Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Politics] Donald Trump 2024



Hiney

Super Moderator
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
19,396
Penrose, Cornwall
I didn’t actually say he was but if my post gave that impression, it was due to over-editing on my part. In more detail; Trump has always supported Putin even before he was President and was aligned with Putin on Ukraine long before he became President too - as was his 2016 campaign manager Paul Manafort and his Lawyer, Rudi Giuliani so my point stands:

After years of being cultivated by Russia, Trump subsequently sent signals to Putin that if Trump were elected, Putin would have an ally in the White House on Ukraine - Russia’s interference in Trump’s efforts to get to power in 2016 became a subject for investigation in the Meuller inquiry.

Background : Twenty years ago, there was no significant reservoir of opposition to Ukrainian independence and democracy. The burgeoning alliance between Russian nationalists and America Firsters was set in motion when Paul Manafort went to work for the pro-Russian Party of Regions in Ukraine in 2004. Manifort, once one of the most powerful Republican lobbyists in Washington, had begun a globetrotting career selling his services to dictators. His Ukrainian client, Viktor Yanukovych and the Party of Regions, was Putin’s main organ for maintaining control of his neighboring country. When Putin ginned up demonstrations in eastern Ukraine as a pretext to hive off chunks of land in 2014, Trump said, “So smart, when you see the riots in a country because they’re hurting the Russians, Okay, we’ll go and take it over… You have to give him a lot of credit.” After winning the nomination, Trump promised to consider recognising Putin’s land seizure because “the people of Crimea, from what I’ve heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were.”
  • Trump later brought in Manafort to run his 2016 election campaign - in that same campaign, echoing Russian propaganda, he smeared Ukraine by falsely suggesting that Kyiv rather than Moscow had interfered in the 2016 US presidential election by hacking the Democrat emails .
  • As President - He delayed military aid to Zelenskyy in an attempt to get dirt on the Bidens - which became an article for his first impeachment in 2019
  • Out of Office, Trump called Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, ‘savvy’, ‘genius’ and ‘wonderful’
  • Trump said he took the Russian president at his word at a summit in Helsinki in 2018 and dismissed U.S. intelligence agencies' conclusions that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election.

The point isTrump has not needed to be President to damage Ukraine and send green lights to Putin about Crimea or his Ukraine invasion - in fact he has done as much damage to Ukraine when he has not been president as when he was - by his historic relations with Russia, his cosying up to Putin, and by his supporters now blocking funding because Trump wants his immigration reforms to go through.

As I said in my earlier post, and have said all through this thread a Trump presidency would be disastrous for Ukraine. You are making assumptions about my POVs and gas lighting my post, clearly unaware of my previous contributions on this thread - I think most regular readers of the thread will how I feel about the possibility of Trump being reelected, including the impact it will have on Ukraine 😡

As I have repeatedly said: Funding for Ukraine would likely dry up and Zelenskyy would no doubt be put under pressure by a Trump administration to concede part of Ukraine (Crimea at least ) to Putin.



I refer you to the first sentence of my reply - FYI, I have already blamed Trump for an enormous amount on this thread. Pages of blame - So don’t need to be told that thanks 😕. .

However, Trump’s influence on American politics in relation to Russia and Ukraine go back to long before he was President and before Putin actually invaded Ukraine in 2022 - that was the point I meant to elucidate but got lost in my attempts to edit my earlier response into a shorter post - so now everyone has got the long version which most people won’t now bother to read anyway 🙄.

If you think Trump had no connection to Putin/Russia/Ukraine before he became President and is completely un-blameworthy in giving Putin the impression Trump would support his annexation of Crimea (and any subsequent invasion of Ukraine) you may find the Guardian article below is a really good read. it will probably astonish you just how much the 2016 Presidential candidate was already entangled up to his neck in Russian politics through Manafort, Rudi Guliani and his business dealings which go back to the 80s, including evidence of the Trump Organisation being alleged to have money laundering operations with Russian oligarchs through the Deutsche Bank.

It is hardly surprising Putin wanted Trump not Clinton to win the White House and interfered in the 2016 Presidential Election to that end…It also suggests to me that Putin miscalculated and thought Trump would win in 2020 too but by that time plans to invade Ukraine were well under way: “Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized "influence operations aimed at denigrating President Biden's candidacy and the Democratic Party, supporting Trump, undermining public confidence in the electoral process and exacerbating socio-political divisions in the U.S," says the report by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.”

By that time, Trump lost the 2020 election, Putin’s Ukraine invasion had already been years in the planning and throughout the Trump Presidency, he was given the time he needed to develop his invasion plans.

This is a long read but highlights that Russia had been cultivating Trump for years before he was elected and continued to influence American elections to get him into the White House



TDLR?

Was Trump President when Putin invaded Ukraine? - No. However, Trump can certainly be blamed for giving Putin the impression America would be soft on Crimea, that Trump had both Rudi Guliani and Paul Manafort as close cohorts, both with shady and insurrectionist involvement in Ukraine prior to Trump’s Presidency. Trump can certainly be blamed for giving Putin the impression that he would have an ally on Ukraine in the White House if Trump won the 2016 Election and the 2020 Election -( Russian interference in both these elections is evidenced by subsequent inquiries) - Trump can also be blamed for his role on the current influences in the Republican Party that is now blocking aid to Ukraine in Congress.






.
R U OK HUN?
 




Zeberdi

Brighton born & bred
NSC Patron
Oct 20, 2022
4,896
R U OK HUN?
Yes thank you - still a little sedated from my endoscopy earlier but have had a few cuppas so not a HANGRY person now - 12 hours NBM 😂

(Kind of you to ask though 🤪)
 




Bodian

Well-known member
May 3, 2012
11,926
Cumbria
The Nasdaq doesn't open for 1/2 hour yet, but I just noticed that TMT is trading at (15%) in pre-trades - down to below $28 now...
Ended up $26.61, and a load more shares being issued. But also something about relisting shares - which gives me the impression that Trump will get around the 'waiting six months before being allowed to sell' issue. He'll sell his shares, at a vastly lower rate than they were 'worth' - but still vastly higher than the nothing they were previously worth. The company will then go bankrupt - and it will be all the smaller investors losing out, after Trump has cashed in as much as he could.
 


Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,870
West west west Sussex
Ended up $26.61, and a load more shares being issued. But also something about relisting shares - which gives me the impression that Trump will get around the 'waiting six months before being allowed to sell' issue. He'll sell his shares, at a vastly lower rate than they were 'worth' - but still vastly higher than the nothing they were previously worth. The company will then go bankrupt - and it will be all the smaller investors losing out, after Trump has cashed in as much as he could.
Trump can sell his shares early but only on the say so of the board of directors.

Obviously there's no need for you to look up who's on the board.
 




tedebear

Legal Alien
Jul 7, 2003
16,844
In my computer
This just astounds me, even more that the BBC would print it. She has gone stark raving looney mad! And the BBC prints it like theres nothing wrong with it....

 
Last edited:


raymondo

Well-known member
Apr 26, 2017
5,731
Wiltshire






nwgull

Well-known member
Jul 25, 2003
13,840
Manchester
She's genuinely gone bonkers. The rationalising of her disastrous budget and the reasons why she only lasted 7 weeks as PM (effectively 5 due to period of national mourning) do not indicate a sound mind.
 


A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
17,971
Deepest, darkest Sussex
Just continuing the trend of politicians endorsing Trump being mostly crazy
 


tedebear

Legal Alien
Jul 7, 2003
16,844
In my computer
Just continuing the trend of politicians endorsing Trump being mostly crazy

Why on earth would Chris Mason of the BBC accept such a poison chalice...Just adding more fuel to my fire about the BBC and their lack of impartiality and behaviour some times like a Red Top rag....
 








raymondo

Well-known member
Apr 26, 2017
5,731
Wiltshire
Shes bonkers. I just reneged on my "don't post on twitter rule", will probably go back in a hour and delete it when all the trolls and bots have come out...
Yes, twitter is hard work. I really admire the warriors out there fighting to get good messages out about difficult subjects: doctors, lawyers, aid workers etc...the level of abuse from trolls and bots can be brutal.
 




tedebear

Legal Alien
Jul 7, 2003
16,844
In my computer
Yes, twitter is hard work. I really admire the warriors out there fighting to get good messages out about difficult subjects: doctors, lawyers, aid workers etc...the level of abuse from trolls and bots can be brutal.

It really is awful. Why so many news agencies still post to it, is such an interesting social study. Trump used twitter (before he created Truth Social) as a tool in his divide and conquer and "stick it to the man" rhetoric to great success...I kind of read twitter as a "this is the worst it can get" sort of side show, as it really shows peoples true colours...I just always have to resist posting, as many of the people on there will never ever change their mind.... which is soooo hard to debate against...
 


Thunder Bolt

Silly old bat
Why on earth would Chris Mason of the BBC accept such a poison chalice...Just adding more fuel to my fire about the BBC and their lack of impartiality and behaviour some times like a Red Top rag....
It doesn’t help when the government put their own people on the board. For the main part, the BBC is balanced ie HIGNFY stays, along with David Attenborough & Chris Packham, but current affairs and news is definitely controlled.
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
50,470
Faversham
She's genuinely gone bonkers. The rationalising of her disastrous budget and the reasons why she only lasted 7 weeks as PM (effectively 5 due to period of national mourning) do not indicate a sound mind.
If you're talking about Truss, she's gobbing off today against the well-trailed HMG bill (supported by Labour) to step up the attack on cigarette smoking. Truss thinks that if children want to smoke they should be allowed to smoke. Into the sea with her!
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
50,470
Faversham
It really is awful. Why so many news agencies still post to it, is such an interesting social study. Trump used twitter (before he created Truth Social) as a tool in his divide and conquer and "stick it to the man" rhetoric to great success...I kind of read twitter as a "this is the worst it can get" sort of side show, as it really shows peoples true colours...I just always have to resist posting, as many of the people on there will never ever change their mind.... which is soooo hard to debate against...
I don't use it but my impression is that people with Opinions use twitter to steamroller the rest. The very notion of debate is not part of the game.

NSC was exactly the same that 20 years ago, with a small majority of thoughtful people (the residue of the class of 2003). Active curation is the only solution of social media.
 




raymondo

Well-known member
Apr 26, 2017
5,731
Wiltshire
It really is awful. Why so many news agencies still post to it, is such an interesting social study. Trump used twitter (before he created Truth Social) as a tool in his divide and conquer and "stick it to the man" rhetoric to great success...I kind of read twitter as a "this is the worst it can get" sort of side show, as it really shows peoples true colours...I just always have to resist posting, as many of the people on there will never ever change their mind.... which is soooo hard to debate against...
Agreed! I rarely post there, and don't have any level of followers that mean my posts get read anyway 😂. I really will stop. One has to be either 100% invested in twitter posting to build a following (hopefully of good guys)...or forget it!
 


nicko31

Well-known member
Jan 7, 2010
17,649
Gods country fortnightly
It doesn’t help when the government put their own people on the board. For the main part, the BBC is balanced ie HIGNFY stays, along with David Attenborough & Chris Packham, but current affairs and news is definitely controlled.
I really hope Labour backs the Beeb, the Tories are deliberately trying to hollow it out whilst using it as a propaganda tool forcing a lot of talent to depart.

We also need to back the world service and foreign language broadcasts properly. Despite the UK's declining influence in the world the Beeb is still highly respected and a great source of soft power overseas
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here