1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Donald Trump campaign made contact with Russian officials at least 18 times during presidential camp

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Crabtownboy, May 18, 2017.

  1. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    18,095
    Likes Received:
    218
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Michael Flynn and other advisers to Donald Trump’s campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race, current and former U.S. officials familiar with the exchanges told Reuters.

    The previously undisclosed interactions form part of the record now being reviewed by FBI and congressional investigators probing Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election and contacts between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

    Six of the previously undisclosed contacts described to Reuters were phone calls between Kislyak and Trump advisers, including Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser, three current and former officials said.

    Conversations between Flynn and Kislyak accelerated after the Nov. 8 vote as the two discussed establishing a back channel for communication between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that could bypass the U.S. national security bureaucracy, which both sides considered hostile to improved relations, four current U.S. officials said.

    In January, the Trump White House initially denied any contacts with Russian officials during the 2016 campaign. The White House and advisers to the campaign have since confirmed four meetings between Kislyak and Trump advisers during that time.

    The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far. But the disclosure could increase the pressure on Trump and his aides to provide the FBI and Congress with a full account of interactions with Russian officials and others with links to the Kremlin during and immediately after the 2016 election.

    The White House did not respond to requests for comment. Flynn's lawyer declined to comment. In Moscow, a Russian foreign ministry official declined to comment on the contacts and referred Reuters to the Trump administration.

    The 18 calls and electronic messages took place between April and November 2016 as hackers engaged in what U.S. intelligence concluded in January was part of a Kremlin campaign to discredit the vote and influence the outcome of the election in favor of Trump over his Democratic challenger, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

    Those discussions focused on mending U.S.-Russian economic relations strained by sanctions imposed on Moscow, cooperating in fighting Islamic State in Syria and containing a more assertive China, the sources said.

    Members of the Senate and House intelligence committees have gone to the CIA and the National Security Agency to review transcripts and other documents related to contacts between Trump campaign advisers and associates and Russian officials and others with links to Putin, people with knowledge of those investigations told Reuters.

    The U.S. Justice Department said on Wednesday it had appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel to investigate alleged Russian meddling in the U.S. presidential campaign and possible collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia. Mueller will now take charge of the FBI investigation that began last July. Trump and his aides have repeatedly denied any collusion with Russia.

    In addition to the six phone calls involving Kislyak, the communications described to Reuters involved another 12 calls, emails or text messages between Russian officials or people considered to be close to Putin and Trump campaign advisers.

    One of those contacts was by Viktor Medvedchuk, a Ukrainian oligarch and politician, according to one person with detailed knowledge of the exchange and two others familiar with the issue.

    It was not clear with whom Medvedchuk was in contact within the Trump campaign but the themes included U.S.-Russia cooperation, the sources said. Putin is godfather to Medvedchuk’s daughter.

    Medvedchuk denied having any contact with anyone in the Trump campaign.

    "I am not acquainted with any of Donald Trump's close associates, therefore no such conversation could have taken place," he said in an email to Reuters.

    In the conversations during the campaign, Russian officials emphasized a pragmatic, business-style approach and stressed to Trump associates that they could make deals by focusing on common economic and other interests and leaving contentious issues aside, the sources said.

    Veterans of previous election campaigns said some contact with foreign officials during a campaign was not unusual, but the number of interactions between Trump aides and Russian officials and others with links to Putin was exceptional.

    “It’s rare to have that many phone calls to foreign officials, especially to a country we consider an adversary or a hostile power,” Richard Armitage, a Republican and former deputy secretary of state, told Reuters.


    Donald Trump campaign contacted Russians 18 times in 2016: report
     
  2. Happy

    Happy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    No it is not rare! Nor is it illegal!

    Correct. It is not unusual.

    Clinton's own record reflects differently - Almost one million miles traveled, having visited 112 countries.
    I doubt she was jet-setting to experience foreign cuisine.

    The point for the opposition is to RAISE suspicion, with inflamed language and accusations, of Trump or his associates of having any contact with Russia.

    The opposition is quite aware of their followers, to hear a suspicion and defend it as a fact.

    Free speech, speaking to foreigners is not illegal. I could care less if Trump ever met Putin, dined with him, discussed likes and dislikes, discussed business adventures. I could care less if Trump was probing to see if he and Putin could have an amicable supportive relationship to work against terrorism.

    All the crafted suspicions are specifically ABOUT "MONEY". But hey who in the opposition is talking about "MONEY" ? No one! And why not, since "accepting" foreign MONEY, is what POINTS to an illegality! And Trump is WEALTHY! He doesn't need to SET up a FOUNDATION, that accepts FOREIGN MONEY, and receive a SALARY from the FOUNDATION, and use it for campaigning....LIKE SOME PEOPLE, who does NOT want MONEY to be out in the limelight!

    So how to create a SCANDAL? Pick a foreign adversary and claim Trump or his associates had conversations with the adversary. And then? IMPLY the conversations were to COAX the adversary, (WHOM the opposition is FURTHER implys, IS COZY with Trump,) to WIN Trump a Presidential election!

    LOL seriously? First of all, the opposition (Liberals) have redefined what COZY means, never having revealed Trump meeting Putin or speaking to Putin. Trump himself claimed, he may or may not have met Putin, under circumstances regarding Trump's involvement with pageants. WOW, that's COZY! lol

    Secondly ~ Just EXACTLY HOW does the opposition claim Russians RIGGED the US Presidential Election?

    LOL seriously? Trump supposedly coheresed, asked, directed, told, ordered, himself or his aides to ask the Russians to RIG the US Presidential Election in his favor?

    HOW, would the Opposition EVEN think that possible....or successful....less they had themselves done such a thing?

    And? Where is the PROOF, a single piece of evidence Trump did such a thing?

    With no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion....WHAT is an investigation based on?

    Suspicion? WHAT is the suspicion? 18 calls and electronic messages?

    Based on what? U.S. intelligence. Under WHOSE direction to INVESTIGATE Trumps campaign calls and electronic messages? Oh, right, the U. S. intelligence under Obama's administration!

    And? According to reports of the calls and electronic messages of those involved....WHAT was the topic of discussion?

    OH no.... A willingness for a Russian leader to have civil talks with a potential US President. oh, oh, oh, the scandal! LOL

    Why the BIG to do? Under the Obama administration the CIA was directed to record communication between Trump's staff and Russia.... And the CIA have the recordings and transcripts... And the transcripts were given to : (for review)

    Transcripts and "other documents". What "other documents" ? How in depth did the Obama administration collude with the CIA to "secretly" probe Trumps activities?

     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,905
    Likes Received:
    937
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Here's how this will be "refuted":
    1. Fake news.
    2. Liberals are always attacking Trump.
    3. At least he's not Hillary.
    4. Yeah but look at what Obama did.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
     
  4. Happy

    Happy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Nah....!

    I'll go with the the comedy of the Liberal constitutes whining about Trump MAYBE talking to a foreigner, while THEY elected a man to sit in the White House who has held at least TWO FOREIGN citizenship's!

    :rolleyes:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,905
    Likes Received:
    937
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Oh look, the Dear Leader shows the way....

    First he uses #4 "Yeah but look at what Obama did."

    Trump Special Councel.JPG


    Then he goes with #2, "Liberals are always attacking Trump":

    Trump Witch Hunt.JPG
     
  6. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,905
    Likes Received:
    937
    Faith:
    Baptist
    So, you're going with #4.
     
  7. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,660
    Likes Received:
    73
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'd like to know exactly why we're not allowed to bring up precedent.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    22,613
    Likes Received:
    486
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It ruins the narrative and exposes hypocrisy.

    The truth doesn't matter. Everything Trump does is the absolute worst ever.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. Reynolds

    Reynolds Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2014
    Messages:
    1,311
    Likes Received:
    162
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Its not convenient.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,905
    Likes Received:
    937
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It doesn't defend the current occupant of the White House. It simply says if someone else did it, Trump can do it, too, never mind that it was wrong then, it's wrong now.

    It goes to the idea that the left must be crushed and their hypocrisy bared, as if that is actual governing. Let's get our agenda passed and put conservative policies in place. That's the best revenge.
     
  11. Happy

    Happy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    So what?
     
  12. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,905
    Likes Received:
    937
    Faith:
    Baptist
    So what?
    So it proves that two of my four predicted responses were used to defend Trump.

    So what?
    It does nothing to defend Trump.
     
  13. Happy

    Happy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Defend him against what charge?

    Good grief, You think a President "governs" 24 - 7 ? He can say what ever he wants in response to people talking about him, so what?

    Trump and the appropriate people are already working on that. Trump multi-tasks. I get that, I do that all day long everyday.

    BTW - it is not about "revenge", but is about "succeeding" to accomplish an agenda, despite adversaries constantly in your face.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,660
    Likes Received:
    73
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It exposes the hypocrisy of the argument being made in the first place.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. Happy

    Happy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    That's funny. Take a known response, use it as a prediction, then say........see, see, my prediction was right. LOL

    Trump is not on trial, but in the court of Liberal opinion. He says what he wants in response to them, just like you say what you want in response to people who talk about you or to you in a manner you do not favor. So why shouldn't he?
     
  16. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,905
    Likes Received:
    937
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I've said these are the predicted responses of Trump defenders several times in the past. This is from just two days ago, for example:

    Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador



    He can say he's the most attacked president in history and he can say that Obama and Hillary did certain things, but this is not a defense for allegedly asking Comey to drop the investigation into Flynn. Nor is it a defense of allegedly passing along classified information to the Russian ambassador. It's deflection and rationalization, not a defense. Of course it probably seems legit to you because these are your tactics as well.
     
  17. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    22,613
    Likes Received:
    486
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But, but, but...

    That's against the rules.
     
  18. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    22,613
    Likes Received:
    486
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Wow! You must be clairvoyant. Pat yourself on the back again.

    We all know these kinds of predictions on your part are meant to limit the response to what you know is blatant hypocrisy on your part.

    You're just trying to control the narrative. Par for the course.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    18,095
    Likes Received:
    218
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No, it says that Loose Lips Trump has been caught with his pants down. He has done himself in. He is his own worst enemy.

    His tactics may have worked in business, but not in politics. He cannot bamboozle the government forever.
     
  20. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    22,613
    Likes Received:
    486
    Faith:
    Baptist

    Didn't seem to bother you at all when Obama and his crew were giving up state secrets and outing CIA operatives.
     
Loading...