Russia Secretly Offered Afghan Militants Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops - Trump has known for months

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

[Landslide Lyndon]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

I'm sure you'd say the same thing if this happened under Obama or Hillary's watch.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

I'm sure you'd say the same thing if this happened under Obama or Hillary's watch.

If I did, would you agree with me or not?

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Soooo, impeach him again?

The best thing for the Democrats in Washington to do would be to just leave this hanging out there, in plain view. Imply that a second Trump term would be mired in scandal, something they could avoid by putting Biden in office.

This is basically how the Republicans treated Hillary, and it worked.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

Ah yes, Mr. Trump's "delicate negotiations" where he talks to Putin on the phone, grovels and brags, and then has to figure out which minor victory he'll  give Russia.

[WD]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

I'm sure you'd say the same thing if this happened under Obama or Hillary's watch.

If this happened under Obama, the Senate trial would have already begun

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/charlie_savage/status/1278015662649114626?s=21

A smoking gun, & yet the White House keeps ignoring Russia's behavior.

He's even trying to hide the gun

[Former Crackhead Mike Lindell]

Trump shouldn't get a pass just because he's so uniquely terrible. Impeach him for this. Should've impeached him for lots of things, too. But for this, definitely. Yeah, yeah, they'll acquit, blah, blah. Get them on record. History is judging. Inaction is normalizing.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Are we really supposed to accept laziness as a reasonable excuse for potentially allowing Americans to die? If I had a loved on overseas in Afghanistan, I would be livid. Unlike the other Russia scandals, as important as they are, this one really could hurt Trump since it involved peoples' lives, and not just any Americans-the troops. Any American who is upset at Colin Kaepernick taking a knee (which doesn't even actually have anything to do with the troops) yet not upset about this is truly full of s*** and doesn't actually value our soldiers as anything else but pawns in their culture war.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Early 2019
Senior WH officials briefed on Russian contact with the Taliban

August 2019
Trump argues Russia should be re-admitted to G7

Late February 2020
Information that Russia was paying Taliban bounties for dead American and allied solders, corroborated by monitoring of wire transfers from Russia to the Taliban, is included in Trump's daily brief.

Late March 2020
National Security Council reviews intelligence assessment on Russian bounties for dead American soldiers.

Mid April 2020
Trump brokers a historic deal with OPEC, ending Saudi Arabia's price war on Russian oil

Early June 2020
Trump personally calls Putin to invite him to attend the G7

The Past Week
After news of the Russian bounty program for American military deaths surfaces, Trump lies, and lies and lies. He lies about being briefed, and about the allegations. He lies to the Republicans about the amount of evidence supporting the allegations.


It's getting very difficult to see Mr. Trump's conduct here as anything short of treason.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

I'm sure you'd say the same thing if this happened under Obama or Hillary's watch.

If I did, would you agree with me or not?

I'll ask again:  Do you think that Presidents should have to worry about being impeached if they are too hesitant to do things that might start a war?

[R.P. McM]

Sometimes I think people really understate how much of an enemy Russians are. They straight up are trying to kill our troops. These aren’t our friends.

This should have been obvious after what happened in the Republic of Georgia in 2008, definitely after Crimea in 2014. We knew they were backing he Taliban for years and this is just direct confirmation of what was widely presumed already.

I have much to criticize Romney about, but he was right on this in 2012 and Obama was incredibly naive about Russia, and meanwhile Trump is bought and paid for.

Nope. Because in geopolitical terms, Russia is still a second-rate power. The only thing that has enabled this current course of events is the willingness of the GOP to unflinchingly support a president seemingly engaged in treason. So Obama's error is that he didn't anticipate Republican voters were willing to abet treason? Yeah, that isn't on him.

[Landslide Lyndon]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

I'm sure you'd say the same thing if this happened under Obama or Hillary's watch.

If I did, would you agree with me or not?

I'll ask again:  Do you think that Presidents should have to worry about being impeached if they are too hesitant to do things that might start a war?

You constantly argue in bad faith so I'm not going to take your bait. If you want to derail the thread find someone else to troll.

[darklordoftech]

What is Russia’s motive?

[NewYorkExpress]

What is Russia’s motive?

I guess Russia supports Biden now, which means we should be voting for Trump ?

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

I'm sure you'd say the same thing if this happened under Obama or Hillary's watch.

If this happened under Obama, the Senate trial would have already begun

And there might be enough Democrats on board to convict and remove him.

Of course, if Obama were stupid/unprincipled enough to allow this to happen, he wouldn't be Obama.

[MasterJedi]

Papa Putin must have talked to Trump. He’s claiming it’s a hoax now.

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1278284552679624705

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

"U.S. intelligence officials"

I know, you always hate what you can't have.

You mean Iraqi WMDs? Yeah, I'm pretty pissed that we didn't find any.

Agencies supply info. Elected officials decide how to use it.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1278284552679624705

Britain confirms seeing US intelligence on Russian bounties

Britain's Defence Secretary Ben Wallace on Tuesday (June 30) confirmed having seen US intelligence briefings about alleged Russian bounties offered to Afghan militants to kill American troops.

"I am aware of the intelligence," Wallace told a parliamentary defence sub-committee hearing when asked specifically about the alleged Russian bounties

[Sir Mohamed]

Not the first time Mr. Trump is betrayed this country. This is actually something that upsets me. We can argue whether being in Afghanistan is in our national interest or not, but not caring for troops in harm's way is bordering treason. No, it actually is treason. It's not just a huge middle finger to men and women in uniform and their families, it also sends a signal to Mr. Putin that he can do whatever he wants with just no price to pay. At the same time, Mr. Trump bullies Merkel and May on the phone.

If we fail to vote his literal criminal out in November, we're beyond doomed.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

I'm sure you'd say the same thing if this happened under Obama or Hillary's watch.

If I did, would you agree with me or not?

I'll ask again:  Do you think that Presidents should have to worry about being impeached if they are too hesitant to do things that might start a war?

You constantly argue in bad faith so I'm not going to take your bait. If you want to derail the thread find someone else to troll.

You are the one who responded to a point I made about why the definition of treason should be limited with an ad hominem based on an accusation of hypocrisy which you cannot backup by pointing to a single thing I have actually said.  I am not the one derailing the thread.

If you are too incurious to engage with my arguments, you could have chosen not to respond at all.

[woodley park]

Amazing that Trump has done more to protect a bunch of traitor Confederate generals than he has to protect our own servicemen and women.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The Times article repeatedly cites unnamed “American intelligence officials.” The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal articles “confirming” the original Times story merely restate the allegations of the anonymous officials, along with caveats like “if true” or “if confirmed.”

Furthermore, the unnamed intelligence sources who spoke with the Times say that their assessment is based “on interrogations of captured Afghan militants and criminals.”

That’s a red flag, said John Kiriakou, a former analyst and case officer for the CIA who led the team that captured senior al-Qaeda member Abu Zubaydah in Pakistan in 2002.

“When you capture a prisoner, and you’re interrogating him, the prisoner is going to tell you what he thinks you want to hear,” he said in an interview with The American Conservative. “There’s no evidence here, there’s no proof.”

. . . . .
“These kinds of deals with the Russian intelligence agency are baseless—our target killings and assassinations were ongoing in years before, and we did it on our own resources,” Zabihullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the Taliban, told The New York Times. “That changed after our deal with the Americans, and their lives are secure and we don’t attack them.”

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/three-glaring-problems-with-the-nyt-russian-taliban-bounty-story/

This whole story just does not add up.

[Badger]

If it turns out to be 100% correct and Trump learned but didn't do anything about it, would this be grounds for charges of treason? I actually think so.

Kinda ironic he recently accused Obama of treason for "spying on Trump Tower". Needless to say: Without any proof.

No, it's not treason to not respond to something.  Presidents need some leeway to choose not to act when either intelligence is inconclusive or any available response is likely to make things worse (ex. in the middle of delicate negotiations).

I'm sure you'd say the same thing if this happened under Obama or Hillary's watch.

If I did, would you agree with me or not?

I'll ask again:  Do you think that Presidents should have to worry about being impeached if they are too hesitant to do things that might start a war?

You constantly argue in bad faith so I'm not going to take your bait. If you want to derail the thread find someone else to troll.

You are the one who responded to a point I made about why the definition of treason should be limited with an ad hominem based on an accusation of hypocrisy which you cannot backup by pointing to a single thing I have actually said.  I am not the one derailing the thread.

If you are too incurious to engage with my arguments, you could have chosen not to respond at all.

Your disingenuous question was the equivalent of have you stopped beating your wife. Let's face facts. This was not a decision either hide the information or go to war. If you have any doubt of this, please note the post above where Trump does his usual screaming Jag of claiming it's all a media hoax, the New York Times bad, etc etc etc.

Your question would be an illogical insistence on two outcomes when there are many other possibilities, even if we had an upright oh, responsible, non self-absorbed functional adult in the White House who wasn't financially and personally beholden to Putin worse than the most Marxist College professors one could find. The fact that we actually do have such an individual who also Revels in fundamental dishonesty literally at the turn of a clock hour hand, Rangers your question nothing better than abject knee-jerk defense of a defenseless Act.

If Landslide Lyndon has anything more to add, I'll yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Greece.