President Donald Trump

[chancellor]

And the Obama administration did not always - or even often - release verbatim transcripts of those notes. Nor did I expect them to do so.

My point of view on this is that the voters have every right to evaluate the president on what foreign policies they pursue, and at a high level, even how they do it. But voters should not be privy to critical discussions, even with foreign leaders.

[Redbirds Fan]

And the Obama administration did not always - or even often - release verbatim transcripts of those notes. Nor did I expect them to do so.

My point of view on this is that the voters have every right to evaluate the president on what foreign policies they pursue, and at a high level, even how they do it. But voters should not be privy to critical discussions, even with foreign leaders.

Chance, you are jousting at straw men. Nobody expected Obama to release notes of the meeting. Nobody expects Trump to release notes of the meeting. That's just plain silly.

What is equally silly is for us to trust "Code Word" Trump to give intelligence officials anything approximating an honest account of what happened in that meeting. Both Putin and Trump wanted to keep the room small...Putin so he could manage Trump, Trump so he could manage the truth. Otherwise, he would have had McMaster in there with him, or someone else with a clue about foreign policy or military matters. Obama, with only a little more foreign policy experience, but apparently less arrogance, took professional help with him.

The Russians had eighty years of government experience in the room. The U.S. had less than a year's worth. It was instructive to watch the post-game press conference, as Putin sat back quietly while Trump talked about how well he did.

[onejayhawk]

You are one who said he "redefined" foreign policy. If redefinition doesn't mean a change of positions, what in the world does it mean? Trump and Nixon have zero in common when it comes to how they approach the Russians. Trump has been a wimp so far, refusing even to admit that the Russians meddled in our election. Trump and Nixon do have in common that they are insecure individuals.

Context shows you meant redefinition as a brag, but pressed for specifics you have walked it back to 'shifting of weight'. I guess his continuation of Obama's ISIS strategy has been a shifting of weight, rather than a 'secret plan'. This is the type of thing that caused me to call out the trumpies here...the fact that nobody admits to being one, but people keep making apologies for him and pretending he has a foreign policy they cannot articulate.

I cited two areas with major differences--trade and climate change--the reaffirmation of Israel, plus new stances on other middle eastern countries. There is also a more confrontational posture on most areas. Add it together and it's a lot. I don't understand what you mean by brag in this context. Trump has effectively put his stamp on foreign policy, for good or ill.

Trump could easily have nothing to hide on the Russians meddling in the election. Not that they didn't, since they always have, but that it didn't work. Obama meddled in Israel's election and look what it got him. No one has shown that the Russians did any better. If they did, it could have been in support of Clinton, the known party with the established contacts. In any event, the wimp comment is out of line.

J

[chancellor]

Chance, you are jousting at straw men. Nobody expected Obama to release notes of the meeting. Nobody expects Trump to release notes of the meeting. That's just plain silly.

Best go back and read swampdragon's question, which, unless I misread, was "How do we find out what was said between Trump and Putin? Are there public records?"

My expectation is there are not. I don't expect it out of Trump, and I didn't expect it out of Obama.

Your point about Trump's lack of professional help is valid. I'd counter that given as often as the Obama administration got their head handed to them, especially in the Middle East, that he had the wrong professionals in the room with him.

[Redbirds Fan]

Best go back and read swampdragon's question, which, unless I misread, was "How do we find out what was said between Trump and Putin? Are there public records?"

My expectation is there are not. I don't expect it out of Trump, and I didn't expect it out of Obama.

Your point about Trump's lack of professional help is valid. I'd counter that given as often as the Obama administration got their head handed to them, especially in the Middle East, that he had the wrong professionals in the room with him.

I yield to your whataboutery.

[Redbirds Fan]

I cited two areas with major differences--trade and climate change--the reaffirmation of Israel, plus new stances on other middle eastern countries. There is also a more confrontational posture on most areas. Add it together and it's a lot. I don't understand what you mean by brag in this context. Trump has effectively put his stamp on foreign policy, for good or ill.

Trump could easily have nothing to hide on the Russians meddling in the election. Not that they didn't, since they always have, but that it didn't work. Obama meddled in Israel's election and look what it got him. No one has shown that the Russians did any better. If they did, it could have been in support of Clinton, the known party with the established contacts. In any event, the wimp comment is out of line.

J

Nope. I'm calling him out. They attacked us. Every one of our intelligence services which has examined the matter is certain of it. Obama, whatever you may think of him, at least had the stones to take some action.

Trump, on the other hand, refuses to admit the fact. What is he trying to hide? Is he afraid it will make him look bad? Is he worried it will affect his friendship with Putin?

So he goes to Germany and says we're not going to dwell on the past. Not only is he a wimp, but he is a fool. Russia sees us as the enemy. The fact that half of the Republicans in the country think they are our 'friends' shows how good they are at this.

Russia has always played the long game. And winter is coming.

[GwynnInTheHall]

How do those of you defending Trump's position on the Russian Hack when on one hand he says he's not convinced it even happened (he reiterated that yesterday) and on the other hand says Obama Choked by not dealing with the hack when it happened?

It's like he lives in a bizarro world where he can contradict himself repeatedly when it suits his purpose.

How many of YOU are living in that world and of you're not why aren't you calling Trump out on his schitzo speak?

[Redbirds Fan]

All kidding aside, it does bother me how so much of the right, especially the gun-toting evangelical right, is embracing Putin.

I graduated college in the 70s, having studied a lot of Russian/Soviet history and political philosophy. There was a lot of U.S. foreign policy through the decades that I thought was wrong-headed. But I always believed that Russia: a) was our sworn enemy, b) could not be trusted to do anything unless it was in their best interest, and c) believed their destiny was the destruction of the United States through whatever means available to them.

Their leaders think differently than ours. They see the whole table, and they play the long game. That sounds cliche, but it is fact of history for them. Individual lives mean nothing in the grand scheme. Think about how they battled the Germans in WWII. They threw millions of men, women and children at advancing troops, essentially to slow them down until winter could stop them.

They have an economy the size of Italy, yet they remain one of the top players on the world stage. Their country is run by thieves, yet they can demand a meeting with the President of the United States. Yeah, they have nukes. But that is not what makes them so dangerous. Putin knows that intelligence and counterintelligence can be more effective than ICBMs. They are much cheaper, easier to develop, and simpler to maintain and upgrade. He is truly the spymaster.

The sooner the administration figures out who we are dealing with, and the quicker portions of the right get over its infatuation with this thug, the better off we will be.

[Bernie Brewer]

Best go back and read swampdragon's question, which, unless I misread, was "How do we find out what was said between Trump and Putin? Are there public records?"

My expectation is there are not. I don't expect it out of Trump, and I didn't expect it out of Obama.

Your point about Trump's lack of professional help is valid. I'd counter that given as often as the Obama administration got their head handed to them, especially in the Middle East, that he had the wrong professionals in the room with him.

Oh snap.

[Bernie Brewer]

Nope. I'm calling him out. They attacked us. Every one of our intelligence services which has examined the matter is certain of it. Obama, whatever you may think of him, at least had the stones to take some action.

Trump, on the other hand, refuses to admit the fact. What is he trying to hide? Is he afraid it will make him look bad? Is he worried it will affect his friendship with Putin?

So he goes to Germany and says we're not going to dwell on the past. Not only is he a wimp, but he is a fool. Russia sees us as the enemy. The fact that half of the Republicans in the country think they are our 'friends' shows how good they are at this.

Russia has always played the long game. And winter is coming.

Red, either you're pissed or intentionally exaggerating here. I would argue many Republicans and others believe Obama did not necessarily display any menaingful "stones" as you call them. And the number of "half" of all Repubs thunk Russia is our friend doesn't serve your argument well. I could pull a GITH / Hodor and ask you to prove that or you be a (fill in the blank with some outrageous name)! Love ya man, but this is hyperbole.

[Bernie Brewer]

How do those of you defending Trump's position on the Russian Hack when on one hand he says he's not convinced it even happened (he reiterated that yesterday) and on the other hand says Obama Choked by not dealing with the hack when it happened?

It's like he lives in a bizarro world where he can contradict himself repeatedly when it suits his purpose.

How many of YOU are living in that world and of you're not why aren't you calling Trump out on his schitzo speak?

As you do often you're mixing two things and drawing conclusions that no one has made. I haven't seen anyone supporting Trump's position, in fact, I've seen a lot of hyperbole or whataboutery as Lucky says about Trump approach, which is certainly different than Obama's, while giving Obama a pass or worse yet, accolades for his big brass balls approach.

[GwynnInTheHall]

As you do often you mixing two things and drawing conclusions that no one has made. I haven't seen anyone supporting Trumps position, in fact I've seen a lot of hyperbole or whataboutery as Lucky says about trump while giving Obama accolades for his big brass balls approach.

There are indeed at least 2 posters in here who seem to have no issue with Trump's contradictory speak. It's pretty clear I won't get an answer from either of them or if I do it'll be circular logic.

I guess what I'd like to see from some on the right is the same incredulity I feel, I mean we're all pretty smart in here and can see what's happening outside positions on the issues.

I guess I'm just a guy who will say over and over again, WTF? man and I don't understand those who grow used to it and stop mentioning things simply because it's more of the same.

He's the POTUS, he should be called out every time until this shit stops and if it doesn't keep mentioning it until the din grows to a deafening roar.

I haven't been following your exchange with Lucky, but if it's about Obama or any other mainstream Dem--I'm more likely to agree with you than him. Don't get me wrong, I think Obama did some great things in office, but he could have/should have done more. And if he had BBB, he sure kept them in his pocket.

[Hornsby]

Very interesting article, more like an Op-Ed piece, in Politico today about how Putin Played Trump and the US. Much of this is conjecture, but given the lack of actual facts about the meeting between the two leaders, it's about all we have to draw on.

President Donald Trump needed to accomplish two things this week during his visits to Poland and the G-20 Summit in Hamburg. First, he needed to reassure America’s allies that he was committed to collective defense and the core set of values and principles that bind us together. Second, he needed to demonstrate that he understands that the greatest threat to that alliance, those values, and our security is the Kremlin.

Trump delivered neither of these. In very concrete terms, through speech and action, the president signaled a willingness to align the United States with Vladimir Putin’s worldview, and took steps to advance this realignment. He endorsed, nearly in its totality, the narrative the Russian leader has worked so meticulously to construct.


The readout of Trump’s lengthy meeting with Putin included several key points. First, the United States will “move on” from election hacking issues with no accountability or consequences for Russia; in fact, the U.S. will form a “framework” with Russia to cooperate on cybersecurity issues, evaluating weaknesses and assessing potential responses jointly. Second, the two presidents agreed not to meddle in “each other’s” domestic affairs—equating American activities to promote democracy with Russian aggression aimed at undermining it, in an incalculable PR victory for the Kremlin. Third, the announced, limited cease-fire in Syria will be a new basis for cooperation between the U.S. and Russia; Secretary of State Rex Tillerson went so far as to say that the Russian approach in Syria—yielding mass civilian casualties, catastrophic displacement, untold destruction and erased borders—may be “more right” than that of the United States.

Each of these points represents a significant victory for Putin. Each of them will weaken U.S. tools for defending its interests and security from the country that defines itself as America’s “primary adversary.” Trump has ceded the battle space—physical, virtual, moral—to the Kremlin. And the president is going to tell us this is a “win.”

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/07/07/trump-handed-putin-a-stunning-victory-215353

[Redbirds Fan]

Red, either you're pissed or intentionally exaggerating here. I would argue many Republicans and others believe Obama did not necessarily display any menaingful "stones" as you call them. And the number of "half" of all Repubs thunk Russia is our friend doesn't serve your argument well. I could pull a GITH / Hodor and ask you to prove that or you be a (fill in the blank with some outrageous name)! Love ya man, but this is hyperbole.

The "half" number came from a poll which Evan McMullin has cited and which was referenced in a Richard Engel report on MSNBC tonight. The exact number was 49%, so I guess you could say that I did exaggerate a bit. I believe the poll was Morning Consult.

Whether the poll is accurate or not, I don't know. I would be shocked if even 25% saw Russia as friendly to the U.S.

So, the answer is that I was pissed, but I wasn't completely making it up. Somebody else may have been making it up, in which case I'm claiming fake news.

[Bernie Brewer]

The "half" number came from a poll which Evan McMullin has cited and which was referenced in a Richard Engel report on MSNBC tonight. The exact number was 49%, so I guess you could say that I did exaggerate a bit. I believe the poll was Morning Consult.

Whether the poll is accurate or not, I don't know. I would be shocked if even 25% saw Russia as friendly to the U.S.

So, the answer is that I was pissed, but I wasn't completely making it up. Somebody else may have been making it up, in which case I'm claiming fake news.

I'll retract my accusation. I would be willing to bit that if half the self-identified Republicans do in fact believe Russia is our friend, then there aren't many self-identifying Republicans anymore. I saw something the other day, and if I knew how to post articles, I would, but it said something like only 25% of eligible voters identify as either Dem or GOP anymore. The vast majority now identify as independent/no party or other. Seemed like low numbers as I would have thought maybe 35 to 40% for each party, but it reasonated with me. While I lean GOP, I want nothing to do with the party anymore. I lean fiscal conservative / social moderate.