Now Trump is contradicting his own Intel Chief stating that Russia is no longer targeting the US.

Can anyone rationalize this aside from the idea that our President is beholden to Putin?

I guess I needed to spell it out with larger letters, respect from the free world, from our allies, from his peers; I'm pretty sure it's a long list of people who might have been on the fence about Trump who just lost all respect for the leader of the free world.

it's brilliant strategy that you are not smart enough to understand...don't worry...he's got this...

they don’t need to respect Trump, they need to respect the US, and i believe they still do. i am confident our adversaries thought obama was a pushover, and we survived just fine. in fact we did pretty darn well in his two terms.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Putin I'm sure feels emboldened after his stroking by his bud Donald and since O did little to stop Russia from expanding their influence; I'm not sure I'd want to be living in a country next door to Russia at this point in time. Trump gave Putin exactly what he wanted at this summit and that in light of the evidence of Russian interference and if you believe (and I do) Russians continued efforts to influence our democracy, is IMHO just the opposite of what should have been happening.

when has he not?

Agreed.

Anyone who thought it was hilarious when Obama mocked Romney for saying Russia was a threat, has exactly zero right to be bitching about Putin's rise. Zero right. We chose to elect a guy who thought it was funny to believe Russia was a concern. SO this is the result. Guess what? When you plant potatoes, you get potatoes?

I also remember when Obama was caught on mike telling a Putin lackey, something to the effect of "this is my last election, after it's behind me, I'll have more flexibility in dealing with Russia." Which I took to mean as , "once I'm no longer accountable to the American people, I'll be able to play ball". How else can that be interpreted? But Spence said not to worry...

I just with the Dems had been more concerned about Russia before the past couple years. I wish the same of Western Europe - that they would be more concerned. RUS broke its economy the past 6-7 years rebuilding its mil and capabilities.

Ahhh, but Russia is a peaceful country surrounded by ceasefires.

They Lackey was Medvedev, the at the time RUS President and Vlad's placeholder until he re-rigged their constitution.

No, you didn't need to use large letters. I disagree with you. I don't think that "the free world" (as I envision what you mean by that phrase) respects America as a country, as a people, as a philosophy of how to live or how to govern. They have some respect for our power, especially insofar as that power is wielded to protect them. Otherwise, the Progressive elites (the ones that our Progressive Press hold as the true representatives of that outer "free world") hold us in various degrees of contempt. And they, as well as our own American elites, have no respect for Trump to lose.

Toadying up to those elites does not garner us respect from them, it just makes them more comfortable with, and more tolerant of, us. And oh, BTW, less nervous that our protection of them might waver.

In some ways, certainly economically, Trump is right that West Europeans are foes to us. We Americans are foes to each other, politically, economically, morally, philosophically. And I don't want our President to be "the leader of the free world." I don't even want our President to be the leader of the American People. I want us to be the leaders of our own lives.

So, I don't care about the notion that other countries or societies lose "respect" for us. Especially if we have to kiss their azz to get it.

I agree with you on that respect, that other nations in NATO and for their own benifit, must contribute their fair share. To kiss the arse golden ring, or lick the boots of a known brutal man and leader; well beam me up Scotty there must be sanity in the universe.

I don't think Trump would lick Putin's boots, nor that he has. He has said some nice things about Putin, as he has about leaders of the so called free world. He is trying to negotiate various agreements with them all. Sometimes different buttons have to be pushed with the same or different people in order to get the desired results.

If, going in, the only way to get results is to threaten, disparage, insult, or actually go to war, then Trump got off on the wrong foot with Putin. But that can change, if necessary. And if war is necessary, what will those who claimed and complained that Trump would get us into a war say about that?

So what ae the desired results from an X super power, with little to offer us and if it’s obtained via cyber meddling or some sort of dirt; does that not raise concerns?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Can't make this stuff up...

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...ng-us-citizens

Official White House transcripts of the press conference conveniently overlooked the part where Putin said he was hoping Trump would win the election
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm not getting it. When it comes to negotiating with Putin, he supposedly has nothing worth our while to offer us. On the other hand, he supposedly has this enormous power to meddle in our affairs and somehow destroy our so-called democracy. (We don't actually have a democracy, and for good reason . . .although, there ARE those who understand how democracies can easily be tools of authoritarian regimes and want to convert us to one. That conversion can psychologically be implanted in our minds by constantly referring to "our democracy.")

I dunno . . . what did China have to offer us when Nixon negotiated with it. It was geopolitically less powerful then than Russia is now. Now, Russia, China, and other nations in both hemispheres are joining each other in an economic relationship whose objective is to replace the US as the hegemonic world economic and military power, and to replace the dollar as the reserve currency.

Is there some possibility to change the direction of that movement? Is there a way, peacefully, over time, to draw all nations into a worldwide economic and cultural competition and/or cooperation that benefits everybody? Does Western Europe's disinclination to powerfully arm itself open the door to Russian and Eastern powers to threaten it and thus embolden those powers to destroy and dominate rather than come to the table and create a diverse worldwide community of friendly competitors?

I don't know what's in Trump's mind. And I don't understand how so many anti-Trumpers absolutely claim to know what he thinks or why he says and does what he does. He's done some good things. Maybe there's more to come. I'm not all hyperbolic about him destroying Western Civilization, nor this country.

He claims to be a negotiator. Negotiators operate differently than adversaries or warmongers. Maybe you're right that he'll eff everything up. I don't think he even has the power to do so. I prefer to wait until Trump actually does something rather than bitch about what I "know" he'll do.

And what has been going on up till now ain't all that good . . . at least it appears few think it is if all the screeching from all directions means anything. It has the appearance of OK to some, but others see a worldwide rise in national debts and the direction unabatedly continuing that way. And there are all the degradations of long standing social norms that have no definition or basic meaning . . . or the political animosities . . . or the ever-present potential for war. . . yada yada yada, you know the drill.

Hey, to rephrase a Beatles' mantra, "give Trump a chance." OK, OK, I realize y'all can't do that . . . y'all continue on with your nice hyperventilation. I'll step aside as the ignorant dummie while y'all really good experts and wizard fortune tellers tell us what's really going on.

Hey, you win again. Maybe, like Trump said, you'll get tired of winning.

President Donald Trump will consider allowing Russian investigators to question U.S.-born investor Bill Browder, former U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul and others after President Vladimir Putin floated the idea, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Wednesday.

“He said it was an interesting idea. He didn’t commit to anything,” Sanders said at the daily press briefing. “He wants to work with his team and determine if there’s any validity that would be helpful to the process…It was an idea they threw out.”


Later in the day, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert called the concept "absolutely absurd."


Appears the Head is losing contact with the rest of the body ...

But again Conservatives are silent on this Suggestion...

I guess because he was Obama's ambassador Michael McFaul.... and U.S.-born investor Bill Browder (english citizen ) over Clinton mystery money

Trump "considers" a lot of things out loud. But does not follow up on the considerations. Declared considerations of a negotiator are often veiled threats in order to steer things in a favorable direction. Mueller indicts some more Russians which may be a stated "consideration" to influence media hype. I don't believe he can extradite those Russians or interview them in Russia if Russia says no. Perhaps Putin's suggestion that he can interrogate Browder and McFaul are like, "Oh yeah . . . you want to interrogate some Russians--OK then, let us interrogate some Americans." Neither of which is likely to happen. Political optics BS.

Said it many times, I don't want Trump to fail. While I despise the man, his constant lies and miss truths and most especially his disrespectful treatment of most anyone who even hints they aren't in agreement; I keep hoping he would finally put his phone down and just thicken up the skin and do the job you were elected to do. The usual comeback to my statement above if also getting so fing old; what about Hillary, what about Obama, what about Bill.

In the very long run, I think eventually we need Russia, China, NK; I personally would hope this world isn't going to keep moving on the way it is with everyone looking out for just their own interest and boarders? I'm pretty sure Putin isn't ready to sit down and play nice in the global sand box and neither is NK; China however is moving itself forward better then anyone probably gives them credit for.

Putin and Trump are so similar in their need to be seen in a certain light, the summit was like watching a mutual admiration society meeting.

Here is an opinion of Trumps effect on The Worlds economy
We are part of it
https://www.theguardian.com/business...e_iOSApp_Other
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Good post
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't want America to fail. Trump is hurting this country and our allies more than he's helping. If we get to the point of impeachment it's going to be hard but we'd be better off long-term.

From what I've seen so far he's not even remotely capable or even interested of doing the job he was elected to do.

Here is the answer to the question the OP asked:

Republicans overwhelmingly approved of President Donald Trump’s handling of his press conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin despite the reactions from top GOP lawmakers and some in the conservative establishment, according to a new poll released Thursday.

Trump’s approval among Republicans has remained strong since he entered office and the Axios and Survey Monkey poll indicated there was very little the president could do wrong in the eyes of Republicans, even while Trump wavers on Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.

Loading...


Seventy-nine percent of Republicans approved of Trump's performance alongside Putin, while 91 percent of Democrats and 62 percent of independents disapproved.

Overall, Trump received 58 percent disapproval and 40 percent approval, though both figures were clearly skewed by the deep partisan divide that often accompanies Trump.

Those results backed up a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Tuesday, which showed 55 percent overall disapproved of Trump’s work on Russian relations. But, the poll also reflected approval from 71 percent of Republicans.

The results echoed Trump’s recent approval ratings among the GOP. Earlier this month, Trump registered a 90 percent approval rating from Republicans, while only 8 percent of Democrats and 38 percent of independents offered approval, according to Gallup. Throughout his 18 months in office, Trump has never received less than 78 percent approval from Republicans in Gallup’s poll.

The recent findings suggest a strong shift within a Republican Party that was staunchly anti-Russia for decades. Starting with notorious Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy and his firebrand style known as “McCarthyism,” the GOP has long been firmly anti-Communism and viewed Russia as the nation’s greatest enemy.

Under Trump, the Republican base appears ready to back a leader who claims to desire better relations with Russia in order to combat terrorism and other issues around the world.

The apparent Republican devotion to Trump has continued despite strong rebukes from Republican lawmakers about his press conference with Putin. The president suggested Monday he believed Putin’s denials of election meddling despite the widespread conclusion by the U.S. intelligence community.

Trump attempted to clean up his comment Tuesday when he claimed he was caught in a “double-negative” during his remarks at the press conference. The president said he intended to say “wouldn’t” instead of “would” when he spoke about whether or not Russia interfered.

The president’s cherry-picking of intelligence was exposed late Wednesday after a New York Times report revealed he had been briefed on Putin’s involvement and direction of cyberattacks against the U.S. in order to meddle two weeks prior to his inauguration in January 2017.

Trump tried to further reverse course on Twitter Thursday morning when he posted a video showing the times he has stated publicly that Russia meddled, though several of the clips show Trump saying “other countries” could also have been involved.

Trump has labeled the summit with Putin a “great success,” but his detractors have used the press conference to further accusations of collusion with Russia to win the presidency. Others have suggested that Putin has some sort of damning information on Trump and is hanging it over the president to improve Russia’s standing in the world

I say he controls Trump because he holds the notes on his properties thru his subordinates.

which was what?..."fundamentally transform" America?....the people that elected him seem to think he's doing the job they elected him to do....not a surprise you don't like the job he's doing since he trounced your heartthrob and you reside far, far to the left of him politically ......and you are a little bitter....he will never get your approval...nor that of the hags on the View or MSNBC...pretty sure he knows that and doesn't really care

sounds like Lisa Page is contradicting a lot of Storks testimony...this could be juicy....

Would it have been better if they appeared to be scowling at each other, hating rather than "admiring" each other?

http://video.foxnews.com/v/581138065...#sp=show-clips


this is what happens when you disrespect the Dear leader on Fox

Well not really. An independent IG has already dug into all of this stuff. I wouldn't take partisan spin as sign of any controversy. Not to mention that Strzok schooled house republicans during his last appearance.

you are a little confused...being an arrogant, evasive douche is not "schooling" someone...

"no...no he's not...we'll stop it"....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZoMg21F_B0

Only Schooling someone if a Republican is doing it .. Again GOP trying to knit a sweater with the FBI but ignore's this

Maria Butina loves guns, has ties to a top Russian banker, and has now landed in an American jail accused of conspiring against the US government

overplayed....

she's accused of not registering as a foreign agent....if she did conspire against the US somehow...then she's in the right place isn't she?...you can rest knowing that she was finally apprehended under the Trump administration...what exactly did Russia get for her efforts?

maybe they will arrest all of those Russians that poured all of that money into the Clinton's coffers to secure the Uranium One deal....talk about collusion

"As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well."

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/u...m-company.html

I wonder how much money the Clinton's have collected from the Russians and Chinese over the years?



only need listed to Strzok's own words Wayne..


"no...no he's not...we'll stop it"....

and

"there’s no big there there.”

http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/397...every-american

A perfect example of whataboutism
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

whatever...hey Pete....if Trump had lost....Bill and Hillary would be in the White House...all of those hacks at the FBI like Stokyk would still be going about their business...Obama's politicization and weaponization of various governmental agencies would continue...if nothing else...trump is a speed bump..for the clintons, a tree in the road....a disruption in the imbalance and politicization of our government...if they can prove he's complicit in collusion or anything else I hope he's removed, I don't like him....but the democrats constant insane screeching is far worse than trumps antics....at some point they will figure out that much of what trump does is to illicit their crazy reactions...or maybe they won't........

let me know when they indict and American for collusion.....

so the gov. is not letting her out on bail bc they only think she didn't register as a foreign agent?

Nothing to see here

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...utors-say.html

https://www.thedailybeast.com/accuse...fraud-lawsuits

probably so she doesn't leave the country like they did during the Clinton years...

"A total of 120 participants in the fundraising scandal either fled the country, asserted their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, or otherwise avoided questioning."

But the media was criticized for not going after that story
From the same article you quoted


Many people still believe that a major cover-up of that scandal worked — in part because the media expressed skepticism and devoted only a fraction of resources they are spending on the Trump–Russia story. Network reporters expressed outright skepticism of the story, with many openly criticizing the late senator Fred Thompson, the chair of the Senate investigating committee, for wasting time and money. On June 17, 1997, Katie Couric, then the Today co-anchor, asked the Washington Post’s Bob Woodward about the story: “Are members of the media, do you think, Bob, too scandal-obsessed, looking for something at every corner?”

According to an analysis by the Media Research Center, the news coverage of the congressional hearings on the China scandal in the summer of 1997 were dwarfed by reports on the murder of fashion designer Gianni Versace and the death of Princess Diana.

It is not brilliant strategy - it makes no sense. Why is Trump so malleable around VVP?

No, China is not moving itself forward and better. It is going to crush millions it its rise

No, not similar at all. Putin is leagues ahead of Trump, Obama, Clinton, Bush (at least junior) but more like a combination Bond villain - the image he tries to cultivate, and a smarter Tony Soprano that also owns his FBI

that was sarcastic....Spence was always quick to defend Obama's questionable moves, particularly in regard to Russia and Syria as "playing brilliantly" or something...as though no one else was smart enough to understand the hidden brilliance of his decisions

So it had nothing to do with her trying to set up meetings w/Trump and Putin and funnel money to the NRA in support of Trump? or her being seen with many infuential Repub. politicians

Interesting that the house intell. committee refused Dem. requests to interview Butina and Erickson (as an overweight old Repub. he should have know an attractive Russian was just using him).

Goes far beyond "not registering as a foreign agent"

point?

yes, I am aware that the media and democrats were more interested in Versace and Di than chinese communists infiltrating and influencing the White House :scream::scream: