Is Trump a Russian Intelligence Asset.

a reply to: trb71

You're right I'm not a Russian anything. I'm clearly not spy material, I'll admit that.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Definitely no more so than Obama and Hillary. I mean, you don't leave classified material behind or wait to make certain arrangements until after the elections are over for no reason. Why id's this relevant? Because the same people who didn't care about any of that are now the ones talking skit Trump with Russia which leads one to believe there's no real merit behind the claims. If there was, then they'd be upset about their own ponies too.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: neutronflux

I didn't, I presented the linked article as my information, its all thoroughly sourced

When you can argue a valid point you think might be credible, then it might be worth the time to read?

Until then, it seems you just want people to click on a link for boosting its number of web hits?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Otherwise, free advertising for a link you cannot find one valid point how Putin is benefiting from Trump worth posting?

a reply to: neutronflux
I disagree, the member is a good debater in my experience with him.
He doesn't post to get stars n #, I've argued the point with him in loads of threads but the difference is I stick to his point instead of inventing ideas about his intentions of posting.
Sidetrack much?

I don't know what to think about Trump but I'll pull you up being all strawman bull#.

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: neutronflux
I disagree, the member is a good debater in my experience with him.
He doesn't post to get stars n #, I've argued the point with him in loads of threads but the difference is I stick to his point instead of inventing ideas about his intentions of posting.
Sidetrack much?

I don't know what to think about Trump but I'll pull you up being all strawman bull#.

Then how is Russia benefitting from Trump more than any other country, including the USA?

a reply to: neutronflux

Oh I agree with your doubts about Trump being a spy or whatever, but it is an interesting thread premise nonetheless.

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

And what does being persuasive have to do with actual credible facts?

Like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle being fooled by young pranksters?

Wait, what? The fairies that fooled Arthur Conan Doyle

blog.wikimedia.org...

In 1985 Elsie said that she and Frances were too embarrassed to admit the truth after fooling Doyle. “Two village kids and a brilliant man like Conan Doyle—well, we could only keep quiet.” In the same interview Frances said: “I never even thought of it as being a fraud—it was just Elsie and I having a bit of fun and I can’t understand to this day why they were taken in—they wanted to be taken in.”

That is way being able to create a valid argument is so important? Over read this and believe...

Thank you!

I keep having to repeat this but this is not a thread with me saying Trump is a Russian intelligence asset...fact, this is a thread saying this body of information exists that provides a premise for the possibility that in a worst case scenario Trump could turn out to have been acting under the influence of the Russians.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Otherwise, free advertising for a link you cannot find one valid point how Putin is benefiting from Trump worth posting?

What are you talking about.

The link is to a article published in the "New York" Magazine by Jonathan Chait a respected political journalist.

But of course I would not expect you to know that because you haven't bothered to read the article and I actually would be surprised if you read my OP.

a reply to: neutronflux

I think the above paragraph can be applied to ufologists, cryptozoology, flat earth.....


The key ingredient is wanting to believe. Vs creating a credible argument.

So, does the opening post create a clear cut theory backed with cited facts? Or is it more of a plea to believe?

a reply to: neutronflux

So, does the opening post create a clear cut theory backed with cited facts?

If you read it you would know that what I have posted is essentially a thread that says, " I read this interesting article about the worst possible case of the Trump/Russia investigation, its pretty interesting have a look if you want"

I am not, let me repeat that because you seem to need it so....

I am not claiming that Trump is a Russian intelligence asset, I am saying that there is a interesting idea that has been circulating about the slim possibly that this could be one possible outcome of the Mueller investigation and the article gives a argument for that possibility.

Just read, please really don't interested in your lazy arguments because you're getting triggered over a title you don't bother read beyond.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Otherwise, free advertising for a link you cannot find one valid point how Putin is benefiting from Trump worth posting?

What are you talking about.

The link is to a article published in the "New York" Magazine by Jonathan Chait a respected political journalist.

But of course I would not expect you to know that because you haven't bothered to read the article and I actually would be surprised if you read my OP.

Then make a clear argument based on quotted or cited facts?

Not the game of innuendo. Or read this and believe. You are the one posting. It’s your argument that counts.

Now, please clearly cite how Russia is benefiting from Trump over other countries. What evidence is there Trump is putting Russian interests ahead of US interests?

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Otherwise, free advertising for a link you cannot find one valid point how Putin is benefiting from Trump worth posting?

What are you talking about.

The link is to a article published in the "New York" Magazine by Jonathan Chait a respected political journalist.

But of course I would not expect you to know that because you haven't bothered to read the article and I actually would be surprised if you read my OP.

Then make a clear argument based on quotted or cited facts?

Not the game if innuendo. Or read this and believe. You are the one posting. It’s you argument that counts.

Now, please clearly cite how Russia is benefiting from Trump over other countries. What evidence is there Trump is putting Russian interests ahead of US interests?

Again I am not making an argument I am saying this is out there what do people think of it.

I have got zero interest anymore in trying to argue with Trump supporters on ATS, I could quote you stuff about how Trump wanted Russia back in the G7 how he has said Crimea is part of Russia or how he was unhappy about the expulsion of Russian diplomates after the Skripal poisoning....but honestly, I am not going to spend a hour hunting for sources on all of that only for you to excuse, defend and ignore it.

You seem to be under this strange idea that I am wanting to debate you, you seem to think that I am making some kind of claim or wanting to prove that Trump is a Russian intelligence asset in someway and that is just not true.

Its a bit of a straw man in a way because you are asking me to defend a argument I am not making.

Literally all this thread is about, is sharing something interesting a read a few days ago and discussing it, I cannot discuss this with people who haven't bothered to read it.

I don't know how I can make this any clearer to you.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Then if Russia is not benefiting from Trump, then what is the possible he is Russian plant?

You. Opening post.

what if this whole Russia/Trump thing goes way deeper than we have realised.

On a subject you claimed

I am also increasingly of the view that as discussion like this is becoming much more of a taboo subject, if you want to discuss the possibility of Trump being somehow a intelligence asset of the Russian state its seen as a pretty crazy theory on either side of the political divide. I personally have been researching this quite a bit,

So.

The logical question would be, if Trump was a Russian Plant; Is Russian being favored over other countries, and over the own interests of the USA?

Is that a false statement?

Yet, your the one that will not dive into what you claim is a taboo subject?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

If you want to make the case Trump is a Russian plant, then cite the evidence. Otherwise, life is to short to spend on propaganda somebody hopes is true.

a reply to: neutronflux

Again you seem to remain under this idea that am looking for a debate.

I am not.

I purposefully didn't post this in the mud-pit because its very much a this is a article some of you might find interesting type of thread.

now yes I have done quite a bit more reading around it, the article that you refuse to read is loaded with sources and links to more info and that alone is very interesting.

Like I said in my above post there are ways in which Trump has indicated he is a lot more pro-russian than former presidents. Ie. he was reportedly very reluctant to expel diplomats in support of a long established ally. I think however that what I would say is that I believe the Russian government is adopting a policy of supporting any kind of politician who will break up old alliances. There is a itnersting discussion that has already been had on that topic in this thread if you wish to read further.

It doesn't necessary have to be that Russia is going to make demand of Trump like "show us the location of all your nukes" but rather its just about placing a individual in the White House who is much more supportive of a pro-Russia policy and is going to help break up old alliances that Russia still sees as a threat.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

If you want to make the case Trump is a Russian plant, then cite the evidence. Otherwise, life is to short to spend on propaganda somebody hopes is true.

I AM NOT MAKING THAT CLAIM

... I a just saying, this is a interesting article that was in the New York Magazine that kind of sets out the possible case for Trump being a Russian intelligence asset (not a plant).

I am very clear, as I have said on loads of other threads, I am holding off on forming a solid opinion on what actually went down camp Trump and the Russians until the investigation is complete because then and only then I think (or hope) we will have enough information to have a informed opinion on it.

Dude if your wanting to get into this with me you need to up your game...

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

How do you go from this in your opening post

Again some might believe that there isn't really anything substantial to these links while others might take a no smoke without fire kind of view.

And this

I am not claiming it as a unequivocal fact however I will say that I do think that this rabbit hole goes much deeper than many on the right would like to believe.

To this?

I AM NOT MAKING THAT CLAIM

So, what is this rabbit hole? The bottomless pit of innuendo and implied implication. Out of genuine concern? Or wishful thinking?

Paragraph after paragraph of you ranting? You could have easily answered how is Trump being president benefiting Russia? I guess you don’t want to answer anything that will dispel the innuendo? Cause the rabbit hole to be more visible, or just right out cause it to collapse.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Is there a rabbit hole or not.