R-W'ers on here wanted "proof" of Trump-Russia collusion....

[Papageorgio]

..........and our "beloved" orange-in-chief just provided the proof.

Disclosing classified intelligence to our arch-enemy, Russia, may seem perfectly legitimate to right wingers since the president can (according to them) do ANYTHING he wants....and as Nixon famously once stated, "if the president does something, it CANNOT, de facto, be called illegal.."

Trump's low self esteem and narcissistic tendencies need constant approval, and to show off to the Russians that he is privy to the most sensitive info., compelled this idiot to share intelligence that WILL (most likely) place individual spies at risk AND also cause for such intelligence to stop flowing to the WH since we have a moron with a big mouth in charge.

Whether Trump knows it or not, he IS colluding with Russian spies and if ever proof was needed, Trump voluntarily has provided such proof.

So previous Presidents never shared intelligence with other countries, Russia in particular?

Do you hear yourself?

Do you have an answer to the question?

No, other presidents did not share highly classified information with hostile foreign governments.

It seems to me that in the 90's we had a President sharing highly classified information with China and North Korea.

 

[RDD_1210]

..........and our "beloved" orange-in-chief just provided the proof.

Disclosing classified intelligence to our arch-enemy, Russia, may seem perfectly legitimate to right wingers since the president can (according to them) do ANYTHING he wants....and as Nixon famously once stated, "if the president does something, it CANNOT, de facto, be called illegal.."

Trump's low self esteem and narcissistic tendencies need constant approval, and to show off to the Russians that he is privy to the most sensitive info., compelled this idiot to share intelligence that WILL (most likely) place individual spies at risk AND also cause for such intelligence to stop flowing to the WH since we have a moron with a big mouth in charge.

Whether Trump knows it or not, he IS colluding with Russian spies and if ever proof was needed, Trump voluntarily has provided such proof.

So previous Presidents never shared intelligence with other countries, Russia in particular?

Do you hear yourself?

Do you have an answer to the question?

No, other presidents did not share highly classified information with hostile foreign governments.

It seems to me that in the 90's we had a President sharing highly classified information with China and North Korea.

Whatever justifies your treason comrade.

 

[martybegan]

So previous Presidents never shared intelligence with other countries, Russia in particular?

Do you hear yourself?

Do you have an answer to the question?

No, other presidents did not share highly classified information with hostile foreign governments.

and you have proof of this how?

LOL, you want me to prove the absence of something?

Prove you're not a wife beater

If this were real life I could bring in my wife as a witness, a lack of any medical records for treatment due to injuries possibly of a domestic nature, and character witnesses testifying to my lack of a violent nature.

Right now with Trump we have a leak saying he said "something" to the Russians about a common enemy. We have not idea what it was, but we do know that he is allowed to do it, because he is the President.

FDR leaked the fact about us having the Bomb to Stalin, even if he did it in a backhanded way. what was FDR guilty of?

 

[debbiedowner]

FACT CHECK: Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?

The Uranium One deal was not Clinton’s to veto or approve

Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating the transaction for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the Uranium One decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton herself “never intervened” in committee matters.

Despite transfer of ownership, the uranium remained in the U.S.

A key fact ignored in criticisms of Clinton’s supposed involvement in the deal is that the uranium was not — nor could it be — exported, and remained under the control of U.S.-based subsidiaries of Uranium One, according to a statement by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:

NRC’s review of the transfer of control request determined that the U.S. subsidiaries will
remain the licensees, will remain qualified to conduct the uranium recovery operations, and will continue to have the equipment, facilities, and procedures necessary to protect public health and safety and to minimize danger to life or property. The review also determined that the licensees will maintain adequate financial surety for eventual decommissioning of the sites. Neither Uranium One nor ARMZ holds an NRC export license, so no uranium produced at either facility may be exported.

The timing of most of the donations does not match

Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion’s share — $131.3 million — came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company’s founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state.

Of the remaining individuals connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, according to The New York Times — Ian Telfer, the company’s chairman:

His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said.

The timing of Telfer’s donations might be questionable if there was reason to believe that Hillary Clinton was instrumental in the approval of the deal with Russia, but all the evidence points to the contrary — that Clinton did not play a pivotal role, and, in fact, may not have played any role at all.

Foundation admits disclosure mistakes

One fault investigations into the Clinton Foundation’s practices did find was that not all of the donations were properly disclosed — specifically, those of Uranium One Chairman Ian Telfer between 2009 and 2012. The foundation admitted this shortcoming and pledged to correct it, but as the Guardian pointed out in its May 2015 discussion of Clinton Cash, the fact that it happened is reason enough to sound alarm bells:

It is also true that large donations to the foundation from the chairman of Uranium One, Ian Telfer, at around the time of the Russian purchase of the company and while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, were never disclosed to the public. The multimillion sums were channeled through a subsidiary of the Clinton Foundation, CGSCI, which did not reveal its individual donors.

Such awkward collisions between Bill’s fundraising activities and Hillary’s public service have raised concerns not just among those who might be dismissed as part of a vast right-wing conspiracy.

An enormous volume of interest and speculation surrounds the workings of the Clinton Foundation, which is to be expected. Given the enormous sums of money it controls and the fact that it is run by a former U.S. president who is married to a possible future U.S. president, the foundation deserves all the scrutiny it gets, and more.

At the same time, for the sake of accuracy it’s crucial to differentiate between partisan accusations and what we actually know about it — however little that may be.

 

[Papageorgio]

So previous Presidents never shared intelligence with other countries, Russia in particular?

Do you hear yourself?

Do you have an answer to the question?

No, other presidents did not share highly classified information with hostile foreign governments.

It seems to me that in the 90's we had a President sharing highly classified information with China and North Korea.

Whatever justifies your treason comrade.

I am not justifying it, it just has happened many times before, Obama has done it, Bush probably did and the Clinton's did it, why is everyone upset now?

I was critical of Clinton for doing it and I am not happy about Trump doing it. But I am looking at it from a historical perspective and we have done it often in our history. Why is this a big deal now?

 

[martybegan]

Do you have an answer to the question?

No, other presidents did not share highly classified information with hostile foreign governments.

and you have proof of this how?

LOL, you want me to prove the absence of something?

Prove you're not a wife beater

If this were real life I could bring in my wife as a witness, a lack of any medical records for treatment due to injuries possibly of a domestic nature, and character witnesses testifying to my lack of a violent nature.

Right now with Trump we have a leak saying he said "something" to the Russians about a common enemy. We have not idea what it was, but we do know that he is allowed to do it, because he is the President.

FDR leaked the fact about us having the Bomb to Stalin, even if he did it in a backhanded way. what was FDR guilty of?

So you can't prove it. Is that what you're saying? Prove you're not a pedophile.
Do you realize how dumb you are? Of course you don't, you're too dumb.

Again, if this were real life I can go to the lack of an evidence to the issue.

We have actual information in this case. So far all we know is Trump shared some info on ISIS, a common enemy of the US and Russia, much like we shared info on Germany with Stalin during World War II. We know that Trump, as president, can pretty much share any classified info he wants, with the exception of things like sealed files probably, and some nuclear secrets.

We do know that past Presidents have authorized sharing of intel data, even with Countries we are not exactly friendly with, WWII probably being a good example when we cooperated with the Soviets even though we still didn't like them and vice versa.

 

[edthecynic]

WikiLeaks cables: US agrees to tell Russia Britain's nuclear secrets
then what would this be?

fake news???

Not just fake news, fake RUSSIAN news!!!

 

[edthecynic]

What did you libtards think when Hillary was giving Russia our uranium?

Libs knew you were lying!

 

[edthecynic]

Neither did Trump.

He admitted it today, saying it is his ABSOLUTE RIGHT to do so!!!!

The pathological liar even called the meeting which was closed to American press but not to Russian press "an OPENLY SCHEDULED W.H. meeting."

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump
As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining....
4:03 AM - 16 May 2017

 

[WillowTree]

What did you libtards think when Hillary was giving Russia our uranium?

Libs knew you were lying!

As Reagan once said " The problem with liberals is that they know so much that isn't so."

 

[edthecynic]

What did you libtards think when Hillary was giving Russia our uranium?

Libs knew you were lying!

As Reagan once said " The problem with liberals is that they know so much that isn't so."

Reagan was always a liar.

 

[WillowTree]

What did you libtards think when Hillary was giving Russia our uranium?

Libs knew you were lying!

As Reagan once said " The problem with liberals is that they know so much that isn't so."

Reagan was always a liar.

I think it might be ewe who is lying.

 

[miketx]

..........and our "beloved" orange-in-chief just provided the proof.

Disclosing classified intelligence to our arch-enemy, Russia, may seem perfectly legitimate to right wingers since the president can (according to them) do ANYTHING he wants....and as Nixon famously once stated, "if the president does something, it CANNOT, de facto, be called illegal.."

Trump's low self esteem and narcissistic tendencies need constant approval, and to show off to the Russians that he is privy to the most sensitive info., compelled this idiot to share intelligence that WILL (most likely) place individual spies at risk AND also cause for such intelligence to stop flowing to the WH since we have a moron with a big mouth in charge.

Whether Trump knows it or not, he IS colluding with Russian spies and if ever proof was needed, Trump voluntarily has provided such proof.

Stop pretending and flapping your lying mouth and provide the proof. We want to see it instead of the daily "Might have...., could be....., undisclosed source...."

 

[edthecynic]

 

[edthecynic]

What did you libtards think when Hillary was giving Russia our uranium?

Libs knew you were lying!

As Reagan once said " The problem with liberals is that they know so much that isn't so."

Reagan was always a liar.

I think it might be ewe who is lying.

REAGAN (videotape, 11/13/86): We did not, repeat, did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we.

 

[Doc1]

What did you libtards think when Hillary was giving Russia our uranium?

Libs knew you were lying!

As Reagan once said " The problem with liberals is that they know so much that isn't so."

Reagan was always a liar.

I think it might be ewe who is lying.

REAGAN (videotape, 11/13/86): We did not, repeat, did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we.

LOL, and Obama? They ALL lie .

 

[Crixus]

..........and our "beloved" orange-in-chief just provided the proof.

Disclosing classified intelligence to our arch-enemy, Russia, may seem perfectly legitimate to right wingers since the president can (according to them) do ANYTHING he wants....and as Nixon famously once stated, "if the president does something, it CANNOT, de facto, be called illegal.."

Trump's low self esteem and narcissistic tendencies need constant approval, and to show off to the Russians that he is privy to the most sensitive info., compelled this idiot to share intelligence that WILL (most likely) place individual spies at risk AND also cause for such intelligence to stop flowing to the WH since we have a moron with a big mouth in charge.

Whether Trump knows it or not, he IS colluding with Russian spies and if ever proof was needed, Trump voluntarily has provided such proof.

In short, Rachael spoke and y'all blew a nut.

 

[Care4all]

What did you libtards think when Hillary was giving Russia our uranium?

Russia never got our uranium willow....not a single drop mined, leaves the USA....it's for USA use only, that was the purchase deal.

 

[WillowTree]

Libs knew you were lying!

As Reagan once said " The problem with liberals is that they know so much that isn't so."

Reagan was always a liar.

I think it might be ewe who is lying.

REAGAN (videotape, 11/13/86): We did not, repeat, did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we.

LOL, and Obama? They ALL lie .

Yes but it is okay with them when Hillary, obama, and any other democrat lies. Who was the mofo running for prez who had a wife dying with cancer and a knocked up stress on the side? They would have voted for him in a ny second.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

..........and our "beloved" orange-in-chief just provided the proof.

Disclosing classified intelligence to our arch-enemy, Russia, may seem perfectly legitimate to right wingers since the president can (according to them) do ANYTHING he wants....and as Nixon famously once stated, "if the president does something, it CANNOT, de facto, be called illegal.."

Trump's low self esteem and narcissistic tendencies need constant approval, and to show off to the Russians that he is privy to the most sensitive info., compelled this idiot to share intelligence that WILL (most likely) place individual spies at risk AND also cause for such intelligence to stop flowing to the WH since we have a moron with a big mouth in charge.

Whether Trump knows it or not, he IS colluding with Russian spies and if ever proof was needed, Trump voluntarily has provided such proof.

Still nothing impeachable. Keep fondling yourself though.