Enjoy President Trump, Courtesy of The Kremlin

[pErvinalia]

If your concern is that DJT,Jr. wanted to meet with a "Russian government lawyer" because he thought that person had "dirt" on HRC, my question to you is -- so what? What's wrong with that?

Collusion with a foreign power to swing your election.

[Forty Two]

We hear hardly anything on CNN about the successful battle to take ISIS out of Mosul. That battle is over and ISIS has lost 60% of its territory.

What did that have to do with Trump? And if your answer is "Would you ask the same question if this happened under Obama?", then don't bother.

Oh. Not having read the bottom bit of 42's ramble, I missed that, but now that you have drawn my attention to it, it's worthwhile pointing out that the battle for Mosul commenced 11 months, and the final push three months before Trump was sworn in as POTUS. Planning for it and putting in the logistic groundwork began even earlier.

So, is it a success, then?

ISIS has been driven out of Mosul. Excellent. That's not your point, though, is it? Your point is the complaint that the media ignores it because it's Trump's plan that succeeded, rather than Obama's:

There is little being said about this in the news - because, they can't criticize Trump for pursuing a plan to defeat ISIS, since they all supported Obama's efforts in doing so. But, they won't report on it in detail unless there is a defeat for American backed forces, or some Special Ops plane or helicopter gets downed. Then you'll see reports from Andrew Cuomo and Jake Tapper asking whether Trump's plan can succeed, etc.

Thanks for not acknowledging that the battle for Mosul commenced 11 months, and the final push three months before Trump was sworn in as POTUS. Planning for it and putting in the logistic groundwork began even earlier, even while you quoted it back. Driving IS out of Mosul was not Trump's plan, so your complaint falls flat on its face.

Yes, and my point is that the major media are not reporting on it. They can write articles that explain that the planning began months before Trump was elected. But, it barely makes a blip in the news. That's because they aren't going to report on success in relation to ISIS because Trump can claim that as, at least in part, his success. He's been President for 6 months now, so, any failure would be owned by him, and since he has operational control, any success, even if he only modifies actions somewhat, can be claimed by him as a success under his watch. So, they mute the reporting. We will see a lot of reporting when there is a negative news item. If anti-ISIS forces lose a battle or are pushed back from somewhere, you'll hear about it loud and clear from CNN, and it will be placed front and center on Trump's doorstep as his responsibility (even though planning started ages before he took office...).

The media will only focus on the war progress if it's negative. They will start counting caskets and displaying flag-draped coffins on the nightly news, claiming the public has a right to know. But, if Raqqa falls, and ISIS takes another significant beating, you'll see a line on the news scroll about how Iraqi forces have defeated ISIS, and there will be hardly a mention of US involvement. That's the way it works... unless a Democrat is President. If a Democrat is President, they will focus on the key management by the President, and the US success.

Wars are protested when Republicans are President, and the media assists. When a Democrat is President, Code Pink basically goes home. Wait and see - mark my words - the first time Trump does anything that can be characterized as deviating from what Obama did, it will make negative news reporting, and there will be protests in the streets.

[Forty Two]

http://content.time.com/time/covers/0,1 ... 15,00.html

[Forty Two]

The 1996 meddling in the Russian election, to install Boris Yeltsin - http://global-politics.eu/2017/01/15/us ... s-yeltsin/

For this reason, the continued outrage over Donald Trump’s ties to Russia rings hollow to anyone willing to recognise some fundamental truths about the way foreign policy really works. Outside intervention in domestic politics is as old as politics itself. Maybe Putin does want Trump to be President, maybe he doesn’t. The only real question is – who’s going to play them in the movie?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... l-meddling

[Animavore]

[Forty Two]

[Forty Two]

[pErvinalia]

The 1996 meddling in the Russian election, to install Boris Yeltsin - http://global-politics.eu/2017/01/15/us ... s-yeltsin/

For this reason, the continued outrage over Donald Trump’s ties to Russia rings hollow to anyone willing to recognise some fundamental truths about the way foreign policy really works. Outside intervention in domestic politics is as old as politics itself. Maybe Putin does want Trump to be President, maybe he doesn’t. The only real question is – who’s going to play them in the movie?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... l-meddling

That was an impressive tu quoque, even for you.

[pErvinalia]

When was he acting-director and when did he make those comments?

[Brian Peacock]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/cli ... on-n734176

[pErvinalia]

Does he still work for the CIA, and if not when did he finish there? You wouldn't expect him to have seen any evidence after that point. And even if he did, there's been over 3 months of investigation since then.

[Forty Two]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/cli ... on-n734176

exactly.

[Brian Peacock]

Does he still work for the CIA, and if not when did he finish there? You wouldn't expect him to have seen any evidence after that point. And even if he did, there's been over 3 months of investigation since then.

Indeed. I think the whole statement has a massive 'from what we know so far' qualification attached to it, even if it is intended to portray an absolute and inalienable truth.

[Animavore]

Trump held secret hour-long meeting with Putin at G20 with only Russian translator present
Meeting described as a breach of national security protocol

Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a second, previously undisclosed meeting at the G20 summit earlier this month in Germany, a White House official has confirmed.

The meeting followed the two leaders’ formal two-hour meeting on 7 July in which Mr Trump said Mr Putin denied allegations that he directed efforts to meddle in the 2016 US presidential election.

The second meeting, which took place some hours later, was only attended by Mr Putin, Mr Trump and Mr Putin’s translator. It had not previously been disclosed by the White House.

The White House official did not say how long the second meeting took place or what was discussed.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 48061.html

[pErvinalia]

He seems clueless to how all this will be perceived. Maybe he really doesn't care.