Posted on Mar 3, 2017
Do you really believe the Trump Administration would throw America under the bus?
104K
2.05K
871
210
210
0
With all the rhetoric about Russian collusion and no evidence at the present to validate the accusations.
1. Exactly what does Russia gain with a Trump Administration that affects our National Security? Foreign interference is common in elections even by the U.S.
2. Why do you believe the Trump administration would conspire with Russia?
3. Do you believe Vice President Pence or Congress would go along with this idea?
1. Exactly what does Russia gain with a Trump Administration that affects our National Security? Foreign interference is common in elections even by the U.S.
2. Why do you believe the Trump administration would conspire with Russia?
3. Do you believe Vice President Pence or Congress would go along with this idea?
Posted in these groups: 
Office of the President (POTUS)
Russia
National Security
United States
Donald Trump
Office of the President (POTUS) Russia National Security United States Donald Trump
Edited >1 y ago
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 338
4
4
0
SSG Ken Gilder
CWO4 Ken Rickard - Hillary Clinton has a long history of disrespecting those in uniform, from Arkansas State Troopers, to all branches of the US military, and not to mention her hubby's implication that he "loathed the military."
She would have been a disaster as commander in chief.
She would have been a disaster as commander in chief.
(1)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
SSG Ken Gilder Given how little I trust Clintons (Hillary, Bill, Et All); that really is not saying much about your trust in Trump.
However it is curious how you can find a guy trustworthy who was quoted as saying he didn't even know who Putin is. Did you ever ask yourself why this America First guy who want to put Americans back to work has not closed his factories overseas and nearly all his products are made by foreigners? Or why Trump properties all seek H1B Visas to import foreign workers to take jobs throughout the country? While he, his wife, and kids all flout foreign designer clothing/jewelry....
However it is curious how you can find a guy trustworthy who was quoted as saying he didn't even know who Putin is. Did you ever ask yourself why this America First guy who want to put Americans back to work has not closed his factories overseas and nearly all his products are made by foreigners? Or why Trump properties all seek H1B Visas to import foreign workers to take jobs throughout the country? While he, his wife, and kids all flout foreign designer clothing/jewelry....
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
1. Actually with Trump's energy policies Russia stand to get hurt, very badly. Trump is/will continue to push more energy sources and will no doubt approve more production which will lower the cost per barrel on the market. This will crush Russia as it is one of their primary economic drivers. Lower crude costs kill them. The dems policies would have been far better for Russia.
2. No, you have to believe that people like Mattis, Kelly, and many others would accept the sell out. That is not going to happen.
3. Pence would not be the only one that wouldn't go along with it.
2. No, you have to believe that people like Mattis, Kelly, and many others would accept the sell out. That is not going to happen.
3. Pence would not be the only one that wouldn't go along with it.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
1. Whatever he can. Whether it be intel, less sanctions, foothold in American politics, more assurances that they don't have to worry about the US stopping them from what they want.
2. In a way yes I do think this administration would sell us out. But they would not really consider it selling out. It would be more of a business transaction. There are more people in this administration who knows less how government works. as opposed to how to work government To get what they want. To them, it would benefit them.
3. Actually, no I don't think he would. I think he was the pick our Republican Party picked to help rein him and his cronies in so this does not happen. I think he's more babysitter than VP. From what little I'm seeing, he's the little voice of reason that is supposed to give the rest of us who really really wonder what the actual hell trump and pals are thinking hope. I'm just not sure he is up to the job.
2. In a way yes I do think this administration would sell us out. But they would not really consider it selling out. It would be more of a business transaction. There are more people in this administration who knows less how government works. as opposed to how to work government To get what they want. To them, it would benefit them.
3. Actually, no I don't think he would. I think he was the pick our Republican Party picked to help rein him and his cronies in so this does not happen. I think he's more babysitter than VP. From what little I'm seeing, he's the little voice of reason that is supposed to give the rest of us who really really wonder what the actual hell trump and pals are thinking hope. I'm just not sure he is up to the job.
(4)
(0)
SPC Saundra Teater
MSgt (Join to see) - I'm not sure what side I'm on. If anything I'm on neither side. From what I'm seeing, I would throw a vote of no confidence at a vast majority of members of our government. I think they have forgotten that they are there for the good of their people and not just to push their agendas and interests thru.
(1)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
SPC Saundra Teater -
Fair enough! I know many are not happy with our leaders. Personally I believe we are heading in the right direction with this administration. Although I wasn't sure in the beginning. I was a backer of Ted Cruz. I am a conservative always have and will be. That's the great thing about our country that we can all have our opinions and ideas. It's greatly appreciated when we can have civil conversations without the nastiness. It is when we open our ears and listen that we may learn things. Even though we may disagree.
Fair enough! I know many are not happy with our leaders. Personally I believe we are heading in the right direction with this administration. Although I wasn't sure in the beginning. I was a backer of Ted Cruz. I am a conservative always have and will be. That's the great thing about our country that we can all have our opinions and ideas. It's greatly appreciated when we can have civil conversations without the nastiness. It is when we open our ears and listen that we may learn things. Even though we may disagree.
(3)
(0)
SPC Saundra Teater
MSgt (Join to see) - Dear God yes. I get a laugh every time someone calls me a snowflake. I live in Michigan. If everyone who has questions about our administration got together, they really would show what happens when a bunch of snowflakes gather. Blizzard, White out, avelanche, and high drifts to block roads. Or as those of us who live in the north call it, a regular winter weather. But I am tired of being called names just because I have questions. And personally, if your answer to a question is to insult someone, it kind of makes me think you have no clue what the answer is or you don't want to answer because it might show a bad light on something
(5)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
SP5 Christine Conley - SPC Saundra Teater
I try to be as openminded as possible. Truthfully I can sometimes get a little stubborn with my opinion. But you have to stand on your beliefs. I admit we as conservatives brought everything we could to overshadow the Obama administration and some not true. Just as many are doing today against the Trump administration. It is what opposite sides do although very sad and desperate. It would be nice if folks took there feelings out of the equation and substitute actual facts. All the accusations and innuendo, tit for tat is just silly and not good for the country. And both Republicans and Democrats are guilty. And I'm not sure the bickering will ever become civilized.
I try to be as openminded as possible. Truthfully I can sometimes get a little stubborn with my opinion. But you have to stand on your beliefs. I admit we as conservatives brought everything we could to overshadow the Obama administration and some not true. Just as many are doing today against the Trump administration. It is what opposite sides do although very sad and desperate. It would be nice if folks took there feelings out of the equation and substitute actual facts. All the accusations and innuendo, tit for tat is just silly and not good for the country. And both Republicans and Democrats are guilty. And I'm not sure the bickering will ever become civilized.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
3
3
0
MSgt (Join to see) Fake news is running the show right now. Nothing has been proven, and Trump loves this country, ans especially the military.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
IF you take CBS NBC ABC CNN MSNBC NPR BBC Bloomberg, etc verbatim AND all the white male late night "comedy" hosts [that's all there is][so much for liberal diversity] then the sky is falling, we are all doomed.
Trump did not conspire with Russia, who would attack anyone who won the election.Do you think Trump was really ever in any ones pocket? Despite what CBS or Jon Stewart will tell you. To be sure Congress would never align with Russia, half of them are still living in the Cold War. Some of Obama' comments about Putin got this nonsense going. Obama also gutted our military, left it demoralized.
Trump did not conspire with Russia, who would attack anyone who won the election.Do you think Trump was really ever in any ones pocket? Despite what CBS or Jon Stewart will tell you. To be sure Congress would never align with Russia, half of them are still living in the Cold War. Some of Obama' comments about Putin got this nonsense going. Obama also gutted our military, left it demoralized.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
No
No
And No.
This is a political which hunt. If Congress wants to find some evidence of collusion they should look no further than Yhe Clinton foundations sources of foreign cash, Clintons uranium deal with the Russians and Obamas deal to give the Iranians hundreds of millions of dollars while allowing them to continue to be the greatest state sponsor of terrorism in the world.
No
And No.
This is a political which hunt. If Congress wants to find some evidence of collusion they should look no further than Yhe Clinton foundations sources of foreign cash, Clintons uranium deal with the Russians and Obamas deal to give the Iranians hundreds of millions of dollars while allowing them to continue to be the greatest state sponsor of terrorism in the world.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
No I don't. He was not responsible for selling them 20% of our Uranium. I was hoping the last one would not sell us out, then I see reports of a deal that only benefits Iran, and a massive cash only payout that fully funded their nuclear weapons program. Talk about being dismayed at those critical failures of leadership. I don't think we'll see those kind of failures with the current administration. I may get surprised, but I do not expect that outcome.
(3)
(0)
A1C John Reese
CPO (Join to see) - Would that be like the aircraft ordered and paid for by Iran while the Shah was still in power, but never delivered when he was deposed? If Iran were to regain assets seized and frozen because of its change of government they would be quite happy, not the kiss and make up kind of happy, but pleased none the less.
(0)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
I don't disagree with you on that. Like I said, I do not agree with aspects of the agreement and I have some questions about the payments, but they certainly are not anything like what has been portrayed by the far right. I feel it was a dumb move, but not the treasonous sell out and betrayal of our nation that some want to hype it up to be...
Let's move the national conversation away from the false claims of the extremists on both ends of the (Left vs Right) spectrum and back to the middle where we can rationally discuss reality. Nearly half of Americans are neither Rep or Dem, but some how those two groups control the story. Both Rep and Dem supporters need to realize that there is another big group out there that is tired of the crap. According to Gallup (Nov2017) 40% Independent, 30% Dem, and 25% Rep. http://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx
Being critical of Dem party and Dem politicians does not mean I am Rep. Conversely, being critical of Rep party and Rep politicians does not mean I am Dem. There are crooks and wrongdoers in both parties.
Let's move the national conversation away from the false claims of the extremists on both ends of the (Left vs Right) spectrum and back to the middle where we can rationally discuss reality. Nearly half of Americans are neither Rep or Dem, but some how those two groups control the story. Both Rep and Dem supporters need to realize that there is another big group out there that is tired of the crap. According to Gallup (Nov2017) 40% Independent, 30% Dem, and 25% Rep. http://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx
Being critical of Dem party and Dem politicians does not mean I am Rep. Conversely, being critical of Rep party and Rep politicians does not mean I am Dem. There are crooks and wrongdoers in both parties.
(3)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
A1C John Reese - The French sent privateers (pirates) to plunder the Caribbean and to raid American shipping all along the Atlantic coast when the U.S. claimed we only owed money to King Louis XVI and refused to pay anything to the new government after the king was disposed. This led to our mostly forgotten Quasi War with France.
The U.S. had deals with Iran when the Shah was in power but halted the deals and kept the money when the Shah was disposed and froze Iranian assets deposited/invested with U.S. financial institution plus real estate holdings within our jurisdiction. Hundreds of millions of dollars from 38 years ago have accumulated billions in interest since then and, in many cases, we have leased out Iran's real estate holdings and collected rent from the current occupants for decades. Like France in 1798, Iran is motivate to have its assets returned but instead of utilizing privateers for their proxy war over this dispute, Iran supports more contemporary organizations in its quasi-war.
CRS: Iran Sanctions (13 Oct 2017)( https://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS20871.pdf ) is an interesting read on what assets we hold and who has paid what to Iran, when, and why over the last 38 years.
There is also the Treasury Dept's, Iran Sanctions page for some light reading: https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/pages/iran.aspx
Please do not confuse anything in this post as a statement of support for Iran or anything they are doing. It is not. I am merely making a historical comparison to point out that the U.S. v Iran relationship is not the crystal clear black-and-white, good versus evil confrontation it is often portrayed to be. Especially when you consider the Shah of Iran never would have been in power had the U.S. not organized the 1953 coup d'etat overthrowing the democratically elected prime minister (reportedly through the support of Iranian fascists, former Nazis, and local terrorist groups). Both sets of hands appear to have a lot of dirt on them.
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/iran/
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB435/
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB598-State-Department-releases-documents-on-US-backed-1953-coup-in-Iran/
The U.S. had deals with Iran when the Shah was in power but halted the deals and kept the money when the Shah was disposed and froze Iranian assets deposited/invested with U.S. financial institution plus real estate holdings within our jurisdiction. Hundreds of millions of dollars from 38 years ago have accumulated billions in interest since then and, in many cases, we have leased out Iran's real estate holdings and collected rent from the current occupants for decades. Like France in 1798, Iran is motivate to have its assets returned but instead of utilizing privateers for their proxy war over this dispute, Iran supports more contemporary organizations in its quasi-war.
CRS: Iran Sanctions (13 Oct 2017)( https://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS20871.pdf ) is an interesting read on what assets we hold and who has paid what to Iran, when, and why over the last 38 years.
There is also the Treasury Dept's, Iran Sanctions page for some light reading: https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/pages/iran.aspx
Please do not confuse anything in this post as a statement of support for Iran or anything they are doing. It is not. I am merely making a historical comparison to point out that the U.S. v Iran relationship is not the crystal clear black-and-white, good versus evil confrontation it is often portrayed to be. Especially when you consider the Shah of Iran never would have been in power had the U.S. not organized the 1953 coup d'etat overthrowing the democratically elected prime minister (reportedly through the support of Iranian fascists, former Nazis, and local terrorist groups). Both sets of hands appear to have a lot of dirt on them.
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/iran/
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB435/
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB598-State-Department-releases-documents-on-US-backed-1953-coup-in-Iran/
µ2RÐãÉx*!]NÂe:ØòêoæôP µbAÄBs"P4Q@ý¿}pu ÿÔÞPïðï`Lñvç(3Ë·dÍUÏý¶ROìyÉaÆd0̺ãbÀÔÒMà`Dè}åGÌ]npüï tð*Ú`æ/ #dÄ endstream endobj 7079 0 obj /Metadata 275 0 R/Pages 7076 0 R/StructTreeRoot 367 0 R/Type/Catalog endobj 7080 0 obj /MediaBox[0 0 612 792]/Parent 7076 0 R/Resources/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageB/ImageC/ImageI]/XObject/Rotate 0/StructParents 0/Tabs/S/Type/Page endobj 7081 0 obj stream hÞäWÛnÛ8ýûÒbëì\¶Òî"IÔXëp$ÃVw¿ï%J§]Æ!9"Ï9CYî$ãÌr§ÞÐL Ia:VdXs #f...
(1)
(0)
A1C John Reese
CPO (Join to see) - I had been aware of most of these issues, and you rightly bring these up to confirm the tangled web of relationships we share with Iran, over decades of manipulations. Most American's only remember the downfall of the Shah, and subsequent Embassy takeover. It is easy to forget the back room dealings that allowed the diplomatic corps to return home, but that is another story for another day. Some of what you brought up IS new to me, citing sources is very helpful, and I'll be doing my homework.
Thanks.
Thanks.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
3
3
0
Trump Administration is just starting. We can't expect quick results from his campaign promises as we usually do, actually with a mainstream media and democrat party screwing everything he does.
America was almost sold to Saudis under Obama administration, and nobody started a damn investigation. Everything about the Russian connection with Trump administration and their consequences, is just a total bulls**t, a fake story created by bad losers, who can't accept the whole idea of their loss.
America was almost sold to Saudis under Obama administration, and nobody started a damn investigation. Everything about the Russian connection with Trump administration and their consequences, is just a total bulls**t, a fake story created by bad losers, who can't accept the whole idea of their loss.
(3)
(0)
Jose Cornejo
CPO (Join to see) -
Can you believe that bullshit you said? Hey accept the defeat and move on!
Can you believe that bullshit you said? Hey accept the defeat and move on!
(0)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
Mr Cornejo, you sound like a Bill Clinton supporter while he was under investigation before his 1998 impeachment.
Which defeat are you referring to? Hillary Clinton's defeat? Had the DNC not been bought out by Clinton, I doubt she would have even been "selected' as the Democratic nominee. Nonetheless, more people voted for Clinton than Trump but she was indeed defeated in the electoral college and Trump has been sworn in as President.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/08/31/poll-clinton-trump-most-unfavorable-candidates-ever/89644296/
http://fortune.com/2016/11/07/clinton-trump-voters-unpopular-negative/
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/voters-in-washington-hated-both-trump-and-clinton-more-than-in-any-other-state/
Like Trump, Clinton is an extremely unpopular person among most Americans but is beloved by a small very supportive faction. The only reason Clinton got so many votes is because so many people were against Trump more than her. Unfortunately the same is true for Trump and most of his votes came from people who were against Clinton more than him.
https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/191/685/thumb_v2/f20ed9b5.jpg? [login to see]
I dislike Hillary Clinton and I did not vote for her. I am glad she is not President and that she was not able to achieve immortality with the legacy as the first female U.S. President.
Now that that is out of the way, maybe you can enlighten me on what you argue is BS? Please state what you believe are factual errors in my last post and cite a reference if possible. Russian interference was brought up around Apr 2016, well before election day Nov 2016. DJT and Sessions both claimed no campaign people had any contact with Russians but over a half-dozen campaign people have since admitted to having contact with Russians. Trump Jr, Manafort, and Kushner held a meeting with a Russian in Jun 2016. DJT dictated a false cover story for that meeting. DJT spoke on national television soliciting the support of Russian hackers in Jul 2016. Where is the factual error in any of that?
Which defeat are you referring to? Hillary Clinton's defeat? Had the DNC not been bought out by Clinton, I doubt she would have even been "selected' as the Democratic nominee. Nonetheless, more people voted for Clinton than Trump but she was indeed defeated in the electoral college and Trump has been sworn in as President.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/08/31/poll-clinton-trump-most-unfavorable-candidates-ever/89644296/
http://fortune.com/2016/11/07/clinton-trump-voters-unpopular-negative/
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/voters-in-washington-hated-both-trump-and-clinton-more-than-in-any-other-state/
Like Trump, Clinton is an extremely unpopular person among most Americans but is beloved by a small very supportive faction. The only reason Clinton got so many votes is because so many people were against Trump more than her. Unfortunately the same is true for Trump and most of his votes came from people who were against Clinton more than him.
https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/191/685/thumb_v2/f20ed9b5.jpg? [login to see]
I dislike Hillary Clinton and I did not vote for her. I am glad she is not President and that she was not able to achieve immortality with the legacy as the first female U.S. President.
Now that that is out of the way, maybe you can enlighten me on what you argue is BS? Please state what you believe are factual errors in my last post and cite a reference if possible. Russian interference was brought up around Apr 2016, well before election day Nov 2016. DJT and Sessions both claimed no campaign people had any contact with Russians but over a half-dozen campaign people have since admitted to having contact with Russians. Trump Jr, Manafort, and Kushner held a meeting with a Russian in Jun 2016. DJT dictated a false cover story for that meeting. DJT spoke on national television soliciting the support of Russian hackers in Jul 2016. Where is the factual error in any of that?
Poll: Clinton, Trump most unfavorable candidates ever
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are the two most unpopular presidential candidates in more than 30 years of ABC News/Washington Post polling.
(0)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
CPO (Join to see) - To be clear. I am *not* arguing that the Russias stole the election. However, I do believe that Russia interfered in the election and it is obvious that the Trump campaign had contact/connections with Russian.
How much Russia interfered needs to be investigated and a solution developed to minimize such interference in future elections.
How much contact/connections the Trump campaign had with Russians needs to be investigated and appropriate action should be taken.
But to deny that Russia had *any* interference in the election, or claim that Trump's people had *no* contact/connections with Russians, is simply an inexcusable delusion.
How much Russia interfered needs to be investigated and a solution developed to minimize such interference in future elections.
How much contact/connections the Trump campaign had with Russians needs to be investigated and appropriate action should be taken.
But to deny that Russia had *any* interference in the election, or claim that Trump's people had *no* contact/connections with Russians, is simply an inexcusable delusion.
(1)
(0)
Jose Cornejo
CPO (Join to see) - Bud: if there's a "Russian Intervention" in last elections, you need evidence to prove it, isn't it? the evidence, you can find it under the 30.000 Hillary's Emails, the Iranian Nuclear deal and the Obama's Birth certificate.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google