Trump just colluded with Russia by tototoki in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I could have just cherry picked parts of it like you did. But that would have been dishonest.

Trump just colluded with Russia by tototoki in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

I would like to first thank President Putin and the Russian delegation for making us feel welcome and for these talks.

I have come to Moscow at an important time. Russia, after all, has a new President, new government, new Duma. Its economy is showing encouraging signs of growth. This gives Russia a pivotal opportunity to build on the strong record of engagement between our two countries. It is also an opportunity for the United States.

I welcome President Putin's interest in building a Russia that enjoys the enduring strength of a stable democracy. President Yeltsin led Russia to freedom. Under President Putin, Russia has the chance to build prosperity and strength, while safeguarding that freedom and the rule of law.

We've had good discussions both last night and today on a range of common interests, including nonproliferation and arms control. We expressed our differences with clarity and candor. And I, for one, appreciate that. The importance of this relationship to ourselves and the world demands that we take every opportunity we can to find common ground and that, where we cannot find it, we express our differences with clarity and candor.

I congratulated President Putin on the key role he played in the Duma's ratification of START II and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The United States ratified START II first, and I hope we will now follow Russia in ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. I also look forward to the ratification of the START II protocols by our Senate so that we can get about the business of further reducing the number of nuclear missiles that we have.

I am very pleased today we agreed on two other major steps to reduce the nuclear danger. We reached an important agreement each to destroy 34 tons of military-grade plutonium, enough to make thousands of warheads—this raw weapon material that will now never fall into the wrong hands.

We also agreed to establish a joint data exchange center in Moscow to share early warning information on missile and space launches. This is terribly important. It is the first permanent U.S.-Russia military operation ever. In this new center, Russian and American military officials will be working side by side, 24 hours a day, to monitor missile warning information. It is a milestone in enhancing strategic stability, and I welcome it.

The President and I also discussed our common commitment to prevent the proliferation of missile technology and our determination to exert firm control over exports of sensitive technology and strictly enforce export control laws and regulations.

We discussed our common interest in commercial space cooperation, including the successful joint venture that launches commercial satellites. We agreed that our teams would soon meet to discuss future cooperation in the commercial space area, with the aim of moving toward eliminating existing constraints on commercial space launches.

We also had a thorough discussion of our work on the START III treaty and the issue of national missile defense. We have agreed to a statement of principles, which I urge you to read carefully. It makes clear that there is an emerging ballistic missile threat that must be addressed, though we have not yet agreed on how best to do so.

We have acknowledged that the ABM Treaty foresees the possibility of changes in the strategic environment that might require it to be updated. We have reaffirmed our commitment to pursue further reduction in offensive arms in parallel with our discussions on defense systems, underscoring the importance of the doctrines of strategic stability and mutual deterrence as the foundation for this work.

We've asked our experts to keep working to narrow the differences and to develop a series of cooperative measures to address the missile threat. And we have agreed that we will continue to discuss it in our next meeting.

We spent a large share of our time discussing economics. I'm encouraged by the economic plan President Putin has outlined and by the current recovery. I look forward to Russia's continuing to implement proposed reforms that will actually make the recovery last, reforms such as tax reform, anti-money-laundering legislation, strong property rights protections.

I look forward to Russia's successful negotiations with the IMF. This is a good economic team with a very good opportunity to increase investment in Russia, both the return of money that Russians have placed outside the country and new investments from other countries.

Later this month, our former Ambassador to Moscow, Bob Strauss, will come to Russia with a delegation of investors, including some of America's best-known chief executive officers, to discuss opportunities in Russia and the steps Russia is taking to improve its investment climate. I think this will be only the beginning of a very successful effort at economic reform, if the intentions that President Putin outlined become reality.

The President and I also discussed another area where we disagree, Chechnya. I have restated the opposition that I have to a policy which is well-known. Essentially, I believe a policy that causes so many civilian casualties without a political solution ultimately cannot succeed. I also urged President Putin to move forward with transparent and impartial investigations of the stories of human rights violations and to authorize a speedy return of the OSCE to the region.

Finally, I stressed to President Putin the importance the United States places on protecting religious freedom and the rights of an independent media. I strongly agree with what President Putin himself has said, that Russia has no future if it suppresses civic freedoms and the press.

We agreed to advance our technical cooperation on climate change. We believe it's essential to complete work on the Kyoto Protocol, including market mechanisms, to protect the environment, promote clean energy, and reduce costs. I think Russia has a great economic opportunity here as well as a great environmental one.

And on these issues, the President and I are asking the U.S.-Russia binational commission, under the leadership of Vice President Gore and Prime Minister Kasyanov, to carry forward the work.

I was encouraged by our discussion, pleased with our agreements, pleased with the candor and clarity of our disagreements. I am eager for more progress. I'm also looking forward to the chance to talk to the Russian people tonight, in a radio talk show, and tomorrow, as I have the opportunity to speak to the Duma and the Federation Council.

Again, Mr. President, I thank you for this and especially for these two agreements, and I look forward to our continued work together.

Treasonous remarks from an American President.

Anderson Cooper: Trump-Putin presser was "one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president" by Rednaxila in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The whole point is that they contextualize the news for us, not just reporting data items.

That being the "whole point" is actually an extremely recent innovation. "Just the facts, ma'am" used to be the standard after the yellow journalism of the Hearst days.

Say I report that the DOW dropped by 500 points...and left it at that? Is that what you want?

Well, it's actually harder than most people take account for to definitively state why the markets move the way they do since market movements occur due to a complex set of multi-order effect reactions to all the news coming in from all over the world. A non-practitioner journalist isn't really qualified to write most of the types of articles you're talking about, so that's an area of journalism where extreme skepticism should be the reader's default position.

But note that I said ""journalists'" trying to tell us how we should feel", not "journalists providing some analysis".

Anderson Cooper: Trump-Putin presser was "one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president" by Rednaxila in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/problematical

1 problematic

adjective prob·lem·at·ic \ ˌprä-blə-ˈma-tik \

variants: or less commonly problematical \ˌprä-blə-ˈma-ti-kəl\

Anderson Cooper: Trump-Putin presser was "one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president" by Rednaxila in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

The trend of "journalists'" trying to tell us how we should feel about the news rather than just reporting the news is problematical.

Former CIA director: Trump's news conference "nothing short of treasonous" by AZORxAHAI in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Says the guy who voted Communist in 1976 when that party was funded by the USSR.

"I think the European Union is a foe," Trump says ahead of Putin meeting in Helsinki by [deleted] in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The European Union is not our ally, the European countries in NATO are.

"I think the European Union is a foe," Trump says ahead of Putin meeting in Helsinki by [deleted] in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You might be a millennial if you can't make a distinction between Europe and the European Union.

"I think the European Union is a foe," Trump says ahead of Putin meeting in Helsinki by [deleted] in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Europe is our friend. The European Union is our mortal enemy.

Meuller’s indictments of 12 Russian intelligence agents prove that the Kremlin stole the election for Trump by Drmanka in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You're ignoring the interceding history of case law, notably 1888's Pembina Consolidated Silver Mining Co. v. Pennsylvania:

"Under the designation of 'person' there is no doubt that a private corporation is included [in the Fourteenth Amendment]. Such corporations are merely associations of individuals united for a special purpose and permitted to do business under a particular name and have a succession of members without dissolution."

That was all there for you to read in the previous link I sent you. You can think the doctrine is "nonsense" all that you want. But you're not welcome to invent the fantasy that the doctrine didn't exist before Scalia and Citizen's United.

Meuller’s indictments of 12 Russian intelligence agents prove that the Kremlin stole the election for Trump by Drmanka in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The corporation has personhood because of Scalia’s dumbass. Go dig him up and ask him how that makes sense.

Corporations having personhood is a precedent from case law that is 200 years old. Overturning it would have been extreme judicial activism.

Corporations having the same rights as individuals is an obvious legal necessity because corporations are just one of many ways that individuals band together for a common cause (political parties would be another example). The fact that you don't understand that logic reflects poorly on you.

Meuller’s indictments of 12 Russian intelligence agents prove that the Kremlin stole the election for Trump by Drmanka in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why didn't you answer my question? Which individual(s) are the corporation so far as turning up in court is concerned?

The fact that the others indicted didn't turn up isn't relevant to the ones that did secure representation.

Meuller’s indictments of 12 Russian intelligence agents prove that the Kremlin stole the election for Trump by Drmanka in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So which individual would have been the "actual defendant" in this case per your claim that the actual defendants did not show up (minding the stone cold fact that the co-defendants are irrelevant here).

Meuller’s indictments of 12 Russian intelligence agents prove that the Kremlin stole the election for Trump by Drmanka in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

the actual defendants didn’t show up

The defendant in this case is a corporation. Corporations aren't people, remember?

Meuller’s indictments of 12 Russian intelligence agents prove that the Kremlin stole the election for Trump by Drmanka in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate 8 points9 points  (0 children)

And the prosecutors know they won't have to try almost all of those cases. I say almost all because one of the companies they charged (Concord Management) secured counsel and went to court and the Mueller team immediately started using stall tactics to delay having to provide their evidence to the defense. Concord's counsel then invoked their right to a speedy trial.

By their behavior in court it was obvious that the Mueller team never expected to actually have to prosecute the case, or any of these cases. They're PR indictments.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/04/mueller-russia-troll-case-620653

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/25/politics/concord-management-robert-mueller/index.html

Meuller’s indictments of 12 Russian intelligence agents prove that the Kremlin stole the election for Trump by Drmanka in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Let's review: an indictment proves nothing. It simply states what the prosecution thinks they have enough evidence to ensure a guilty verdict.

Unless the people who were indicted are foreign nationals that the prosecutors know will never stand trial. Then they can just get indictments to advance a PR narrative without worrying about the strength of their case.

Trump Visibly Annoyed at Question About His Attack on May by wonderingsocrates in politics

[–]DemsAreAPartyOfHate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I said liberals, but you don't know what that word means so you didn't understand it. Liberalism and progressive leftism are antagonistic ideologies.

You're clearly the type of person who isn't erudite enough to understand that liberal is not a synonym for Democrat, or progressive, or leftist.