Liberal Forum

Misty » 13 Jul 2017 6:22 pm » wrote:I could be wrong, but it is my opinion that T'Bag is up to his eyeballs in helping Russians launder their dirty money.

Ted Kennedy's Soviet Gambit
Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.

“On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.”

Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election.
“The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.”

Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers.

First he offered to visit Moscow. “The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.” Kennedy would help the Soviets deal with Reagan by telling them how to brush up their propaganda.

Then he offered to make it possible for Andropov to sit down for a few interviews on American television. “A direct appeal … to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. … If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews. … The senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side.”

Kennedy would make certain the networks gave Andropov air time–and that they rigged the arrangement to look like honest journalism.

Kennedy’s motives? “Like other rational people,” the memorandum explained, “[Kennedy] is very troubled by the current state of Soviet-American relations.” But that high-minded concern represented only one of Kennedy’s motives.

“Tunney remarked that the senator wants to run for president in 1988,” the memorandum continued. “Kennedy does not discount that during the 1984 campaign, the Democratic Party may officially turn to him to lead the fight against the Republicans and elect their candidate president.”

Kennedy proved eager to deal with Andropov–the leader of the Soviet Union, a former director of the KGB and a principal mover in both the crushing of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution and the suppression of the 1968 Prague Spring–at least in part to advance his own political prospects.

In 1992, Tim Sebastian published a story about the memorandum in the London Times. Here in the U.S., Sebastian’s story received no attention. In his 2006 book, The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism, historian Paul Kengor reprinted the memorandum in full. “The media,” Kengor says, “ignored the revelation.”

“The document,” Kengor continues, “has stood the test of time. I scrutinized it more carefully than anything I’ve ever dealt with as a scholar. I showed the document to numerous authorities who deal with Soviet archival material. No one has debunked the memorandum or shown it to be a forgery. Kennedy’s office did not deny it.”

Why bring all this up now? No evidence exists that Andropov ever acted on the memorandum–within eight months, the Soviet leader would be dead–and now that Kennedy himself has died even many of the former senator’s opponents find themselves grieving. Yet precisely because Kennedy represented such a commanding figure–perhaps the most compelling liberal of our day–we need to consider his record in full.

Doing so, it turns out, requires pondering a document in the archives of the politburo.

When President Reagan chose to confront the Soviet Union, calling it the evil empire that it was, Sen. Edward Kennedy chose to offer aid and comfort to General Secretary Andropov. On the Cold War, the greatest issue of his lifetime, Kennedy got it wrong.

Peter Robinson, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and a former White House speechwriter, writes a weekly column for Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/ted-k ... inson.html

Huey » 14 Jul 2017 1:01 pm » wrote: Yeah, they call that helping.

Misty » 13 Jul 2017 6:22 pm » wrote:I could be wrong, but it is my opinion that T'Bag is up to his eyeballs in helping Russians launder their dirty money.

Boy oh boy, maybe this time we can overturn the results of the election…...

Tim Kaine is channeling his inner Louise Mensch, who seems to be channeling the voices in her head, and is screeching “TREASON!!!” But we should be forgiving because Tim has an excuse.

He's an idiot.


The liberals are losing and they're going to keep losing. They're going to lose in 2018, despite the Republicans’ best efforts to fail. And in 2020 we’ll get four more years of Donald Trump and I'm going to laugh during every minute of it. Let all those latter-day converts to McCarthyism working as associate sociology professors at Gumbo State and who drive old Corollas with fading bumperstickers that read “Nuclear Freeze Now” keep tweeting “TREASON” in all caps. You go, girls.


Again, whatever....


Let's assume every single thing the liberals postulate is absolutely true. Let's say Donald Trump, Jr., knew that the Russian government was using a crew of goofuses to try to feed him negative information on Felonia von Pantsuit and he went to get it and found out they didn't have any, which is a miracle because if there is one thing in the world there's a lot of, it's negative information about Hillary Clinton.


So what?


This was never some sort of rule acquiring you be fussy about where you dig up your dirt, and to the extent Clinton didn't already break this fake rule, she would've in a heartbeat if she had been presented the opportunity. I don't think I'm going to give up my freedom to honor your bogus principle du jour.


It won't work. Nobody's getting arrested, nobody’s getting impeached. You liberals suck and you're going to lose. Again.
https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtsch ... t-n2353881

Termin8tor » 14 Jul 2017 1:32 pm » wrote:As if anyone cares what a psychopathic liar thinks.
The following is a little understated, but I like it.

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 3:42 pm » wrote: As if anyone cares what a psychopathic liar likes.

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 3:42 pm » wrote: As if anyone cares what a psychopathic liar likes.

Bungled Collusion Is Still Collusion

By Charles Krauthammer

The Russia scandal has entered a new phase, and there’s no going back.

For six months, the White House claimed that this scandal was nothing more than innuendo about Trump campaign collusion with Russia in meddling in the 2016 election. Innuendo for which no concrete evidence had been produced.

Yes, there were several meetings with Russian officials, some only belatedly disclosed.

But that is circumstantial evidence at best.

Meetings tell you nothing unless you know what happened in them.

We didn’t.

Some of these were casual encounters in large groups, like the famous July 2016 Kislyak-Sessions exchange of pleasantries at the Republican National Convention.

Big deal.

I was puzzled.

Lots of coverup, but where was the crime?

Not even a third-rate burglary.

For six months, smoke without fire.

Yes, President Trump himself was acting very defensively, as if he were hiding something.

But no one ever produced the something.

My view was: Collusion? I just don’t see it.

But I’m open to empirical evidence. Show me.

The evidence is now shown.

This is not hearsay, not fake news, not unsourced leaks.

This is an email chain released by Donald Trump Jr. himself.

A British go-between writes that there’s a Russian government effort to help Trump Sr. win the election, and as part of that effort he proposes a meeting with a “Russian government attorney” possessing damaging information on Hillary Clinton.

Moreover, the Kremlin is willing to share troves of incriminating documents from the Crown Prosecutor. (Error: Britain has a Crown Prosecutor. Russia has a Prosecutor General.)

Donald Jr. emails back. “I love it.” Fatal words.

Once you’ve said “I’m in,” it makes no difference that the meeting was a bust, that the intermediary brought no such goods.

What matters is what Donald Jr. thought going into the meeting, as well as Jared Kushner and then-campaign manager Paul Manafort, who were forwarded the correspondence, invited to the meeting, and attended.

“It was literally just a wasted 20 minutes, which was a shame,” Donald Jr. told Sean Hannity.

A shame? On the contrary, a stroke of luck.

Had the lawyer real stuff to deliver, Donald Jr. and the others would be in far deeper legal trouble.

It turned out to be incompetent collusion, amateur collusion, comically failed collusion.

That does not erase the fact that three top Trump campaign officials were ready to play.

It may turn out that they did later collaborate more fruitfully.

We don’t know.

But even if nothing else is found, the evidence is damning.

It’s rather pathetic to hear Trump apologists protesting that it’s no big deal because we Americans are always intervening in other people’s elections, and they in ours.

You don’t have to go back to the ’40s and ’50s when the CIA intervened in France and Italy to keep the communists from coming to power.

What about the Obama administration’s blatant interference to try to defeat Benjamin Netanyahu in the latest Israeli election?

One might even add the work of groups supported by the U.S. during Russian parliamentary elections — the very origin of Vladimir Putin’s deep animus toward Clinton, then secretary of state, whom he accuses of having orchestrated the opposition.

This defense is pathetic for two reasons.

First, have the Trumpites not been telling us for six months that no collusion ever happened?

And now they say: Sure it happened. So what? Everyone does it.

What’s left of your credibility when you make such a casual about-face?

Second, no, not everyone does it.

It’s one thing to be open to opposition research dug up in Indiana.

But not dirt from Russia, a hostile foreign power that has repeatedly invaded its neighbors (Georgia, Crimea, eastern Ukraine), that buzzes our planes and ships in international waters, that opposes our every move and objective around the globe.

Just last week the Kremlin killed additional U.N. sanctions we were looking to impose on North Korea for its ICBM test.

There is no statute against helping a foreign hostile power meddle in an American election.

What Donald Jr. — and Kushner and Manafort — did may not be criminal.

But it is not merely stupid. It is also deeply wrong, a fundamental violation of any code of civic honor.

I leave it to the lawyers to adjudicate the legalities of unconsummated collusion.

But you don’t need a lawyer to see that the Trump defense — collusion as a desperate Democratic fiction designed to explain away a lost election — is now officially dead.

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 3:42 pm » wrote: As if anyone cares what a psychopathic liar likes.

Why does the Democrat Party still proudly defend Nazi linked, racist eugenicist Margaret Sanger and her organization Planned Parenthood?

Sanger happily wrote for the Nazi Party explaining her racist views on eugenics, including sterilizing "inferior races."


This has been known for many decades, without a peep from your side.

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 4:18 pm » wrote:

We have only Fredo's word that the meeting was a 'wasted 20 minutes' and his word is worthless.
He lied about how many people were at the meeting.
Apparently there were several other people at the meeting who were not disclosed.

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 4:18 pm » wrote:

We have only Fredo's word that the meeting was a 'wasted 20 minutes' and his word is worthless.
He lied about how many people were at the meeting.
Apparently there were several other people at the meeting who were not disclosed.

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 4:18 pm » wrote:

We have only Fredo's word that the meeting was a 'wasted 20 minutes' and his word is worthless.

Termin8tor » 14 Jul 2017 3:46 pm » wrote:Blah, blah, blah.
Why didn't you respond to my point about liberal icon and racist eugenics advocate Margaret Sanger writing for the Nazis?

Termin8tor » 14 Jul 2017 3:46 pm » wrote:Hey look over there. It's a squirrel!

Termin8tor » 14 Jul 2017 4:26 pm » wrote:This from the psycho who dishonestly defended a literal sociopathic liar, Bill Clinton.

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 4:26 pm » wrote: I didn't see it, but even if I had, I wouldn't have responded.

I'm guessing that was an lame attempt at whataboutism in response to my post about Sebastian Gorka.
Is Margaret Sanger currently serving as a deputy assistant to the POTUS?

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 4:28 pm » wrote:
You really need to get a new routine Puss.
That one is really worn out.

how utterly twisted you are.

You can screech about Clinton all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Fredo's word IS worthless.
How many different versions of the story have we gotten from him about this meeting now?
I've lost count.

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 4:26 pm » wrote: I didn't see it, but even if I had, I wouldn't have responded.

I'm guessing that was an lame attempt at whataboutism in response to my post about Sebastian Gorka.
Is Margaret Sanger currently serving as a deputy assistant to the POTUS?

Termin8tor » 14 Jul 2017 4:24 pm » wrote:Hey psycho, why aren't you equally concerned with the Hillary campaign colluding with Ukraine to undermine the Trump campaign?

Isn't that equally as bad? Not to mention proven beyond any doubt.

We all know how fair, non-partisan and objective you are.

Help me out with that.

Fox's Shep Smith on Trump Jr. meeting: 'Mind-boggling' deception.

Fox News anchor Shep Smith went off on the "mind-boggling deception" in the Trump administration following Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer.

Smith on "Shepard Smith Reporting" urged the Trump administration to "come clean" about all of their ties to Russia, pointing out the repeated "lies" that members of the Trump team have told about who was at the meeting and what they discussed.

Trump Jr. originally denied that he met with any Russian officials, but eventually admitted to the meeting and released an email chain of him setting up the meeting.

He revealed that he had been at the meeting with White House adviser Jared Kushner and Trump's former campaign manager Paul Manafort.

"If there's nothing there, and that's what they tell us, why all these lies?" Smith said.

"The deception is mind-boggling and there are still people out there who think we're making it up.

And one day they are going to realize we are not."

Chris Wallace paused for a moment after Smith's speech and added, "I don't know what to say."

Misty » 14 Jul 2017 7:11 pm » wrote:Saw this segment on FOX News today with Shep Smith and Chris Wallace.
TrumpCo's safe space at FOX is shrinking.