Between the leftist media hyping the shit out of every unsubstantiated rumor, and an untrustworthy FBI and CIA, it's impossible to know what's really going on.
In this thread, let's discuss every fact which supports or refutes Russian penetration of the United States government. People of all political stripes are encouraged to post whatever they know. Please keep emotions to a minimum.
(If this is real, we can't just bury our heads in the sands and ignore it.)
Other urls found in this thread:
dailymail.co.uk
thedailybeast.com
express.co.uk
ibtimes.co.uk
telegraph.co.uk
twitter.com
dubya tea oeuf i h8 Poccuя nao
дa
Bump.
This could be the Trojan horse of a lifetime. It merits some discussion.
>Is Russia really trying to infiltrate the US government through Donald Trump?
We have already done it. US is Russia's bitch now. Deal with it. Pic prooves everything.
>Hillary gets in
>WWIII with Russia
>World goes to shit
>Trump gets in
>two of the most powerfulest Christian countries are now friends
>U.S becomes great again
>prosperity comes back to the U.S
It's as if people wanted Hillary to start WWIII..
You're citing someone who shilled for Fidel Castro. Much like Sanders and his support of communist revolutions throughout the world, Waters has a similar history and is just attempting to deflect her actual history of communist support by saying it's actually the other side in bed with commies.
M A I N S T R E A M
M E T E O R
And this is why we can't have a serious discussion. Every time the issue is brought up, the two sides jump to absurd extremes and throw their shit at the other.
Leftists: "Trump is literally Putin wearing a face mask and we're now Russia's colony. This obvious forgery talking about urine proves everything!"
Trump supporters: "Russia a good Christian boy who dindu nuffin wrong and has zero interest at all in compromising our national security."
Who leaked the 'grab them by the pussy' tape?
The tape which was used to try to influence the election.
Were they russian?
I have seen no credible evidence whatsoever, not even a shred, that implicates Trump with Russia in any form. It's literally all made up from deep state "sources," DNC innuendo from the campaign, and outright falsifications by the media.
Even the CIA "disclosure" (remember that?) had no evidence in it!
Russian Trump connections are 100% original Grade A Fake News. And only paid shills would say otherwise.
Just look at the people leading the charge against Trump. It's politicians like Sanders, who notably used communist imagery in his early days and flew a USSR flag in his office, while also supporting communist revolutions in South America. Then you have Maxine Waters, who supported Fidel Castro. Sanders and Waters aren't cut from the same cloth that JFK was cut from. While JFK was actively campaigning against communism, politicians and activists like Waters and Sanders were undermining him.
we can have a serious discussion, we just need someone, who obviously isn't you, to seriously discuss
>tfw Americans are cucked by Russia
>tfw American men are forced to take hormone therapy and become little girls for Russian families
I think Putin is sowing general discord in western Europe and the US by capitalizing on demographic problems, not because he actually cares about white people but simply because a destabilized western Europe and US is in his geo political interests. If a race war ever erupts you'll 100% know Putin and Soros will be behind it.
The answer is an obvious NO because of 2 things:
1st, when you want to infiltrate, you tend to do it quietly and discretely. Trump is neither of those. Trump also draws plenty of attention to himself even without the dems constantly going at him. It's like recruiting a 5th column agent who likes to periodically yell that he is not a 5th column agent.
2nd, it was obvious before the election win that dems do not like anyone he would nominate to the cabinet or any other government position. If the Kremlin was counting on him to appoint KGB sleeper agents or pro-Russia sympathizers, it would like an automatic invitation for FBI, CIA and NSA to pick their life apart.
The only plausible rationale for Russian interference is that they needed someone who they can easily maneuver around. Hillary, despite being a corrupt narcissistic cunt, does have substantial foreign policy experience and has worked with CIA in managing op staging grounds at US embassies worldwide. She is the last person that Russia wants to deal with. The truth of the matter is, there was some propaganda efforts using RT media assets to run negative Hillary material. Which is rather mundane and hardly outrageous considering the violent military intervention that the US has routinely uses. BTW, Voice of America is still being blasted to dozens of different countries around the world as we speak.
Well it's like this Europe is spooked, the likes of GCHQ and the UK etc don't start losing their shit over nothing, theres a massive power shift taking place worldwide and a lot of disruption and to think Russia is sitting back doing nothing is absurd.
Maybe there is nothing going on but maybe just maybe it's best to err on the side of caution, intelligence services hear and deal with things the populace never hear about literally top secret intelligence, spys, number stations, espionage counter espionage it's not for show
Things are happening
Also, the funniest thing right now is that in order to counter this supposed "victory" of Russian interference, the dems only need to work with Trump in order to ensure that he can effectively defend American interests. Compromise on the social stuff and work with him to develop a good foreign policy instead of irrationally fighting everything he does. Which is exactly what they have NOT been doing, causing Trump to be distracted with their shenanigans and allowing Russia, China and North Korea to basically do whatever the hell they want.
I would say that this is the master play of Russian interference: getting the dems to sabotage their own elected government over petty bullshit, and ironically, making them defacto agents of Russia.
>deep state "sources"
Why dismiss these sources though? Sure the media will distort them massively (which is THE biggest threat to serious journalism today imo, not lying outright but willfully distorting possibly truthful information for political reasons). But, how do we know there aren't seeds of truth in the primary materials themselves?
As far as I know, the "deep state" just refers to non-political appointees in the US intelligence community whose career spans multiple presidencies. What interest would the IC have in undermining a sitting president?
Speaking of pro-Russian Democrats, it's always been interesting to me how Podesta sold them the uranium and no one talked about it. Could it be that all their accusations about Trump's collusion with Russia is to distract from their own guilt?
I'm just trying to learn myself. I don't know what the facts are. I've been exposed to tropes and memes from both sides, and some of it just smells like bullshit.
This is true. I believe it's been proven that Russia funds both BLM and Golden Dawn for instance. The best thing for European stability long-term would be to dissolve the EU which everyone hates and have its strongest nations rebuild their armies (i.e. France, Italy, Germany). Having one federal superstate is like putting all your eggs in one basket. It's a recipe for disaster.
Because it's fucking retarded. There's nothing to discuss.
It's so simple, why don't you see it? Russia does NOT want war with America. They know that they would get their shit pushed in. When Trump said he wanted to make friends with Russia, Putin got excited as fuck, because it meant the trade embargoes would soon be lifted, and relations between the two nations would start healing. Putin wants Russia to become great, but he can't do that when U.S keeps threatening Russia itself, and its neighbours.
Look at what Russia did to the groups that are part of the NWO. He kicked them out, no wonder the U.S/George Soros was all up in their shit trying to start a war, trying to change their culture and get the entire West to go against them. Fuck me, it isn't hard to understand.
It's funny how americans in general have no dimension of how big and influent the KGB still is (Russian-chinese intelligence agency).
They are used to believe america is the agent of everything that happens in their country and the world, they can't conceive the idea of the enormity of Russian agents work inside their own homeland throughtout history.
No. There was already an investigation on this by the FBI prior to the election and they said they couldn't find anything suggesting Trump is compromised by Russia. The liberal media really wants it to be true though. So bad that they are even starting to believe their own propaganda.
>agents who worked
Fixed.
I am at the point where even if that was happening, which it is not, I wouldn't care. I've become tired of the American system and want something new. God bless America, and I pray Trump can fix the broken system that we have dealt with for the past 250 years
>Could it be that all their accusations about Trump's collusion with Russia is to distract from their own guilt?
I'm not sure it's worth going down this specific rabbit hole, because I have a fairly controversial opinion on this topic, but I don't fault the Obama administration for this business deal. In fact, it was one of the few instances of his tenure when you could feel the wind blowing in another direction. In fact, I'd even say that moderate Democrats, or, as I like to call them, JFK democrats, aren't actually bad people. It's the far left that I have a problem with. And by far left, I mean people like Sanders, who, by their own admission, are democratic socialists. The fact that his supporters change his words to say "social democrat" rather than "democratic socialist" is very telling.
Reagan won. America won. Communism no longer exists in Russia. Now, the far left, the people like Waters, who shilled for Castro, no longer have a favorable opinion of Russia, and, instead, they're shilling for the likes of China and Saudi Arabia. Remember that the first whispers of Trump being a Russian sleeper stemmed from him verbally slapping Bush across the face, and claiming that we cannot fight ISIS, the Syrians and the Russians at the same time in Syria, and that we must clearly define one enemy and build alliances around mutual enemies. In this case, Russia would become a natural ally in the conflict. There is no need to have yet another Afghan-Soviet war, only, this time, in Syria, because the Soviets lost. That war is done. The ship has sailed. We no longer need to work with the Saudis and the Israelis to help create privateers to fight communist influence in the region. But, acknowledging this means we must face a huge shift in our foreign policy, and it's something the deep state doesn't want to do.
>The only plausible rationale for Russian interference is that they needed someone who they can easily maneuver around.
This is the view I'm leaning towards. I never doubted that Donald Trump himself was a true patriot, and I seriously doubt that any Russian spies would make it into his cabinet with all the negative press his presidency is getting. It may just be that Russia is counting on someone inexperienced who they think can be manipulated.
>the dems only need to work with Trump in order to ensure that he can effectively defend American interests
Unless they literally believe he's compromised somehow, in which case working with him would be the worst thing to do.
Interesting analysis overall, thank you user. Any thoughts on the whole Wikileaks affair?
...
Every American who cares knows this. Much like every Russian who cares knows that, for much of recent American history, the most prominent politicians, notably the Bush family and the Clinton family, have been either CIA members or CIA assets.
If you find it shocking that the head of the military in a country has ties to an intelligence agency, hoo, boy, you've got quite a bit of learnin' to.
>WWIII with Russia
That certainly was the Kremlin propaganda campaign, but it was Putin constantly threatening the world nuclear annihilation just like that other little tin horn crackpot dictator in North Korea.
>Russia does NOT want war with America.
Then why is Putin constantly threatening to blow up the world with nukes if he doesn't get his way?
thedailybeast.com
express.co.uk
>I'm not sure it's worth going down this specific rabbit hole, because I have a fairly controversial opinion on this topic
Let's hear it.
>Now, the far left, the people like Waters, who shilled for Castro, no longer have a favorable opinion of Russia, and, instead, they're shilling for the likes of China and Saudi Arabia.
Did this sort of progressive far-left ever truly have a favorable opinion of Russia? From everything they advocate, they sound like Trotskyists. This is a distinctive ideological branch of communism with deep roots in the United States, and with a historical animosity to mainline Stalinist communism. The latter is actually what most people think of when they talk about communism in general.
Sure the elites know this, but the publi doesn't.
Even if you know something is happening, you don't want to believe it.
The only one who is suspicious is Paul Manafort, who was sacked.
That's it
You're shilling the russian narrative too hard, be a little more subtle about it and you might get some more board sliding replies, er uh... I mean "serious discussion".
>Did this sort of progressive far-left ever truly have a favorable opinion of Russia?
Seeing as many actively supported rebel groups and regimes worldwide who were, obviously, being supported by the USSR, yes, I'd say they had a favorable opinion of Russia, albeit their support was done more covertly rather than overtly.
I view this whole deep-state hissy fit as something comparable to the strikes we often see in Hollywood. The fact is, they no longer want to do their job. Since the 60s, they've had a very clear directive on foreign policy issues and a very clear indication as to who our allies were. The election of Trump was a work order they weren't quite ready for. It seems, as if, they were hoping that Americans thought the Cold War was still on. It's not. We no longer need privateers to fight Russian influence. Going against ISIS and allying with Russia to eliminate ISIS completely changes their work assignment they've had since the fucking 60s. This isn't something they were ready for. But, from a free market perspective, if they wish to stay relevant and become competitive, they better suck it up, bow to their fucking employer and realize that a new directive is being set and that a new threat is needed.
>Let's hear it.
It's not terribly relevant, as it will get into the Petrodollar narrative, which I pray is something that is eliminated.
>trump is a buffoon, a monkey man, an orange clown, completely incompetent, has no idea what he's doing and had everything handed to him in life
>he is also a dastardlyinternational mega-spy mastermind who has singlehandedly usurped the American throne
This thread is garbage.
I would rather Trump arrest John McCain and invite Putin to Mar-a-lago
It's clearly a shill infested shill thread and looks like you just helped bump it
You keep coming back to the narrative that ISIS is a nothing more than a NATO proxy to fight Russian influence in the Middle East, but you underestimate political Islam. Turkey, the Gulf States, and Israel are involved, and while these countries are nominally US allies, they sort of constitute an independent power bloc of their own.
>It's not terribly relevant, as it will get into the Petrodollar narrative, which I pray is something that is eliminated.
The uranium deal is pure bullshit and it's bigger than the Rosenburgs. There's literally no way you can justify this as something in the US national interest. Also the petrodollar is an organ of US power. The only argument you can make for its removal is that oil could be obsolete soon anyway, and that American purchasing power shouldn't rely on a commodity with an uncertain future.
>2014 and 2015 articles
That's why.
...
>NATO proxy
[citation needed]. I've made zero references to NATO.
>to fight Russian influence in the Middle East
Yes, absolutely. In fact, this was the direct intention of the initial alliance of the region
>but you underestimate political Islam. Turkey, the Gulf States, and Israel are involved, and while these countries are nominally US allies, they sort of constitute an independent power bloc of their own.
I'm starting to wonder if you know what you're talking about. Not because you're wrong, but because everything seems to be going over your head. This started to become apparent when you brought up NATO, rather than the Safari Club, which is what I've been referencing throughout this entire thread. If you don't understand that the US allied with the Safari Club (again, not a NATO reference, no idea where you got that) specifically for Cold War purposes, this conversation is going nowhere. Without you acknowledging the historical fact that the alliances exist because it was mutually beneficial for the countries to combat communism in the Middle East and North Africa, there's no point in continuing - kind of like there's no reason for the alliance to continue since the USSR was dissolved!
>we can't just bury our heads in the sands and ignore it
Baww, why not? Is just friendly back-prank, comrade.