I nor anyone else owes Benson a citation until he starts giving me the citations he has owed me. He is in citation black-out.

    6. Paul Caviler Schulteacher blathered, “Do you remember that we invaded Russia at the end of WWI? We don’t exactly have clean hands when it comes to Russia.”

      Technically speaking the Russians ended their involvement in World War I shortly after the Bolsheviks came to power and before The Allied Powers backed two of the three White Armies and The Czechoslovak Legion. That the war on the Western front was still going on is neither here nor there. The Russian Civil War was in full swing at that point.

      Even so, the main point that Caviler is glossing over is that, had Britain and France not threatened the Russian governments under either Prince Lodz or Kerensky with demands for the immediate repayment of Russia’s war debt if Russia quit the Eastern front, there probably would not have been a Bolshevik Revolution in Russia or, failing that, the Bolshevik Revolution would more likely have failed.

      1. L4D enables David Benson – Is what I said incorrect? Yes or no.

        1. What you said is misleading. The Bolsheviks quit the war on the Eastern front on launched the Russian Civil War. The war on the Western front was still raging. But so what? You need to take the knowledge level of all of your readers into account. Or else I get to bust your chops.

          1. L4D enables David Benson – there was nothing I wrote that was incorrect. You have not chops that can be busted. And it would be a cold day in hell that you ever got the opportunity to do that.

      1. No that’s bad news. Syria was ok, a stable and relatively successful country economically, and not flooding the West with refugees, until US misadventure in Iraq laid the foundations for ISIS. Of course one wonders to what extent the US also sold arms and gave aid to alqueda factions against Assad like al Nusra or the rest of the anti Assad assorted rebels. A bunch of jihaadists for the most part and praise PUTIN for helping to crush them.

        1. OFCOLA. If The Grand Bargain is adopted, then the Sunnis in Iraq and Syria will positively erupt in an absolute orgy terrorism against the Shiites in Iraq and Iran not to mention the Kurds. That is the none-too-secret unreason that the Emiratis and the Saudis pitched the idea to Kushner in the first place. And have you heard the bit where Russia is supposed to protect Israel from the Iranians in the Golan Heights? I swear. The Holy Bible calls The Grand Bargain by the name of Armageddon. Who do you think that makes Trump?

          1. that is way to oblique for me to respond to. it seems like you were saying something pertinent but I guess I am too dumb to figure out all that doubletalk.

    7. Also Paul, if the Brits had given Russia financial backing they could have possibly averted WWII.

  17. ” It is an ironic anniversary after the disastrous meeting of President Donald Trump in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin. ”

    Disastrous? For Whom, The Commie/Nazi American Hatin Trash around DC? Yes I that know so.

    WoW!, I didn’t know you were Completely Tone Deaf!!!

    Oh, I remember now, you only get your news from the dead Old news sources one watches or hears. LOL:)

  18. Prof Turley, I’d be very interested in hearing your fantasy that Russian Ships were not off our current West Coast during the US’s Civil War & why they were their Comrade Turley.

    Thank You.

Comments are closed.