Donald Trump paid Russian hookers for golden showers?

[kallend 1,623]

By Anne Applebaum, Columnist, January 13 at 5:54 PM

We now have not one but two “secret” dossiers on the Russian campaign to support Donald Trump. One of them is an unverified and probably unverifiable 35-page collection of rumors and gossip put together by a former British spy. Dumped on the Internet by BuzzFeed, the report is filled with small mistakes and some puzzles (for instance: how could salacious Russian “ kompromat ,” or compromising material, be used to blackmail someone as shameless as Trump?) and mixes the plausible with the implausible without giving real answers.

The other is the declassified version of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence report on Russia’s role in the U.S. election campaign. Carefully hedged and printed on official stationery, it sticks almost entirely to information that was already in public domain, including straight-faced analysis of programs broadcast on RT, the Russian state propaganda channel, which are available to anybody who owns a television.

Both of these reports are in the news because they contain “secrets.” But they add very little to what we already know about Trump’s strange relationship with Russia. The MI6 dossier is tantalizing but cannot be proven; the DNI report is banal. Instead of wasting more time on these documents, maybe we ought instead to abandon our obsession with “secrets” and “spies” and look at what is sitting in front of us. Here, for the record, once again, are things we already know about Trump and Russia, and they aren’t remotely secret:


●Trump’s real estate empire relies, though we don’t know how much, on Russian money. Trump says he never invested in Russia or got loans from Russia. But he did get investment from Russia. In 2008, his son said that Russian investment was “pouring in” to Trump properties. Even before that, Trump had a whole series of partners and investors linked to post-Soviet oligarchs and even Russian organized crime. Has Trump concealed his tax returns for this reason?

●Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign manager, spent many years working on behalf of the thuggish Russian-backed Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych, who eventually fled his own country. Manafort maintains links to pro-Russian groups in Ukraine. His name appeared on a list of people who took large chunks of cash from Yanukovych. He hasn’t gone away — in fact, he has lived in Trump Tower. There is no secret about his Russian connections. On the contrary, they define him.

●Last summer, Trump operatives at the convention changed the Republican Party platform to soften the language on Ukraine. There was no explanation for this change, one of the few substantive changes made to the entire party platform. Was this a signal, from Manafort or Trump, that the candidate was on Vladi­mir Putin’s side?

●Throughout the campaign, Trump repeated slogans and conspiracy theories — “Obama invented ISIS,” “Hillary will start World War III” — lifted from Sputnik, the Russian propaganda website. Was this just Trump campaign chief Stephen K. Bannon borrowing ideas, or Manafort using tactics he perfected in Ukraine? Or was there deliberate linkage?

●Finally, and most important: Trump is willing to risk serious conflict with China, to destroy U.S. relations with Mexico, to dismiss America’s closest allies in Europe and to downgrade NATO, our most important military alliance. But he has repeated many times his admiration for Russia and its president. In 2013 he told MSNBC, “I do have a relationship” with Putin, who is “probably very interested in what you and I are saying today” and will “be seeing it in some form.” In 2014 he bragged that Putin had sent him a “beautiful present” and claimed — apparently untruthfully — to have spoken to him as well. Nothing that Putin has done since — invade Ukraine, murder journalists, jail opponents — has induced Trump to change his mind.

To that list, we can now add the fact that Russia hacked material from the Clinton campaign, fed it to WikiLeaks and passed it on through their bot and troll network, which transformed it into hysterical slogans. Eventually, our intelligence agencies may learn more about that process, but at this point it doesn’t matter.

Information doesn’t have to be secret to be shocking. Trump doesn’t have to be a Manchurian candidate who has been hypnotized or recruited by foreign intelligence. It’s enough that he has direct and indirect links to a profoundly corrupt and violent foreign dictator, whose policies he admires, whose advisers he shares and whose slogans he uses. That’s kompromat enough for me.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[gowlerk 1,912]

Hey Marc, I know it's a lot of words. But maybe you should make time to read and understand it anyway. It gets past the bullshit to the facts.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[aphid 0]

kallend

***

Quote

My name is spelled with a "C".

Marc

I have edited my comment, and I apologize for the error. I even knew the correct spelling, but accidentally used the wrong one.

Marc, of course, has never been known to make a spelling error in this forum.

Damn you, John Kallend. The nostril-coffee flood just cost my laptop another motherboard.

[rushmc 18]

gowlerk

Quote

My name is spelled with a "C".

Marc

I have edited my comment, and I apologize for the error. I even knew the correct spelling, but accidentally used the wrong one.

Thank you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 1,623]

Hi MarC.

True or a lie? What do you think?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[ryoder 1,384]

Here is an interesting POV from Bruce Schneier:

A Comment on the Trump Dossier

Imagine that you are someone in the CIA, concerned about the future of America. You have this Russian dossier on Donald Trump, which you have some evidence might be true. The smartest thing you can do is to leak it to the public. By doing so, you are eliminating any leverage Russia has over Trump and probably reducing the effectiveness of any other blackmail material any government might have on Trump. I believe you do this regardless of whether you ultimately believe the document's findings or not, and regardless of whether you support or oppose Trump. It's simple game-theory.

This document is particularly safe to release. Because it's not a classified report of the CIA, leaking it is not a crime. And you release it now, before Trump becomes president, because doing so afterwards becomes much more dangerous.

Source: https://www.schneier.com/

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[ryoder 1,384]

Last night's SNL cold open.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_Gf0mGJfP8

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

ryoder

Here is an interesting POV from Bruce Schneier:

A Comment on the Trump Dossier

Imagine that you are someone in the CIA, concerned about the future of America. You have this Russian dossier on Donald Trump, which you have some evidence might be true. The smartest thing you can do is to leak it to the public. By doing so, you are eliminating any leverage Russia has over Trump and probably reducing the effectiveness of any other blackmail material any government might have on Trump. I believe you do this regardless of whether you ultimately believe the document's findings or not, and regardless of whether you support or oppose Trump. It's simple game-theory.

This document is particularly safe to release. Because it's not a classified report of the CIA, leaking it is not a crime. And you release it now, before Trump becomes president, because doing so afterwards becomes much more dangerous.

Source: https://www.schneier.com/

Had not thought of this angle, but it does make sense.

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

***Here is an interesting POV from Bruce Schneier:

A Comment on the Trump Dossier

Imagine that you are someone in the CIA, concerned about the future of America. You have this Russian dossier on Donald Trump, which you have some evidence might be true. The smartest thing you can do is to leak it to the public. By doing so, you are eliminating any leverage Russia has over Trump and probably reducing the effectiveness of any other blackmail material any government might have on Trump. I believe you do this regardless of whether you ultimately believe the document's findings or not, and regardless of whether you support or oppose Trump. It's simple game-theory.

This document is particularly safe to release. Because it's not a classified report of the CIA, leaking it is not a crime. And you release it now, before Trump becomes president, because doing so afterwards becomes much more dangerous.

Source: https://www.schneier.com/

Had not thought of this angle, but it does make sense.

You do know that this document was available for almost a year, right?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Yes, but not publicly. Therefore the perfect document to use in that angle.

[normiss 622]

Operation Ivy Bells would have never been possible had it not been for a few spies and the contents of their dossiers.

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

Yes, but not publicly. Therefore the perfect document to use in that angle.

Actually
It is just a fake news hit piece.

Not that you care..........

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 1,623]

rushmc

***Yes, but not publicly. Therefore the perfect document to use in that angle.

Actually
It is just a fake news hit piece.

Not that you care..........

Maybe, maybe not. YOU don't know for sure.

The trouble for Trump is not that it's known to be true, but that based on his known past behavior it is quite plausible. It fits right in with his style.

Just because the serial liar denies it doesn't make it fake.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jakee 1,254]

rushmc

***Yes, but not publicly. Therefore the perfect document to use in that angle.

Actually
It is just a fake news hit piece.

Not that you care..........

The funny thing is you've been constantly lying out of your arse about Clinton for the best part of two years now, spreading the same fake bulshit time after time after time - and now that one possibly fake story comes out about Trump (one that most people are spreading because it's so damn funny whether it's true or not) you suddenly think you're soooooo much better than everyone else because you think you can spot that it's fake.

I have never in all my life seen a horse so high.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 18]

jakee

I have never in all my life seen a horse so high.

Simple reason for this.

You spend most of your time down in the mud......


they must all look high to you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,122]

rushmc

***Yes, but not publicly. Therefore the perfect document to use in that angle.

Actually
It is just a fake news hit piece.

Not that you care..........

The report isn't fake news.

The report may be false, but that doesn't make it fake news.

Even if the report is false, it would still serve the purpose under the angle that was posted about. Which is what I said.

And you throw the term fake news around a lot. Something that came about because it is what got Trump elected: the spreading and hyping of fake news by the alt-right. But then you probably think all those stories were true?

If you don't think that, why didn't you mention anything about fake news until this issue. Are you always this hypocritical?

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

******Yes, but not publicly. Therefore the perfect document to use in that angle.

Actually
It is just a fake news hit piece.

Not that you care..........

The report isn't fake news.

The report may be false, but that doesn't make it fake news.

Even if the report is false, it would still serve the purpose under the angle that was posted about. Which is what I said.

And you throw the term fake news around a lot. Something that came about because it is what got Trump elected: the spreading and hyping of fake news by the alt-right. But then you probably think all those stories were true?

If you don't think that, why didn't you mention anything about fake news until this issue. Are you always this hypocritical?

I think it was CNN who coined the term (I do not remember for sure) But the term and the tactic has backfired on them as these left leaning mainstream media outlets release most of the fake news these day.

And the release of that report serves only one purpose, to try and smear DJT. And it is not working

And what got Trump elected was Hillary lying and her private server.

BTW

If the Clinton World Wide money laundering org was not just a front to buy favor from Hillary, and it really does do good humanitarian work, why are they laying off 22 more people because the donor list and money is shrinking?


In the end Trump got elected because he was a better candidate than HRC AND he worked much harder with a better plan.

Period!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DJL 232]

SkyDekker

******Yes, but not publicly. Therefore the perfect document to use in that angle.

Actually
It is just a fake news hit piece.

Not that you care..........

The report isn't fake news.

The report may be false, but that doesn't make it fake news.

Even if the report is false, it would still serve the purpose under the angle that was posted about. Which is what I said.

And you throw the term fake news around a lot. Something that came about because it is what got Trump elected: the spreading and hyping of fake news by the alt-right. But then you probably think all those stories were true?

If you don't think that, why didn't you mention anything about fake news until this issue. Are you always this hypocritical?

Rush, it's important that you understand this and I'm not trying to win an internet argument over semantics, believe me. The fake news in the election was the process of several news sources finding false sources and then referencing each other as the source material for validating it. It's not something limited to Red State and Breitbart but Mother Jones does the exact same shit with the clickbait BS. The problem is that many of the audience members aren't sophisticated enough to check the source or understand what validates a news story. In this case, just about every news source has said, "This is an unvalidated leak..." Compare that to all the news you saw that said, "Hillary is GUILTY according to new information on Wiki leak Email report." Other reports were "FBI reports that Indictment...etc" that YOU posted. Remember that? Does this job your memory? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/11/02/fbi_sources_tell_fox_news_indictment_likely_in_clinton_foundation_case.html

Edit: Fake news is "FBI report proves that Donald Trump paid prostitutes to pee on bed". That's the kind of reporting that was going on during the election with Clinton.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

If the Clinton World Wide money laundering org was not just a front to buy favor from Hillary, and it really does do good humanitarian work, why are they laying off 22 more people because the donor list and money is shrinking?

Those lay offs were announced before the US election. Your argument makes no sense. As usual.

[Lawndarter 3]

rushmc

And what got Trump elected was Hillary lying and her private server.

BTW

If the Clinton World Wide money laundering org was not just a front to buy favor from Hillary, and it really does do good humanitarian work, why are they laying off 22 more people because the donor list and money is shrinking?


In the end Trump got elected because he was a better candidate than HRC AND he worked much harder with a better plan.

Period!

What got Trump elected is false news, outrage over things that weren't real, the ignorance of voters, the ludicrous Electoral College system, and liberals who didn't like Clinton who stayed home or voted for Jill Stein.

History will long record that Trump "won" with the greatest defeat in the popular vote in American history.

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

Rush, it's important that you understand this ...

Good luck with that. You'd have better luck trying to teach a hamster to do calculus.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[jakee 1,254]

Quote

But the term and the tactic has backfired on them as these left leaning mainstream media outlets release most of the fake news these day.

The term has backfired because people like you are so shameless and ignorant that not only do you gleefully swallow as much right wing fake news they can throw at you,* you also condemn as fake anything which you do not agree with, regardless of the veracity of the story or the rigor of the journalism. In other words, they underestimated just how determined you are to never, ever learn anything.


* How many times during the election did you and Channman claim that it had been proven that there was pay to play with the Clinton foundation, to take but one example?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 18]

jakee

Quote

But the term and the tactic has backfired on them as these left leaning mainstream media outlets release most of the fake news these day.

The term has backfired because people like you are so shameless and ignorant that not only do you gleefully swallow as much right wing fake news they can throw at you,* you also condemn as fake anything which you do not agree with, regardless of the veracity of the story or the rigor of the journalism. In other words, they underestimated just how determined you are to never, ever learn anything.


* How many times during the election did you and Channman claim that it had been proven that there was pay to play with the Clinton foundation, to take but one example?

I get a kick out of you lefties. As it is always somebody else's faults.

I think Bush got Trump elected!!

how is that??

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Hey Marc,

You have any problems with Tom Price buying stock in companies and then proposing legislation that will help said company?

[jakee 1,254]

rushmc

[I get a kick out of you lefties. As it is always somebody else's faults.

Eh? I'm not saying it's anybody else's fault. How could it be anyone elses fault that you believe any right-wing fake news that passes your eyeline? How could it be anyone elses fault that you've started crying 'fake' to any genuine story that you disagree with? Of course it's your fault.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?