Can any Trump supporter explain this to me?

[Norman]

People on the right have been very adamant on Trump not being in Russia's pocket. A few weeks ago congress unanimously accepted additional sanctions on Russia. This in the wake of testimony from the intelligence community about not just past election interference of Russia but also in more interference during the next election cycle. When asked the FBI acknowledged that Trump has giving no directives on how to handle this. He also refused to uphold the proposed sanctions. Since the Trump campaign is under investigation for working with Russia it would be in his best interest to come out strongly against Russia. this would at least give him some real time facts to point to, in order to,at least try to deflect the appearance of wrongdoing. In other words he has strong reasons to uphold the sanctions, yet he chooses not to.Can any explain a decent reasoning why anyone shouldn't think this suspicious in the extreme? And not consider this Trump simply refusing to do his job?

No, no one can explain the delusional neurotic obsession with Russia. The stupidity is so extreme that science just isn't equipped to deal with it.

 

[mikegriffith1]

People on the right have been very adamant on Trump not being in Russia's pocket. A few weeks ago congress unanimously accepted additional sanctions on Russia. This in the wake of testimony from the intelligence community about not just past election interference of Russia but also in more interference during the next election cycle. When asked the FBI acknowledged that Trump has giving no directives on how to handle this. He also refused to uphold the proposed sanctions. Since the Trump campaign is under investigation for working with Russia it would be in his best interest to come out strongly against Russia. this would at least give him some real time facts to point to, in order to,at least try to deflect the appearance of wrongdoing. In other words he has strong reasons to uphold the sanctions, yet he chooses not to.Can any explain a decent reasoning why anyone shouldn't think this suspicious in the extreme? And not consider this Trump simply refusing to do his job?

No, no one can explain the delusional neurotic obsession with Russia. The stupidity is so extreme that science just isn't equipped to deal with it.

Yeah, it's amazing that the same liberals who argued against continuing harsh sanctions on Iran are now urging draconian sanctions on Russia. I'll tell you what, liberals, if you didn't mind when Obama gave the Iranians hundreds of billions of dollars in sanctions relief in exchange for the laughable Iran nuclear treaty, you shouldn't mind that Trump does not want to push Russia into a full-blown depression over the actions of a few people in the government. In case you haven't noticed, thanks to the kinds of gun laws that you love, the Russian people are in no position to overthrow or control the Russian government.

 

[forkup]

People on the right have been very adamant on Trump not being in Russia's pocket. A few weeks ago congress unanimously accepted additional sanctions on Russia. This in the wake of testimony from the intelligence community about not just past election interference of Russia but also in more interference during the next election cycle. When asked the FBI acknowledged that Trump has giving no directives on how to handle this. He also refused to uphold the proposed sanctions. Since the Trump campaign is under investigation for working with Russia it would be in his best interest to come out strongly against Russia. this would at least give him some real time facts to point to, in order to,at least try to deflect the appearance of wrongdoing. In other words he has strong reasons to uphold the sanctions, yet he chooses not to.Can any explain a decent reasoning why anyone shouldn't think this suspicious in the extreme? And not consider this Trump simply refusing to do his job?

No, no one can explain the delusional neurotic obsession with Russia. The stupidity is so extreme that science just isn't equipped to deal with it.

Yeah, it's amazing that the same liberals who argued against continuing harsh sanctions on Iran are now urging draconian sanctions on Russia. I'll tell you what, liberals, if you didn't mind when Obama gave the Iranians hundreds of billions of dollars in sanctions relief in exchange for the laughable Iran nuclear treaty, you shouldn't mind that Trump does not want to push Russia into a full-blown depression over the actions of a few people in the government. In case you haven't noticed, thanks to the kinds of gun laws that you love, the Russian people are in no position to overthrow or control the Russian government.

Lol draconian?????? "impose sanctions on anyone determined to conduct significant business with Russian defense and intelligence sectors, already sanctioned for their alleged role in the election."Trump administration holds off on new Russia sanctions, despite law
Tell me again how this hurts the Russian people. And btw, Trump did approve additional sanctions on N-Korea a country that has a population hardly able to feed itself. I'm guessing your all for sanctioning them.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

"I'm here to ask you to send more Russian Bots to the messageboards cause I need help, Lord Putin."
\

 

[BlackSand]

If my reasoning was purely based on him not imposing sanctions while being politically expedient you might by able to say that. In fact I've given you more then that line of reasoning. I've given you the fact that congress, you know the second branch of government feel that Russia needs to have further sanctions, and I've given you that those sanctions make sense in a national security sense to. You are just answering the first line of reasoning, I suspect because a: That's the only one you can conceivably argue against, and b: It allows you to not have to answer the premise of my post.

That wasn't your question though ... Your question was why President Trump wasn't following suit with Congress.

Simple answer ... He doesn't have to.
Simple solution ... Congress can do it without his approval if they have enough support.

The premise of your post was bullshit based on conjecture ...
Your insistence it isn't ... Is just more bullshit.

.

 

[theHawk]

People on the right have been very adamant on Trump not being in Russia's pocket. A few weeks ago congress unanimously accepted additional sanctions on Russia. This in the wake of testimony from the intelligence community about not just past election interference of Russia but also in more interference during the next election cycle. When asked the FBI acknowledged that Trump has giving no directives on how to handle this. He also refused to uphold the proposed sanctions. Since the Trump campaign is under investigation for working with Russia it would be in his best interest to come out strongly against Russia. this would at least give him some real time facts to point to, in order to,at least try to deflect the appearance of wrongdoing. In other words he has strong reasons to uphold the sanctions, yet he chooses not to.Can any explain a decent reasoning why anyone shouldn't think this suspicious in the extreme? And not consider this Trump simply refusing to do his job?

It’s quite easy to explain.

Congress has no authority to force the President to take such actions. Foreign policy is set by the President, and the constitution grants him authority in matters such as sanctions.

In addition to that, this “law” passed by Congress also stipulates that if Russia takes steps to change, then the sanctions aren’t necessary. It’s so vague that it means the President can determine Russia has taken those steps if he feels like it.

In other words, you don’t get to dictate what President Trump gets to do against Russia.

 

[forkup]

People on the right have been very adamant on Trump not being in Russia's pocket. A few weeks ago congress unanimously accepted additional sanctions on Russia. This in the wake of testimony from the intelligence community about not just past election interference of Russia but also in more interference during the next election cycle. When asked the FBI acknowledged that Trump has giving no directives on how to handle this. He also refused to uphold the proposed sanctions. Since the Trump campaign is under investigation for working with Russia it would be in his best interest to come out strongly against Russia. this would at least give him some real time facts to point to, in order to,at least try to deflect the appearance of wrongdoing. In other words he has strong reasons to uphold the sanctions, yet he chooses not to.Can any explain a decent reasoning why anyone shouldn't think this suspicious in the extreme? And not consider this Trump simply refusing to do his job?

It’s quite easy to explain.

Congress has no authority to force the President to take such actions. Foreign policy is set by the President, and the constitution grants him authority in matters such as sanctions.

In addition to that, this “law” passed by Congress also stipulates that if Russia takes steps to change, then the sanctions aren’t necessary. It’s so vague that it means the President can determine Russia has taken those steps if he feels like it.

In other words, you don’t get to dictate what President Trump gets to do against Russia.

I never claimed I have the right to dictate anything. I'm hardly able to dictate my kid's bedtime and she's six. I do claim that in Trump's case, what he's doing (nothing) is highly suspect in light of the Mueller probe and not a single one of you, has been capable of giving a decent reasoning for him not doing anything. Especially considering the FBI, CIA and NSA all three testified that Russia is still planning to interfere in the midterms, so Russia isn't changing anything.

 

[froggy]

No they are very much connected. One is the issue that Trump worked with Russia to get elected. The other issue is that Trump is refusing to punish Russia for that interference. Against not just the wishes of congress, but even against his own self interest. How can you separate those issues?

You haven't proven that Russia helped President Trump get elected.

You are trying to support your idea that they did, and what you think the President should do, with nothing more than conjecture.
The President is not required to do what Congress wants him to do ... Nor is he required to react any certain way because of allegations that have not been proven.

You are connecting dots that are not even on the same page at the moment.
It's not his job to look out for his personal self-interests ... That's what the crooked politicians do.

Your silliness belongs in conspiracy theories.
Thanks for exposing the complete corruption you expect and desire from our politicians.

.

No one has proven that they did. We taxpayers shouldn't have to keep pay for a wasted investigation.

 

[forkup]

If my reasoning was purely based on him not imposing sanctions while being politically expedient you might by able to say that. In fact I've given you more then that line of reasoning. I've given you the fact that congress, you know the second branch of government feel that Russia needs to have further sanctions, and I've given you that those sanctions make sense in a national security sense to. You are just answering the first line of reasoning, I suspect because a: That's the only one you can conceivably argue against, and b: It allows you to not have to answer the premise of my post.

That wasn't your question though ... Your question was why President Trump wasn't following suit with Congress.

Simple answer ... He doesn't have to.
Simple solution ... Congress can do it without his approval if they have enough support.

The premise of your post was bullshit based on conjecture ...
Your insistence it isn't ... Is just more bullshit.

.

Your insistence that the issue of not imposing sanctions is unrelated to election interference, THAT is bullshit and dropping the word conjecture and claiming I don't acknowledge it as such THAT is bullshit.

In my original OP I stated clearly that Trump was under investigation, not that he was guilty.

Like it somehow invalidates my post THAT is bullshit. There's plenty of information in the public domain available to come to reasonable conclusions. USMB is a forum, all our post are opinions of some sort. Dismissing it because it is an opinion THAT is bullshit. Citing as reason for Trump not following congress because he doesn't have to THAT is bullshit. If I ask a reason for something and you reply," just because" you then haven't answered the question. In fact you have giving the most cliche non answer their is. AND THAT BLACKSAND IS NOT JUST BULLSHIT BUT UNORIGINAL BULLSHIT

 

[BlackSand]

If my reasoning was purely based on him not imposing sanctions while being politically expedient you might by able to say that. In fact I've given you more then that line of reasoning. I've given you the fact that congress, you know the second branch of government feel that Russia needs to have further sanctions, and I've given you that those sanctions make sense in a national security sense to. You are just answering the first line of reasoning, I suspect because a: That's the only one you can conceivably argue against, and b: It allows you to not have to answer the premise of my post.

That wasn't your question though ... Your question was why President Trump wasn't following suit with Congress.

Simple answer ... He doesn't have to.
Simple solution ... Congress can do it without his approval if they have enough support.

The premise of your post was bullshit based on conjecture ...
Your insistence it isn't ... Is just more bullshit.

.

Your insistence that the issue of not imposing sanctions is unrelated to election interference, THAT is bullshit and dropping the word conjecture and claiming I don't acknowledge it as such THAT is bullshit.

In my original OP I stated clearly that Trump was under investigation, not that he was guilty.

Like it somehow invalidates my post THAT is bullshit. There's plenty of information in the public domain available to come to reasonable conclusions. USMB is a forum, all our post are opinions of some sort. Dismissing it because it is an opinion THAT is bullshit. Citing as reason for Trump not following congress because he doesn't have to THAT is bullshit. If I ask a reason for something and you reply," just because" you then haven't answered the question. In fact you have giving the most cliche non answer there is. AND THAT BLACKSAND IS NOT JUST BULLSHIT BUT UNORIGINAL BULLSHIT

I didn't insist any such thing.

I didn't say squat about the Russians interfering with the elections.
I simply stated you have no proof the President had anything to do with that.

You don't have reasonable conclusions ... You have conjecture ...
The President doesn't have to do what Congress wishes ... And nothing you say will ever make that any different.
The Congress can override the President's refusal ... Talk to them if you want something done.


Your opinion doesn't mean anything ... You are simply full of shit ... And are too ignorant to realize your mistakes.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

People on the right have been very adamant on Trump not being in Russia's pocket. A few weeks ago congress unanimously accepted additional sanctions on Russia. This in the wake of testimony from the intelligence community about not just past election interference of Russia but also in more interference during the next election cycle. When asked the FBI acknowledged that Trump has giving no directives on how to handle this. He also refused to uphold the proposed sanctions. Since the Trump campaign is under investigation for working with Russia it would be in his best interest to come out strongly against Russia. this would at least give him some real time facts to point to, in order to,at least try to deflect the appearance of wrongdoing. In other words he has strong reasons to uphold the sanctions, yet he chooses not to.Can any explain a decent reasoning why anyone shouldn't think this suspicious in the extreme? And not consider this Trump simply refusing to do his job?

The Hillary campaign colluded with the Ukrainian government as they later came out and publically stated that they feared that Trump was not fit for office.

Should Trump also come out with sanctions against the Ukraine? This is one of the reasons the Russians were trying to support Trump.

I don't know what Hillary offered the Ukraine government. Perhaps she offered her support if the Russians invaded. If so, I just don't know how you could watch Benghazi unfold and ever think that she would have your back.

Damn. You just can't do it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I was under the impression that the investigation has been concluded. Considering the recent 13 indictments, and the admitting by the investigation team that they found no collusion between Trump and Russia.

Aside from that, for Trump to do anything differently because of an investigation would not be in his best interest and not consistent to governing a country. Besides, would it really help him? If he goes light on them, the media will say that is proof of his ties to Russia. If he deals with them harshly, the media says he is just trying to put on a front, and cover his tracks. Either way, there is no upside for him.

Who told you that the investigation has been concluded? Whoever it was, you should NEVER listen to them again.

 

[miketx]

I was talking to Trump just yesterday at my weekly briefing where he keeps me current on what all is happening in the oval office. He told me face to face that he will allow the sanctions against Russia to move forward in the interest of good faith in is his presidency, and until Putin gives up the pictures of the peeing school girls. Really. I'm surprised that all Trump voters haven't told you this as we all are kept up to date personally on what's happening.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

People on the right have been very adamant on Trump not being in Russia's pocket. A few weeks ago congress unanimously accepted additional sanctions on Russia. This in the wake of testimony from the intelligence community about not just past election interference of Russia but also in more interference during the next election cycle. When asked the FBI acknowledged that Trump has giving no directives on how to handle this. He also refused to uphold the proposed sanctions. Since the Trump campaign is under investigation for working with Russia it would be in his best interest to come out strongly against Russia. this would at least give him some real time facts to point to, in order to,at least try to deflect the appearance of wrongdoing. In other words he has strong reasons to uphold the sanctions, yet he chooses not to.Can any explain a decent reasoning why anyone shouldn't think this suspicious in the extreme? And not consider this Trump simply refusing to do his job?

It’s quite easy to explain.

Congress has no authority to force the President to take such actions. Foreign policy is set by the President, and the constitution grants him authority in matters such as sanctions.

In addition to that, this “law” passed by Congress also stipulates that if Russia takes steps to change, then the sanctions aren’t necessary. It’s so vague that it means the President can determine Russia has taken those steps if he feels like it.

In other words, you don’t get to dictate what President Trump gets to do against Russia.

I never claimed I have the right to dictate anything. I'm hardly able to dictate my kid's bedtime and she's six. I do claim that in Trump's case, what he's doing (nothing) is highly suspect in light of the Mueller probe and not a single one of you, has been capable of giving a decent reasoning for him not doing anything. Especially considering the FBI, CIA and NSA all three testified that Russia is still planning to interfere in the midterms, so Russia isn't changing anything.

When it comes to international affairs, what we know is about 50% of what's really going on. That's because our government cannot tell us everything for security reasons.

The real Russian collusion was with Hillary, the DNC, Fusion, and Steele. They were the ones trying to shape the outcome of an election--not Trump.

And if you ever seen anybody on television hold up a copy of the Nune's memo, you would see pages of black magic marker lines also known as redacted. The government simply cannot tell us everything we would like to know.

I trust Trump and his team to make the bests decisions for the country possible. Just because you don't understand his reasons doesn't mean there is anything nefarious going on, it just means you don't understand the decision process.

 

[BulletProof]

Since the Trump campaign is under investigation for working with Russia it would be in his best interest to come out strongly against Russia.

Hey dumbshit, Are you really arguing that Trump should pile on punishing Russia for collusion with Trump because Trump claims he didn't collude with Russia?

 

[blackhawk]

So the President should do something to prove he is not guilty of something of which there is no proof he ever did? Yeah I don't really see Trump or any other President doing that.

 

[forkup]

So the President should do something to prove he is not guilty of something of which there is no proof he ever did? Yeah I don't really see Trump or any other President doing that.

No, the president not doing something that congress wants done by unanimous consent, the intelligence community wants done by unanimous consent and even from the standpoint of his own personal survival would be prudent is suspect. The OP simply puts that at the for and asks of all those supporting him, if they can give a reasonable explanation for him forgoing those three reasons and give a decent reasoning for him not doing it. So far we have as answers to that question. He's the president so he doesn't need a reason and he has a reason but we don't know what it could possibly be. I'm paraphrasing but it seems a decent synopsis. In my view both answers are weak to say the least. As I pointed out before, political survival is one but not the most important of those reasons.