Why does MSM keep lying about Trump's handling of Russia

Over the past year and growing in recent weeks, MSM and some on the political left have claimed President Trump has done nothing to address Russian propaganda/espionage activities as they pertain to the 2016 election. This is simply not true. In fact, President Trump has taken more action against Russia than Obama did - and that is considering the fact that the alleged incidents took place during Obama's administration.

The first issue is that liberal MSM is quick to claim that President Trump hasn't ordered any investigations into Russia's alleged activities. This is another lie. Appropriately, a true counter-intelligence investigation (as opposed to a criminal investigation) would remain secret at the highest levels and be undertaken via traditional intelligence channels. It would not be publicly disclosed and absolutely would not be discussed. Consequently, this is the basis of a lot of opposition against any current criminal investigations into a matter that is certainly intelligence related. Some of the efforts, especially leaking of certain information, could seriously jeopardize the integrity of the highly probable ongoing counter-intelligence investigation.

Excluding this near-certain effort, Trump has taken more direct action in opposition to Russia than President Obama did, after supposedly being proven wrong in his assertion that Russia didn't tamper with the election. I won't point out again that election influencing is within the purview of national intelligence operations, and something even we engage in casually and frequently. I also won't point out that any number of other nations were likely involved in peddling their influence in one way or another.

Under President Trump:

1) Trump began supplying lethal arms to Ukraine in opposition to Russian threats related to the matter. Obama? No
2) President Trump seized & searched the Russian consulate in San Francisco and expelled hundreds of Russian officials from the US - this is technically an act of war, I believe. Obama? As far as I know, Obama took no action against Russia as he deemed them to have no interfered as a result of the demand he issued to them.
3) President Trump has continued and strengthened sanctions against Russia, for their intelligence operations against us as well as their participation in Ukraine. Obama? He and Victoria Nuland created the Ukraine mess to begin with
4) President Trump ordered salvos of cruise missiles to be fired at Syrian Government targets. Syria is Russia's ally, and they had warned us against any attacks on their forces. Russia had troops stationed in Syria at the time as well. Obama? Assad crossed his "red line" but he still did not act. He did parrot the words "Assad must go"

Trump isn't gaining any favor with the Russians and he certainly isn't taking it easy on them. Given the extreme level of meddling the US engages in (even against our allies), it is amazing we are sanctioning them at all. This is an intelligence matter and absolutely should've been handled through traditional intelligence channels (which it was, until Peter Strozok commandeered the inquiry).

In any case, he was already investigated by FBI in summer of 2016 and they found no evidence of unlawful activity. President Obama claimed Russia didn't interfere with anything and the fact that none of the 5 or 6 investigations to this date have found a shred of evidence implicating President Trump in any wrongdoing.

I agree with the President's statement. It is time we start running this government, and stop allowing this ridiculous and vindictive cloud to hang over progress.

This doesn't mean we don't need to secure our elections. I find it amusing that we were derided for even suggesting the elections could even possibly be tampered with. But this isn't a time for bitterness and vengeful attitudes. I don't seek to embolden any specific position, and I would like to see compromise and true bipartisan effort. The immigration legislation is a great start, and it is heartening to hear Trump agree to sign any bill the group sends him.

Both McConnell and Trump have signalled a desire for a more bipartisan effort this year, and I personally welcome it. Sure, let Mueller finish out his investigation so no one even gets the appearance of impropriety. But clearly if Mueller indeed finds no evidence of wrongdoing on the President's behalf, perhaps the left will decide to start working toward compromises everyone can live with.

Trump is willing and able to take on comprehensive reform. This is a big deal, and something Democrats should not throw away simply because he also rightly demands increased border security. This includes more CBP agents, technology, local resources and funding and of course some type of wall/barrier. He already realizes it won't span the entire length of the border, that is simply impractical due to geography and environmental concerns. But there are 9 million people in this country illegally that could truly benefit from comprehensive reform, and Democrats let this slip away at their own peril of a huge voting block.

Out of that 9 million, there are only a small percentage of serious criminals and others who would of course not receive any sort of path to citizenship as a result of the hypothetical future legislation. This is one area we all can win on. No one can make a serious argument against border security, just as no one can make a serious (or at least fiscally conservative) argument that all 9 million illegal aliens must go.

What say you, Dems?

a reply to: JBurns

Those who control the msm are but a few.

They also have an agenda. Unfortunately the masses take the televised agenda's as gospel.

It’s obvious why they do it.
I honestly don’t think it needs answering.

However I’d like to address this very popular narrative of “Obama’s Red Line”...

www.politico.eu...

Here we have an article with Obama claiming the “political courage of not bombing Syria”...
Which is in line with the above narrative...


But in reality it’s just absurdly false...

www.independent.co.uk... .html?amp

Because here we have an article mapping Obama’s reign of terror...
And the vast majority of the bombs were definitely landing on Syria.


By claiming he “backed down”, you’re actually just assisting Obama in selling the narrative that he isn’t a murderous Warhawk.
Reality teaches us that he is actually one of the worst and most prolific.

originally posted by: Timely
a reply to: JBurns

Those who control the msm are but a few.

They also have an agenda. Unfortunately the masses take the televised agenda's as gospel.

It's almost foolproof, if one doesn't believe the media they have to reevaluate their worldview, very few are willing to do that.

Thanks everyone who replied, I am glad I am not the only one up late worrying about this kind of stuff

Beer sounds good, but a coffee sounds better

a reply to: JBurns

I don't want to nitpick your whole post here. I'll start by saying your speculation about a possible secret investigation ordered by Trump isn't exactly compelling evidence and then address this one part:

2) President Trump seized & searched the Russian consulate in San Francisco and expelled hundreds of Russian officials from the US - this is technically an act of war, I believe. Obama? As far as I know, Obama took no action against Russia as he deemed them to have no interfered as a result of the demand he issued to them.

Obama sanctions Russian officials over election hacking

It was the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats/staff and the sanctions imposed in response to the interference that Flynn discussed with Kislyak in the conversation that he lied to the FBI (and apparently Pence) about.

And it was because of the assurances given by Flynn in that conversation — that the Trump admin would take care of that after he was sworn in — that Russia didn't immediately respond.

As for the closing of the SF consulate (there was also the closing of some trade offices), this was a reaction to sanctions passed by Congress with a veto-proof majority.

Putin To Expel 755 U.S. Diplomats And Staff From Russia In Response To New Sanctions

These were not sanctions that Trump supported:

Trump administration pushing to weaken Russia sanctions bill: report

Trump wasn't happy about signing it (Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) but it had passed the House 419-3 and Senate 98-2. What was he supposed to do? Then the administration drug its feet imposing the new sanctions.

Timeline of Trump's delays on Russia sanctions

Trump had one week to sign the law, veto it, or do nothing and let it become law on its own.

On Aug. 2, with no public ceremony, Trump signed the bill -- but released two blistering statements with his signature, calling the legislation "significantly flawed" and saying it included "a number of clearly unconstitutional provisions."

"I built a truly great company worth many billions of dollars. That is a big part of the reason I was elected. As President, I can make far better deals with foreign countries than Congress," he said, but added he was "signing this bill for the sake of national unity."

Despite being partially "unconstitutional" in the administration's view, it also said it would fully implement the law.

For weeks, however, the Trump administration did not fulfill its obligations.

The law gave the Trump administration staggered deadlines to begin implementation -- the first being Oct. 1 for the Russian portion. By then, the administration was supposed to have authorized particular agencies to identify Russian defense and intelligence entities under the new sanctions that the U.S. would sanction individuals and companies for doing business with.

Shortly before the deadline, that authorization was given, but for weeks the list of Russians was missing. The State Department said that it and the Treasury were working together to develop guidance for partner countries and private companies to help them avoid violating the new sanctions, and that caused the delay.

And just to really drive this point home:

Rex Tillerson: Trump not very happy about Russia sanctions bill

President Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson still oppose the Russia sanctions legislation passed by Congress, the nation's top diplomat reiterated Tuesday, even though Trump plans to sign the bill.

"The action by the Congress to put these sanctions in place and the way they did, neither the president nor I are very happy about that," Tillerson told reporters during a press briefing at the State Department.

Russia ordered the State Department to withdraw 755 American personnel from the country in payback for the sanctions bill, which punishes the 2016 election interference as well as Russia's aggression in Ukraine and Syria. Tillerson lobbied against the bill as it moved through Congress, because the legislation gives Trump less discretion than presidents usually enjoy when deciding how to implement sanctions.

"We were clear that we didn't think it was going to be helpful to our efforts, but that's the decision they made," Tillerson said. "They made it in an overwhelming way. I think the president accepts that and all indications are he will sign that bill."

a reply to: JBurns
I don't even see why it is important to continue to point out the obvious time after time after time. Like I said before, Trump does not need defending.

He has iron skin, accusations and words reflect off him like a mirror and stab the accusers in the heart. He is superman without a known kryptonite. My dude is the #ing MAN!

Just ignore the trash and you will see it fall off into the rubbish bins of forgotten nonsense.

a reply to: JBurns

They are part of NWO I'm pretty sure they thought Hillary had election thru a fix,the real government is at work here with their 1 world government,and the US will be a socialist country,if they have to kill most of us,nothing we can do,resist but will seem futile,hope I'm dead before

a reply to: JBurns

Trump is the golden calf.

Moses is America.

Trump will serve as an object lesson for Republicans and democrats, alike; they both come out of this smelling like bull #.

As long as his presidency continues as it has (little literal impact), I think he will be the most important thing to happen to America in the last hundred years.

a reply to: JBurns

Making it impossible to negotiate with someone helps view them as an enemy.

At least if sides negotiate there is a chance to come to an arrangement. The people that want war with Russia don't want any negotiating going on. They call this false accusation "Collusion".

They only want you listening to what thy have to say in the MSM.

Thats why its Putin this and Putin that, but you never actually see him or hear what he's saying.

No colluding with the enemy.

a reply to: Abysha

Trump is the golden calf.

The golden calf sits on Wall Street...

images

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Abysha

Trump is the golden calf.

The golden calf sits on Wall Street...

images

Exactly.

a reply to: JBurns

A) the sanctions were forced upon trump. Even gop officials were stumped and forced to try and justify why trump was refusing to sign them..

Which was doubly curious because that would be a stellar way to discredit the collusion narrative.

If trump had been out there arguing to increase sanctions and chomping at the bit to sign it. That could go a long way to show he is innocent. However that’s not what happened... he fought it tooth and nail with no support.

B) now the Ukrainian weapons I can’t say the same about.. it kinda came from nowhere, so obviously it doesn’t appear trump had to be pressured into it. So atleast from what I know would fairly be evidence against him being in bed with putin.

C) continued to increase sanctions?!?! See A. Lol

D) as far as immigration...

What you are proposing is the normal everyday democrat plan..

The gop and trumps position on that has ALWAYS been that every single immigrant be shipped out of the country . Then get in the back of the line and apply again..

That it was worth kicking out all the good ones to eject the few bad.

So I’m not sure the gop/trump get credit for agreeing they have just been denogoging their base and demonizing Mexicans to do so...

a reply to: JBurns

Just on a side note...

So what is your justification for both the CIA and FBI saying Russia specifically helped trump win both the primary AND then the general elections???

They did not only say that Russia interfered..

They said that they interfered specifically for trump..




To be fair I have said all along that Russia could be setting trump up...


Say they leak info claiming trump is making a deal through whatever spy channels.. then set up a few meetings that seem benign to the trump camp, but then look shady after an investigation starts.. all while using whatever pull the Russians have to push fake hillary and pro-trump propaganda online..


But assuming that is the case, then why wouldn’t Russia have enlisted trump once they found out he was willing to deal through the Jr. meetings???

Even if they were setting him up originally. Once you find out he can be bought.. why wouldn’t you buy him???

Hell, if you save evidence of the deal you effectively own trump. Because then you can just drop it anytime he pisses you off..

a reply to: Abysha

Golden calf, cattle market, "stock" market.

They have their reward.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

It's almost foolproof, if one doesn't believe the media they have to reevaluate their worldview, very few are willing to do that.

Actually a whole lot of us have done just that!

They keep lying because they can, domestic propaganda has been legalized once again since 2014 (thanks Obama).

All the MSM is owned by a few corporations with a huge agenda. Now that they can say whatever they want on national TV with no one to say otherwise, it's open season on disinformation.

'Murica.

the russian story could get inside you. then you become the russianstory

a reply to: airowineSailorcat

Or a child of the 60's ... man !

😎

a reply to: theantediluvian


I appreciate the reply ante, and I admit that is a personal theory and should have made it clear too.

I don't want to nitpick your whole post here. I'll start by saying your speculation about a possible secret investigation ordered by Trump isn't exactly compelling evidence and then address this one part:

No problem ante Challenging my own mistakes/beliefs is all an effort to stay and keep informed

I didn't realize Trump was opposed to those specific actions and am a bit surprised to find out that Pres. Obama had also slapped them with sanctions over this business.

Although Trump did authorize the sales of arms to Ukraine and bombing of Syrian government targets, apparently his sanctions response would have been weaker if not for seeking national unity, which does at least show here he has an interest in working toward a unified government/country and I think it is great

As you did point out, several of my points did end up being weaker than I had hoped, but I do hope it at least shows Trump has not been "idle" (as I saw it once described) on Russia. I think some of it too may be a limit on what would be considered "proportionate" but that too is speculation on my part

Whatever the solution is, I think a big part will be educating the public and making people more aware in general of these efforts. The recent report released by Sen. Ben Cardin, D-MD actually does a decent job of this and really lays out procedurally some of the methods they use to spread misinformation/propaganda/influence: www.foreign.senate.gov...

Thanks for the reply ante