Any good articles on this?

All I can see is that we supported NGOs in Russia(legally), and Hillary made a comment(not even that harsh) that got Vladimir all hot and bothered.

Now that Hillary is off the ballot and Putin got his revenge, I expect you won't continue with the deflection and whataboutism for future attacks by Russia?

cute, but my argument has literally nothing to do with trench boy's post. i'm merely pointing out your double standard concerning foreign contributions, and not at all commenting on the somewhat weak argument of portraying the meeting as the main point of the investigation, and the cringeworthy feigning of insight into the 'espionage game'...

guess it's good enough for you to try another transparent pivot though...

let me quote this please


US- very probably- funded some anti governement groups and opposition parties.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-financing/analysis-putin-critics-hit-back-over-charge-of-western-funding-idUSTRE7BC0ZZ20111213

Only the fool working for his mother Russia could put it as an equal measure with the 2016 collusion & interference, but still: maybe US deserved it ?



Not to mention others parties could be involved in this story. Keep the faith.

I said "a focus" not "main point", as in "your balls are a focus of mine, but my main point is still living a life without contributing to society" - fender

feigning insight? jesus you cant post without reaching huh? it's basics of the cold war that you only leave a paper trail if you're setting someone up.

but my main point stands, because you couldn't argue it with a whole page of buzzwordery. The russians didn't and wouldn't need the trump campaigns help to release info on HRC, in fact it would look worse if they funneled it through the opposition rather than a pseudo-credible organization like Wikileaks. The trump campaign was stupid to not realize this, if you dont realize this you are too.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Aug 7 2018 01:47pm

I mean I did link a pbs article about the subject right in that post.
I've never seen the specifics of what the US did in Russia in 2011, all I know is that Hillary publicly accused Putin of rigging his election, Putin accused Hillary of using the state department to run cyber-propaganda and agitate followers, and rather than deny it, the state department's official message was that they were running "pro-democracy" operations.
ie;
http://time.com/4783932/inside-russia-social-media-war-america/



I think given Hillary and Obama's history of governance and amplify that with the power struggle slapfight between the two while our SoS roleplayed as PotUS, its not hard to fill in the blanks. Particularly considering how Obama & Biden yanked on her leash and conspicuously did not join in antagonizing Putin at the time and took a more neutral if not conciliatory tone while Hillary was foaming at the bit. And notice the language. How many times has our state department used terms like "pro-democracy movements" or "freedom fighters" or other such euphemisms to cover up our dirty operations. 'member moderate pro-democracy protesters in Syria? Also known as ISIS/Al-Qaeda/Nour Al-Din Al-Zenki? I'm not going to buy the US line at its face value. Anyway, as I said at the time and many times since, we can't really know how much of the interaction between Hillary & Obama in foreign policy was infighting and how much was strategic good cop / bad cop routine on a world stage.

Whatever the actuality of 2011, its obvious that was precisely what sparked Putin's revenge and the incredibly specific tit-for-tat nature of the response- showing Hillary rigging her election and running destabilizing propaganda- is far too cute to be a coincidence. I'm a whole lot less concerned about moral justifications and jingoism and a lot more interested in the dynamics of who did what and why.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Aug 7 2018 01:52pm

Looks like NYU Law School professor Bob Bauer agrees with my assessment more or less :/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/08/06/why-the-trump-tower-meeting-may-have-violated-the-law-and-the-steele-dossier-likely-didnt/

You linked a transcript for a PBS documentary. I'm not reading that whole thing, lol. I've watched many of the full interviews from those people(Brennan, Clapper, Ioffe, Nuland, etc).

Where did Putin specifically accuse the State Department of doing cyber propaganda? And if State actually did that, why doesn't Putin provide some evidence? His security agencies are very capable. Seems to me he's just trying to deflect the anger of his populace onto the West, like he always does.

Our government legally funding NGOs in Russia is not the same sort of thing Putin did in 2016. If Russia doesn't want us doing that, kick us out. Also sort of laughable that Hillary expressing concern about reports of voter fraud in Russia was the "signal" that launched a bunch of protests. Standard "blame the West" nonsense.

This post was edited by IceMage on Aug 8 2018 06:46am

you can't really blame the cult though, their leader set plenty of precedent with his 'you think WE are so innocent?' rhetoric when confronted with putin's atrocities...
false equivalence ftw...

Nyu is a liberal cesspool

much more credible than Liberty University :/