Jared Kushner Was Right To ‘Collude’ With Russia — Because He Did It For Israel

[Machismo]

Thank you for bringing up those points about past transition members engaging in foreign relations. As Rich Lowry put it, if the election atmosphere weren't so poisonous, nobody would bat an eye at Flynn.

That's not true at all. When did other incoming administrations do anything close to what this administration did? When did other campaigns do what this campaign did? The last time I checked, we don't have a long list of transition members who lied to the FBI to cover up their clandestine meetings with foreign governments. We have no less than 5 in this administration. We have a dozen or more who lied to the American public about those meetings.

What the Trump team did was not normal, not by a long shot.

[Daelak]

Then you, or he, clearly have some kind of link to the evidence of such things.

He got it from the article, but I wouldn't group those in with what happened in December 2016. It's a pro-Israeli settlement monthly magazine.

[Edge-]

According to Professor W. David Clinton, chairman of the Political Science Department at Baylor University:

"It is common for representatives of other governments to get in touch with the incoming presidential administration to begin informal relationships and address relevant issues,” Clinton said. “It is not unusual. Transitions are fairly long. The incoming administration needs to inform itself of foreign policy. Getting to know people and foreign governments is widely done and beneficial to the U.S."

Here's the problem - you're looking at this as an isolated incident. It's not. It's part of a long-term (at least since what, June 2016? Earlier?) pattern of Trump campaign officials having questionable or flat-out inappropriate (and potentially illegal) contact with members of the Russian government or Russians with connection to their intelligence arms, and then lying about it for upwards of a year. Not to mention Flynn's lies and work as a foreign agent that he didn't report.

As an isolated incident it would raise red flags if he did in fact talk about the Obama sanctions before they were announced, as has been reported, but it wouldn't be as major as it is now. But when you place it into context of the campaign/transition teams broader actions, and the bigger story of Flynn's behavior, it substantially elevates the meeting and raises a ton of additional questions.

It seems to be a habit with Trump supporters/sympathizers. They downplay everything by treating them as isolated incidents, ignoring the broader context and reality of the situation.

[Skroe]

Strictly speaking about Flynn contacting foreign officials during transition, strictly speaking in that context (not 2016 or anytime else), transition members have done this before and there was never any Logan Act nonsense, no accusations of law-breaking, only now when Flynn did it.

No. They have not in fact "done it before".

This "Logan Act nonsense"... you do realize that came only AFTER Flynn and the Trump campaign were warned by the Obama Administration, post election day, right? A warning they chose in their arrogance and stupidity to ignore, because they had been colluding the entire time.

You don't get to "strictly" make it about anything. That is not your prerogative. Doing so allows your side, which has been excusing a foreign adversary's aggression upon this country and the behavior of their American collaborators for over a year, to set the terms of what is fair game.

The Trump Campaign, Flynn included, had been in regular communications with Russia throughout 2016. That much is clear. Flynn's discussing with the ambassador wasn't a logan-act violating one-off. It was the terminal act at the end of an extended period of interactions. It was in illegal and illegitimate interference into US foreign policy by what was still then, a civilian.

And that doesn't even touch on the larger quid-pro-quos between Trump and Russia.


Really, what's it going to take man? This is black and white at this point, but you're hell bent to excuse criminal, treasonous behavior. Is some ridiculous little set of greivences against SJW or shit like that worth it?

I'm going to tell you what. You have two choices. You either have your side face the music now, under Mueller, or you face the music later, under the next Democratic President. There will be no escaping the reckoning for what your side did and your support of it. It either happens now, or later, and both will be terrible.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's the problem - you're looking at this as an isolated incident. It's not. It's part of a long-term (at least since what, June 2016? Earlier?) pattern of Trump campaign officials having questionable or flat-out inappropriate (and potentially illegal) contact with members of the Russian government or Russians with connection to their intelligence arms, and then lying about it for upwards of a year. Not to mention Flynn's lies and work as a foreign agent that he didn't report.

As an isolated incident it would raise red flags if he did in fact talk about the Obama sanctions before they were announced, as has been reported, but it wouldn't be as major as it is now. But when you place it into context of the campaign/transition teams broader actions, and the bigger story of Flynn's behavior, it substantially elevates the meeting and raises a ton of additional questions.

It seems to be a habit with Trump supporters/sympathizers. They downplay everything by treating them as isolated incidents, ignoring the broader context and reality of the situation.

Bingo. Exactly.

Dacien. Stop. Nobody is buying your horse shit here.

[Jastall]

I meant nobody would be outraged about Flynn reaching out to foreign agents in December.

The only reason it's an issue suddenly for transition members to engage in these activities is because he lied about it and because the political atmosphere is miasmic.

Maybe the political atmosphere is at least partially miasmic because of this type of lies, as well. Lying about stuff took down a President and put another in a seriously difficult proposition, I don't see why Flynn or Trump's team should be immune when Clinton lying about a blowjob was grounds for impeachment.

I mean, yes, there's hysteria over Russia and such, but the Trump team has very much fueled it with controversial statements and then, apparently bald faced lies.

[Blur4stuff]

Funny watching Trump supporters go from "he didn't do it" to "it wasn't wrong for him to do it".

[Dacien]

No. They have not in fact "done it before".

This "Logan Act nonsense"... you do realize that came only AFTER Flynn and the Trump campaign were warned by the Obama Administration, post election day, right? A warning they chose in their arrogance and stupidity to ignore, because they had been colluding the entire time.

You don't get to "strictly" make it about anything. That is not your prerogative. Doing so allows your side, which has been excusing a foreign adversary's aggression upon this country and the behavior of their American collaborators for over a year, to set the terms of what is fair game.

The Trump Campaign, Flynn included, had been in regular communications with Russia throughout 2016. That much is clear. Flynn's discussing with the ambassador wasn't a logan-act violating one-off. It was the terminal act at the end of an extended period of interactions. It was in illegal and illegitimate interference into US foreign policy by what was still then, a civilian.

And that doesn't even touch on the larger quid-pro-quos between Trump and Russia.


Really, what's it going to take man? This is black and white at this point, but you're hell bent to excuse criminal, treasonous behavior. Is some ridiculous little set of greivences against SJW or shit like that worth it?

I'm going to tell you what. You have two choices. You either have your side face the music now, under Mueller, or you face the music later, under the next Democratic President. There will be no escaping the reckoning for what your side did and your support of it. It either happens now, or later, and both will be terrible.

- - - Updated - - -



Bingo. Exactly.

Dacien. Stop. Nobody is buying your horse shit here.

I never made assertions about Flynn's behavior as a whole, I only asserted that there would be no Logan Act talk in any other situation. The lying about it is a separate issue, but as far as being a member of a presidential transition team reaching out to foreign agents? Happens frequently and none of them are ever accused of breaking federal law.

You've told me what I don't get to do, let me tell you what you don't get to do: claim that the cries of "Logan Act law-breaking!" are due to Flynn's behavior as a whole. They're not. People are making this kind of hay over his December contacts. And as I said, the lying about it is a separate issue.

[Daelak]

Funny watching Trump supporters go from "he didn't do it" to "it wasn't wrong for him to do it".

Haha, what's the next step in denial for them? It's so obvious how deluded the republican base is from Russian misinformation. You can even see it on a monthly basis on gallup of the meteoric rise of approval of Putin by likely republican voters in the months leading up to the election. US conservative media have only themselves to blame for priming tens of millions of republican voters to conspiracy theory and falsehoods.

[Skroe]

I never made assertions about Flynn's behavior as a whole, I only asserted that there would be no Logan Act talk in any other situation. The lying about it is a separate issue, but as far as being a member of a presidential transition team reaching out to foreign agents? Happens frequently and none of them are ever accused of breaking federal law.

Not like this it doesn't. And you're wrong to think this was somehow normal and Flynn is getting the short end of the stick. Other campaigns observed limits. This one did not.

You've told me what I don't get to do, let me tell you what you don't get to do: claim that the cries of "Logan Act law-breaking!" are due to Flynn's behavior as a whole. They're not. People are making this kind of hay over his December contacts. And as I said, the lying about it is a separate issue.

Wrong again. Because while the Logan Act violation is in regards to a specific action, it is the latest in a chain of behaviors that spans the entire year.

You know, those behaviors you keep looking.

Are you so afraid of Democrats you really want to get in close with Vladmir Putin's Russia? Are you that cowardly about *gasp* losing some policy?

- - - Updated - - -

Funny watching Trump supporters go from "he didn't do it" to "it wasn't wrong for him to do it".

This was always going to be the Treasonweasel's last redoubt. They ALL betrayed the founders. All of them. Trump, His inner circle. Every MAGA hat wearing deplorable. Even his supporters here. They brought shame to us all by running into the arms of a foreign adversary because of domestic politics.

And they will _all_ pay a price for it. Legally. Emotionally. Politically. Economically.

But the treasnweasels' final redoubt here is, like all the rest, a fortress made of sand that the mere tide will wash away. Because they do not get to decide what constitutes criminal behavior.

If Trump and his supporters weren't utter imbeciles and terrible at lying and politics and pretty much everything, this would actually be far worse. I think in the end, America will be grateful it got a bad bought of the flu and not Ebola, so to speak.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I love how the focus has shifted from "THERE WAS NO COLLUSION" to "COLLUSION ISN'T BAD!"

[Edge-]

I love how the focus has shifted from "THERE WAS NO COLLUSION" to "COLLUSION ISN'T BAD!"

It's funny, because this already happened. We already went down the "BUT COLLUSION ISN'T ILLEGAL" back in June when the Trump Tower meeting was discovered.

But here we are again : |

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

It's funny, because this already happened. We already went down the "BUT COLLUSION ISN'T ILLEGAL" back in June when the Trump Tower meeting was discovered.

But here we are again : |

Next week they'll be back to denying collusion, but still saying that if there was collusion it's okay.

Also, I just saw that Trump's Lawyers are now saying "The President cannot obstruct justice" which is a small but noticeable shift from "The President did not obstruct justice"

[Stormspark]

I love how the focus has shifted from "THERE WAS NO COLLUSION" to "COLLUSION ISN'T BAD!"

Yep, the Trump "supporters" (I'm still convinced most of them are either Russians or sockpuppet accounts) seem to have confused goalposts with this:

[Theodarzna]

I love how the focus has shifted from "THERE WAS NO COLLUSION" to "COLLUSION ISN'T BAD!"

So far there isn't any evidence of it. But it is interesting that when it does turn up, its okay because of REASONS!

[Macaquerie]

Next week they'll be back to denying collusion, but still saying that if there was collusion it's okay.

Also, I just saw that Trump's Lawyers are now saying "The President cannot obstruct justice" which is a small but noticeable shift from "The President did not obstruct justice"

[Cthulhu 2020]

Strictly speaking about Flynn contacting foreign officials during transition, strictly speaking in that context (not 2016 or anytime else), transition members have done this before and there was never any Logan Act nonsense, no accusations of law-breaking, only now when Flynn did it.

You seem to have completely missed the point of why Flynn is even being charged. It's not "because he contacted Russia during the transition". It's because he lied about it, because he's refusing to tell what he discussed with the Russians, it's because he knew others met with Russians and lied about that, it's because others knew Flynn met with Russians, and they lied about it.

It takes fuckloads of just not paying attention to think this is merely about meeting with Russians.

[cubby]

(source)

So, I guess collusion is selectively a-okay? Is acting with a foreign nation on behalf of another foreign nation okay? For the Trump voter, is that putting America First? Should everyone get a free pass on working with foreigners if those foreigners are Israeli? At this point I am not even sure what the Trump admin is accused of anymore.

How can you be so obtuse to what is going on? Are you confused by the money laundering? The tax evasiveness? The emoluments clause violations? The multiple guilty pleas and indictments? The daily story changes based on constant new accusations?

Pray tell - what confuses you as to what we're all after regarding Trump? What part are you missing?

[Acidz]

Isn't OP a scientist?

[Theodarzna]

You forget to mention Hilary.

So thats nothing then?

[Felya]

According to Professor W. David Clinton, chairman of the Political Science Department at Baylor University:

"It is common for representatives of other governments to get in touch with the incoming presidential administration to begin informal relationships and address relevant issues,” Clinton said. “It is not unusual. Transitions are fairly long. The incoming administration needs to inform itself of foreign policy. Getting to know people and foreign governments is widely done and beneficial to the U.S."

That is saying nothing about lying to US government about it. He leaded guilty to lying and that is not normal... Obama went on a world wide publicity tour, but didn’t lie about it.