Random Politics & Religion #17

Also no way in hell I'm subscribing to Washington Post to read them bash Trump every day.

Congressional support for Obamas sanctions continues as McCain starts his own investigation into Russian hacks, against Trumps wishes but hey that's next week right? Meanwhile, armchair detectives on ffxiah continue to get nowhere with the case. Poor Putin.

Putin will be fine. Worry about Obama, who's about to have a lot of his (awful) work undone in short order.

How's that list of retaliation goin? You can add todays response of "nothing."

You mean how Putin outplayed Obama by not retaliating as an appeal to future relations with Trump?

Thanks for reformatting king. It was before 9 in my AM and the caffeine hadn't hit yet.

I wasn't trying to prove anything, merely reporting something I found that might be of interest.

No, I mean the long list of empty threats made by a former superpower against the US. Trump is not going to dictate relations with poor Putin, it's going to be Congress. Like I keep saying, and like Washington keeps demonstrating, nobody is interested in their little bromance.

Looking at the state of the Russian economy it's adorable that people still think Putin "outplayed" anyone. Adorable.

Like these?


All of those were made by your lord and savior Obama.

And what about Obama? It seems to us all that he is dictating relations with Putin. In case you haven't heard, Obama just issued sanctions against Russia and kicked out 35 Russian intelligence officers out the country.

Trump isn't even president yet, and you are already decreeing that he won't do the exact same job as your lord and savior?

I know you are partisan to the core, but god damn man, stop contradicting yourself!

And I'm supposed to take their word for it why? The super-duper trustworthy government and president who clearly does not have a case of sour grapes say Russia did a thing but won't prove it, and it's totally justified and not just another way of trying to delegitimize Trump's fair victory.

You forgot to mention Obama's transparency, his penchant of passing meaningful executive orders after the election, and his directing the EPA to punish Alaskans for the election by mandating that they don't use wood stoves and ovens for heating during winter, which, if they survive the winter, they will be issued a steep fine for breaking the Clean Air Act by using fire to survive.

What about Obama? Everything he is doing has the full support of the Republican Congress. They passed resolutions authorizing him to sanction Russia and have come out in support of these sanctions and are calling for more. They want tougher sanctions and would cheer for Obama if he issued them. This is irrefutable fact that you are ignoring and you look like an idiot for it.
I have not contradicted myself at all, and you can't countered with anything. You don't like the sanctions, you don't believe the CIA from your armchair, oh well, there is nothing you can do and there is nothing Trump can do about them without Republican support, which he does not have. Congress however, is free to continue sanctions without Trump.

Two things: One, these latest sanctions were issued by executive order. Trump can rescind these without approval from Congress. Two, Trump has veto power over sanctions, meaning Congress is going to need a lot more than just John McRino and a few others to "continue sanctions without Trump".

Ok, now I'm having a hard time finding evidence of this.

I see a few Congressmen who backs this, but I don't see what everyone who doesn't have his head stuck up Obama's *** would call "full support."

Unless you think "full support" to mean "hasn't gotten the president impeached for bypassing Congress yet again."

At the very least, I see several articles that state that the GOP have a tough decision ahead: either soften their stances on Russia, or continue to be tough on Russia.

Nowhere do I see this "full support." I know you will not do so, but where's your source on this assertion?

Those sanctions that Obama is using are from previous resolutions, not anything current.

Fact as in that guy who was kicked off of a Delta flight for speaking Arabic?

I don't think they work. You either go full embargo with Russia, or you do something else. Going after a few top-level people isn't going to affect Russia at all.

I'm surprised you are willing to take somebody's word for it. Especially when that same person was caught lying through his teeth about the very subject.

Remember the CIA agent lying to Washington Post, and then go caught by the FBI completely denying it? Or are you going to completely forget that ever happened?

You are right, there is nothing either of us can do about it. Other than make comments.

Oh hey, what do you know, that's exactly what we are doing.

But I can't help it that you are so partisan in your remarks that you cannot see the ***from the dirt in the ground (hint: ***smells like ***).

I know you and KN are outright ignoring the support Obama has from both majority leaders on this issue, but that's ok it's still there. Nobody is going to buck party on Russia, especially since, again, both majority leaders are calling for stronger sanctions. I would be surprised if anyone votes against sanctions, but it certainly won't be enough to stop a veto override. The sanctions have worked for two years and we aren't adopting the Trump policy of "moving on."

There we have it folks.

We went from "full support" to "both majority leaders."

I didn't know that Congress, who has 535 voting members, comprise completely of 2 people.

, except of course, when they are needed as a scapegoat.

So which is it Vic? Is Russia relevant (hacked the election) or not (sanctions)? Make up your god damn mind!

What information do you think you should be privy to? The released document gives the 'who' and the 'how'. What is missing?
Read past the headline. Lack of definitive evidence on motive doesn't preclude the hack actually happening.

Read past the sentence. Lack of conclusive evidence does not make the person and/or country guilty of a crime.

Wasn't that your argument against prosecuting against Clinton again, even though the investigation was basically a hoax?

Like Vic, make up your god damn mind! Either show conclusive evidence (Russia hacking) or abide by what is told to us by those conducted the "investigation" (FBI "investigation" on Clinton). Stop being ignorant when it best suits your argument.

Evidence? Proof? In other words, something aside from "take our word for it", which is pretty much all that I know that they have. If you'd been following the conversation we've already covered that, though. Back-reading is your friend.


Waitaminute. I thought in your world that lack of motive was a giant "nothing to see here, folks".

You ask too much from them.

Don't worry, we got at least 3 more "Adorable" remarks from Vic before he disappears for another 2 weeks.

No, we didn't. Obama has the full support of congress with these sanctions. Trump does not, no one in Congress has come out in favor of Trumps "move on" plan. More sanctions are coming, from either Congress or Obama, probably both.

Trump can either break up with Putin or sink his agenda with him. Done trolling yet KN? Done lying? How is that armchair investigation going? Maybe you should fall in line with Trumps plan and move on because you have nothing. You won't be getting any proof from the CIA, I know it hurts your feelings but thats just too bad.

Where in the world are you seeing this "full support"? Alternatively, what is your definition of "full support"? I see tempered support from a few key Republicans who are okay with the sanctions but who think Obama has done a terrible job with foreign relations overall. Is that "full support" to you?

We aren't going to tell the Russians how we tracked their hackers..why is this hard?

The point of contention in motive is that Russia did the hacking to aid Trump at the expense of Clinton not that Russia didn't have motive to interfere in the first place. You guys are being intentionally obtuse, which is understandable since it's the only way your position makes any sense.

We're not obligated to, but it seems pointless to sour relations with a superpower over "he said, she said" allegations just because the left is throwing tantrums over the election and can't contain the collateral damage from its flailing.

Oh right, all the intelligence agencies are leftist organizations. I forget who all is in on it at times.

Already called you out on that. Care to be called out again?

Or do what Putin is doing, and ignoring Obama. Cause, you know, Obama's relevancy is on the same level as the most recent ceasefire plan Russia and Syria has agreed upon (hint: US is not involved in that, nor will ever be involved in it as long as Obama is president).

Lying about what? What lies have I told?

That I hate Obama? Isn't it pretty obvious that I do?
That I like Trump? I never said that, ever.
That you don't know what the hell you are talking about? You give way enough evidence to support that.

Where's the lie?

(Protip: What the media tried to do with Trump, you cannot emulate with me. Just saying)

Wait, are you asking me to prove that the CIA has nothing? How does anyone do that? How can you prove that somebody is clueless, besides using their own words (which I did)? Or are you wanting me to prove that CIA/DHS really has something and not showing it, which is completely counter to my argument?

Kindof hard to get any proof when none exists. It's really simple to show the world evidence supporting hacking if evidence existed.

Good thing that's absolutely not what's happening. Really? Trying to reduce the CIA/FBI that Congress supports to he said she said. Ok. And stop calling Russia a superpower, it's not the 90s.

Now KN is lying about what is going on in Syria and the role the US is playing over there. Ok sure. Probably should move on from that topic KN. Ceasefire lasted a couple of hours btw.