kurtster wrote:
 
Prove it, pretzel boy.

IIRC when  Trump's order to declassify that binder of documents was announced in the news, there was no indication as to what was in those documents.

"and is actually all on Hillary and the DNC with help from Obama's DOJ with Obama and Biden directly participating as has been established."

Wow, this bit especially reads like something out of a wet dream you had. Or a Qanon thread.

Here, Kurt, take a look at this article about the GOP-led Senate Foreign Relations Committee report on Russia and the Trump campaign.

G.O.P.-Led Senate Panel Details Ties Between 2016 Trump Campaign and Russia

A nearly 1,000-page report confirmed the special counsel’s findings at a moment when President Trump’s allies have sought to undermine that inquiry.



WASHINGTON — A sprawling report released Tuesday by a Republican-controlled Senate panel that spent three years investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 election laid out an extensive web of contacts between Trump campaign advisers and Kremlin officials and other Russians, including at least one intelligence officer and others tied to the
country’s spy services.

...

It provided a bipartisan Senate imprimatur for an extraordinary set of facts: The Russian government disrupted an American election to help Mr. Trump become president, Russian intelligence services viewed members of the Trump campaign as easily manipulated, and some of Mr. Trump’s advisers were eager for the help from an American adversary....

Like the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who released his findings in April 2019, the Senate report did not conclude that the Trump campaign engaged in a coordinated conspiracy with the Russian government — a fact that Republicans seized on to argue that there was “no collusion.”

But the report showed extensive evidence of contacts between Trump campaign advisers and people tied to the Kremlin — including a longstanding associate of the onetime Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Konstantin V. Kilimnik, whom the report identified as a “Russian intelligence officer.”

...

It also included a potentially explosive detail: that investigators had uncovered information possibly tying Mr. Kilimnik to Russia’s major election interference operations, conducted by the intelligence service known as the G.R.U.

Democrats highlighted Mr. Kilimnik’s potential ties to the interference operations in their own appendix to the report, noting that Mr. Manafort discussed campaign strategy and shared internal campaign polling data with the Russian and later lied to federal investigators about his actions.

“This is what collusion looks like,” Democrats wrote.

...

The report’s findings about Mr. Kilimnik and other Russians in touch with Trump campaign advisers confirmed an article in The New York Times from 2017 that said there had been numerous interactions between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence in the year before the election. F.B.I. officials had disputed the report.

Though there was no evidence of any agreement between the Russians and the Trump campaign to work together, there was clear coordination, said Senator Angus King, a Maine independent who caucuses with the Democrats and is a member of the Intelligence Committee.

“The Russians were doing things to disrupt American democracy and help the Trump campaign and the Trump campaign was doing things to amplify and utilize what the Russians were supplying,” Mr. King said in an interview. “There may not have been an explicit agreement but they were both consciously pursing the same end, which was the election of Donald  Trump. And for the Russians, the extra benefit was disrupting American democracy.”

...

The report is the product of one of the few congressional investigations in recent memory that retained bipartisan support throughout. Lawmakers and committee aides interviewed more than 200 witnesses and reviewed hundreds of thousands of documents, including intelligence reports, internal F.B.I. notes and correspondence among members of the Trump campaign. The committee convened hearings in 2017 and 2018, but most of its work took place out of public view.

The report suggested that Mr. Manafort was compromised by his financial ties with Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs, who themselves were connected to Mr. Kilimnik, the Russian intelligence operative.

It cited Mr. Manafort’s ties to Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch described as a “proxy” for Russian state and intelligence services who claimed that Mr. Manafort owed him money. And it described at length Mr. Manafort’s relationships with a cluster of pro-Russia oligarchs in Ukraine, who had paid him tens of millions of dollars as a political
consultant in Ukraine.

“Manafort conducted influence operations that supported and were a part of Russian active measures campaigns, including those involving political influence and electoral interference,” the report said.

Before, during and after he was forced out as Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman, the report said, Mr. Manafort offered inside information and assistance to these Russian-aligned interests. Mr. Kilimnik was Mr. Manafort’s intermediary with both Mr. Deripaska and the Ukrainian oligarchs, according to the report. It recounted how he briefed Mr. Kilimnik at an August 2016 meeting on the Trump campaign’s strategy to defeat Hillary Clinton, describing efforts in the battleground states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Minnesota and the margins by which Mr. Trump might win.

The report also shed new light on the interaction between Russian intelligence and WikiLeaks — and between WikiLeaks and the Trump campaign. WikiLeaks, which released
tranches of stolen Democratic emails that helped damage Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, not only played a clear role in the election interference but  also “very likely knew it was assisting a Russian intelligence influence effort,” the report said.


Kurt, you should also check out the first piece for more details. It has charts showing the time and nature of contacts between Trump, Trump campaign members and Russians—including members of the Russian government.

Mueller Report Shows Depth of Connections Between Trump Campaign and Russians

Also this piece: 

Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence

 VV wrote: 
So Russia, Russia, Russia is real then as far as you are concerned, right ?  I'm saying this based on what you wrote above since you never replied to this below ...
.
 kurtster wrote: 

“A free press is a cornerstone of our democracy.”
~ Tony Blinken

Fresh air.

 ScottN wrote:
 
Wait a minute... are you saying Russia didn't interfere in our elections, isn't responsible for the data breach, didn't put a bounty on American soldiers and basically didn't get a pass on anything they wanted to do in the previous administration? I'm supposed to be sorry for Russia because in the very near future they may have to answer for their indiscretions?

Funny but you paint a conflict of interest that Trump had with Russia that likely paralyzed him from holding Russia accountable for anything.

If I am reading too much into your reply... my humble apology.

 haresfur wrote: 
They care about money.  The west, led by the US, can return financial sanctions on the Russian oligarchy.  Those who bought condos in Trump Tower or other of his properties can be high on the list.  This can be one step on a list of many that begin to reduce Russia to pariah state status.

 haresfur wrote:
 
...wellllllll, given that the other guy was too afraid to confront Russia on anything. I would say that this is a step in the right direction.

 haresfur wrote: 
He can do this! 

 VV wrote:
 
Good, but I don't know what Biden is able to do about it

Biden had his first call with Putin. He said everything Trump wouldn’t.

“Finally we have a president who will confront Putin on the real issues at hand,” an expert told Vox.

Froth away, alphas...

 rgio wrote:
 



thanks, i saw the methodology here

i don't want to seem overly cautious or critical, but i saw this post and tend to agree with shermer's view (see his thread)

i do worry that this type of misguided framing is potentially dangerous

peace

 miamizsun wrote:
 
Understood.

A quick look around the internet landed on this ranking from C-Span.  Their focus areas are:

Individual Leadership Characteristics

• Public Persuasion
• Crisis Leadership
• Economic Management
• Moral Authority
• International Relations
• Administrative Skills
• Relations with Congress
• Vision / Setting an Agenda
• Pursued Equal Justice For All
• Performance Within Context of Times

Sure, there are some here who are going to argue he did well on a couple of them, but I would suggest history will prove them wrong, especially about economic management and international relations. 

There are also several categories where it's hard to imagine him not being ranked very last for eternity...which is hard to pull off.

Time will tell.

 rgio wrote:
 

look i'm not agreeing or disagreeing

i'm simply asking what measurements are we using and how are we using them

is this an opinion or is there some science behind it?

that's all

 VV wrote: 
Russia, Russia, Russia was the first media lie and used as the basis for treating Trump as a POS for the rest of his term.

It has been completely disproved and is actually all on Hillary and the DNC with help from Obama's DOJ with Obama and Biden directly participating as has been established.

The latest document declassification proves this once and for all.  Yet you and most others here still would bet your lives that it was all real and not a frame job on Trump.  That is the disconnect.

Russia, Russia, Russia was the lie said over and over again so much that the lie became truth.

 kurtster wrote:
 
Absolutely... always have... always will.

Trump took to calling everything "fake" and "fake news" when it painted him in a bad light. I don't see Biden doing the same and welcome a shift back to some sort of normalcy.

 VV wrote: 
Russia, Russia, Russia was real ?  We have a real disconnect here.

 miamizsun wrote:
 
No,  it doesn't.  The statement is a consolidation of all measurement, not a selection process.  

Based on the complete record, he will go down as the worst.

I can't wait for the "fake" news just getting back to just being "the news". I don't think that Biden is going to miscast it as "fake" even when he comes across articles that paint him in a bad light. Was never "fake" before or during Trump and won't be after...

 kcar wrote: 

probably depends on the metric

 kcar wrote:
 
I agree... it means nothing of the sort.