Klobuchar going all in on Trump-Russia connection

[Beet]

Again, you keep ignoring the fact that things happen. This is like saying FDR's '44/'45 positions regarding Japan are in line with some insane quack who wants the U.S. to attack Japan today. Meaningless and sophist.

And what happened? All that happened was Obama's personal views arbitrarily changing. Crimea already had its parallel with Abkhazia and South Ossetia and Obama didn't do anything back then.

So what you're suggesting is that Obama's narcissism and ego defines the 'moderate position', I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy.

No, you're lodging a bunch of insults like 'narcissist', 'egotist' and 'hypocrite' without being able to defend why intellectually, short of making the same assertions over and over again. You're embarassing yourself, and it looks bad.

Then why did Hillary maintain a consistent position regarding Russia in her '08 campaign and her '16 campaign?

Because she was relatively hawkish in '08 (or consensus, as you put it), and between '08 and '16 Russia did a bunch of bad stuff that would not give people like her any reason to change their relatively aggressive stance.

'bad stuff' is quite an arbitrary term, and enough 'bad stuff' had been done in the immediate years leading up to '08 for the formerly pro-Russia GWB administration to also turn on Russia. There's the exact parallel to Obama.

Eh, you just keep going back to the same talking points over and over again. I've already answered you in the thread.

You're giving reasons for which precedent had already been set by Obama, but that Obama had chosen to ignore. Crimea, which was ignored in the context of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by Obama.

Not the same, since Abkhazia and South Ossetia have been disputed territories since the 1990s, and Abkhazia has not been in Georgian control since soon after the dissolution of the USSR. South Ossetia, meanwhile, has a population of only 53,000. Russia claims neither of these states, rather it recognizes their so-called independence.

Crimea, on the other hand, has a population of 2.3 million. It was never previously disputed, and Russia simply annexed it. This is orders of magnitude different. And that's not even getting into the war in eastern Ukraine or all the other things that Putin has done since 2014.

Crimea gained status as an autonomous republic in 1991. Abkhazia actually has the same autonomous republic classification as Crimea.

Are you seriously trying to argue that Crimea was an independent country from 1991 to 2014?

[ApatheticAustrian]

Why does this Russia meme resonate so much with boring middle class White women?

they know bullies when they see one.

[uti2]

Again, you keep ignoring the fact that things happen. This is like saying FDR's '44/'45 positions regarding Japan are in line with some insane quack who wants the U.S. to attack Japan today. Meaningless and sophist.

And what happened? All that happened was Obama's personal views arbitrarily changing. Crimea already had its parallel with Abkhazia and South Ossetia and Obama didn't do anything back then.

So what you're suggesting is that Obama's narcissism and ego defines the 'moderate position', I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy.

No, you're lodging a bunch of insults like 'narcissist', 'egotist' and 'hypocrite' without being able to defend why intellectually, short of making the same assertions over and over again. You're embarassing yourself, and it looks bad.

Then why did Hillary maintain a consistent position regarding Russia in her '08 campaign and her '16 campaign?

Because she was relatively hawkish in '08 (or consensus, as you put it), and between '08 and '16 Russia did a bunch of bad stuff that would not give people like her any reason to change their relatively aggressive stance.

'bad stuff' is quite an arbitrary term, and enough 'bad stuff' had been done in the immediate years leading up to '08 for the formerly pro-Russia GWB administration to also turn on Russia. There's the exact parallel to Obama.

Eh, you just keep going back to the same talking points over and over again. I've already answered you in the thread.

You're giving reasons for which precedent had already been set by Obama, but that Obama had chosen to ignore. Crimea, which was ignored in the context of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by Obama.

Not the same, since Abkhazia and South Ossetia have been disputed territories since the 1990s, and Abkhazia has not been in Georgian control since soon after the dissolution of the USSR. South Ossetia, meanwhile, has a population of only 53,000. Russia claims neither of these states, rather it recognizes their so-called independence.

Crimea, on the other hand, has a population of 2.3 million. It was never previously disputed, and Russia simply annexed it. This is orders of magnitude different. And that's not even getting into the war in eastern Ukraine or all the other things that Putin has done since 2014.

Crimea gained status as an autonomous republic in 1991. Abkhazia actually has the same autonomous republic classification as Crimea.

Are you seriously trying to argue that Crimea was an independent country from 1991 to 2014?

They voted for pro-russian politicians consistently. What changed was the 2014 Ukranian revolution, where the predominant pro-russian party, called the 'party of regions' was effectively purged, eliminating organized pro-russian political elements, this is what caused the russian intervention.

[Mr. Morden]

Why does this Russia meme resonate so much with boring middle class White women?

It's ironic when in 2012 they were all laughing at Romney for wanting a 1980s-era policy regarding Russia. A lot of it is just uncritically regurgitating NYT talking points, to be honest.

In 2012 Russia had not done any of the stuff it's hated for now. The same people who accuse the Klobuchars of wanting to 'start WW3' are also the ones who see things in black and white: as if an country must be permanently Good or Evil for all of history. Instead of looking at the Democrats' attempted friendliness towards Russia in 2012 as evidence that maybe we're not all unreasonably anti-Russia or looking to pick a fight, they take it as another black mark of inconsistency. The notion of judging a government on the basis of its actions escapes them.

I don't see things in black and white. Putin was a terrible leader in 2012, and is a terrible leader today, but there's no shortage of terrible leaders, and that's no reason for a new cold war. It's pathetic how many Democrats are suddenly anti Russia since the Democrats used that to try to deflect from the Wikileaks e-mails. The Democrats have really become everything I hate about Republicans.

I don't get it; the Russians hacked them. Are they supposed to respond to that with kisses and roses? How do you think the GOP would respond if the Russians hacked the RNC and flipped the election to the Democrats, while the Democratic campaign was in touch with the Russians, and the Democratic nominee asked Russia to hack the Republican nominee? The Democrats didn't start any beef with Russia this year. The Russians started a beef with the DNC.

There's no proof that the Wikileaks e-mails came from Russia. Some UK diplomat claims he got them from an American.

Do you sincerely believe it didn't come from Russia? If someone put a gun to your head, and your life depended on getting the right answer, you would really claim it was an American, and not Russia?

We don't know for sure, and even if it was from Russia, the release of some factual e-mails that showed that the DNC was doing what Bernie people knew it was doing anyways certainly isn't enough to start a new cold war. We're such hypocrites since we've interfered so many times with elections around the world, including to help the guy who named Putin his successor, Yeltsin. And China obviously wanted Hillary to win.

You can't even answer no to that question. All you can do is throw around a bunch of red herrings like bailing luggage from a sinking lifeboat.

Why should I have to prove that Russia wasn't involved? Did you ask every anti-war protester to prove that there wasn't WMD in Iraq?

You don't have to prove anything. But clearly you think Russia was involved, and so do I, and it's not unreasonable to want to see an American president stand up for Americans, even if they happen to be in the opposite party, when they're being attacked by a foreign power.

The release of factual information that proved what the Bernie people already knew wasn't an attack on the United State.

Hacking is a crime, and hacking by the military unit of a foreign power is certainly an attack on American citizens on American soil.

You don't start a new cold war because of alleged hacking. Did Germany start a new cold war with the US when we hacked Merkel's phone? It's ridiculous that NSA and CIA supporters are trying to play the victim here.

So...what would you do then?  No investigation of this that's conducted independently of Trump's Justice Department or a Republican majority congressional committee?  OK, "no new Cold War".  But what would you do about it instead?  Nothing?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Why does this Russia meme resonate so much with boring middle class White women?

It's ironic when in 2012 they were all laughing at Romney for wanting a 1980s-era policy regarding Russia. A lot of it is just uncritically regurgitating NYT talking points, to be honest.

In 2012 Russia had not done any of the stuff it's hated for now. The same people who accuse the Klobuchars of wanting to 'start WW3' are also the ones who see things in black and white: as if an country must be permanently Good or Evil for all of history. Instead of looking at the Democrats' attempted friendliness towards Russia in 2012 as evidence that maybe we're not all unreasonably anti-Russia or looking to pick a fight, they take it as another black mark of inconsistency. The notion of judging a government on the basis of its actions escapes them.

I don't see things in black and white. Putin was a terrible leader in 2012, and is a terrible leader today, but there's no shortage of terrible leaders, and that's no reason for a new cold war. It's pathetic how many Democrats are suddenly anti Russia since the Democrats used that to try to deflect from the Wikileaks e-mails. The Democrats have really become everything I hate about Republicans.

I don't get it; the Russians hacked them. Are they supposed to respond to that with kisses and roses? How do you think the GOP would respond if the Russians hacked the RNC and flipped the election to the Democrats, while the Democratic campaign was in touch with the Russians, and the Democratic nominee asked Russia to hack the Republican nominee? The Democrats didn't start any beef with Russia this year. The Russians started a beef with the DNC.

There's no proof that the Wikileaks e-mails came from Russia. Some UK diplomat claims he got them from an American.

Do you sincerely believe it didn't come from Russia? If someone put a gun to your head, and your life depended on getting the right answer, you would really claim it was an American, and not Russia?

We don't know for sure, and even if it was from Russia, the release of some factual e-mails that showed that the DNC was doing what Bernie people knew it was doing anyways certainly isn't enough to start a new cold war. We're such hypocrites since we've interfered so many times with elections around the world, including to help the guy who named Putin his successor, Yeltsin. And China obviously wanted Hillary to win.

You can't even answer no to that question. All you can do is throw around a bunch of red herrings like bailing luggage from a sinking lifeboat.

Why should I have to prove that Russia wasn't involved? Did you ask every anti-war protester to prove that there wasn't WMD in Iraq?

You don't have to prove anything. But clearly you think Russia was involved, and so do I, and it's not unreasonable to want to see an American president stand up for Americans, even if they happen to be in the opposite party, when they're being attacked by a foreign power.

The release of factual information that proved what the Bernie people already knew wasn't an attack on the United State.

Hacking is a crime, and hacking by the military unit of a foreign power is certainly an attack on American citizens on American soil.

You don't start a new cold war because of alleged hacking. Did Germany start a new cold war with the US when we hacked Merkel's phone? It's ridiculous that NSA and CIA supporters are trying to play the victim here.

So...what would you do then?  No investigation of this that's conducted independently of Trump's Justice Department or a Republican majority congressional committee?  OK, "no new Cold War".  But what would you do about it instead?  Nothing?

Well, they can spend 4 years investigating to make even the BENGHAZI!!!!!! Republicans seem sane in comparison.

[Mr. Morden]

Why does this Russia meme resonate so much with boring middle class White women?

It's ironic when in 2012 they were all laughing at Romney for wanting a 1980s-era policy regarding Russia. A lot of it is just uncritically regurgitating NYT talking points, to be honest.

In 2012 Russia had not done any of the stuff it's hated for now. The same people who accuse the Klobuchars of wanting to 'start WW3' are also the ones who see things in black and white: as if an country must be permanently Good or Evil for all of history. Instead of looking at the Democrats' attempted friendliness towards Russia in 2012 as evidence that maybe we're not all unreasonably anti-Russia or looking to pick a fight, they take it as another black mark of inconsistency. The notion of judging a government on the basis of its actions escapes them.

I don't see things in black and white. Putin was a terrible leader in 2012, and is a terrible leader today, but there's no shortage of terrible leaders, and that's no reason for a new cold war. It's pathetic how many Democrats are suddenly anti Russia since the Democrats used that to try to deflect from the Wikileaks e-mails. The Democrats have really become everything I hate about Republicans.

I don't get it; the Russians hacked them. Are they supposed to respond to that with kisses and roses? How do you think the GOP would respond if the Russians hacked the RNC and flipped the election to the Democrats, while the Democratic campaign was in touch with the Russians, and the Democratic nominee asked Russia to hack the Republican nominee? The Democrats didn't start any beef with Russia this year. The Russians started a beef with the DNC.

There's no proof that the Wikileaks e-mails came from Russia. Some UK diplomat claims he got them from an American.

Do you sincerely believe it didn't come from Russia? If someone put a gun to your head, and your life depended on getting the right answer, you would really claim it was an American, and not Russia?

We don't know for sure, and even if it was from Russia, the release of some factual e-mails that showed that the DNC was doing what Bernie people knew it was doing anyways certainly isn't enough to start a new cold war. We're such hypocrites since we've interfered so many times with elections around the world, including to help the guy who named Putin his successor, Yeltsin. And China obviously wanted Hillary to win.

You can't even answer no to that question. All you can do is throw around a bunch of red herrings like bailing luggage from a sinking lifeboat.

Why should I have to prove that Russia wasn't involved? Did you ask every anti-war protester to prove that there wasn't WMD in Iraq?

You don't have to prove anything. But clearly you think Russia was involved, and so do I, and it's not unreasonable to want to see an American president stand up for Americans, even if they happen to be in the opposite party, when they're being attacked by a foreign power.

The release of factual information that proved what the Bernie people already knew wasn't an attack on the United State.

Hacking is a crime, and hacking by the military unit of a foreign power is certainly an attack on American citizens on American soil.

You don't start a new cold war because of alleged hacking. Did Germany start a new cold war with the US when we hacked Merkel's phone? It's ridiculous that NSA and CIA supporters are trying to play the victim here.

So...what would you do then?  No investigation of this that's conducted independently of Trump's Justice Department or a Republican majority congressional committee?  OK, "no new Cold War".  But what would you do about it instead?  Nothing?

Well, they can spend 4 years investigating to make even the BENGHAZI!!!!!! Republicans seem sane in comparison.

Not sure what this is supposed to mean.  We should stop investigating scandals that involve the POTUS because the Republicans made a farce of the Benghazi investigation?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Why does this Russia meme resonate so much with boring middle class White women?

It's ironic when in 2012 they were all laughing at Romney for wanting a 1980s-era policy regarding Russia. A lot of it is just uncritically regurgitating NYT talking points, to be honest.

In 2012 Russia had not done any of the stuff it's hated for now. The same people who accuse the Klobuchars of wanting to 'start WW3' are also the ones who see things in black and white: as if an country must be permanently Good or Evil for all of history. Instead of looking at the Democrats' attempted friendliness towards Russia in 2012 as evidence that maybe we're not all unreasonably anti-Russia or looking to pick a fight, they take it as another black mark of inconsistency. The notion of judging a government on the basis of its actions escapes them.

I don't see things in black and white. Putin was a terrible leader in 2012, and is a terrible leader today, but there's no shortage of terrible leaders, and that's no reason for a new cold war. It's pathetic how many Democrats are suddenly anti Russia since the Democrats used that to try to deflect from the Wikileaks e-mails. The Democrats have really become everything I hate about Republicans.

I don't get it; the Russians hacked them. Are they supposed to respond to that with kisses and roses? How do you think the GOP would respond if the Russians hacked the RNC and flipped the election to the Democrats, while the Democratic campaign was in touch with the Russians, and the Democratic nominee asked Russia to hack the Republican nominee? The Democrats didn't start any beef with Russia this year. The Russians started a beef with the DNC.

There's no proof that the Wikileaks e-mails came from Russia. Some UK diplomat claims he got them from an American.

Do you sincerely believe it didn't come from Russia? If someone put a gun to your head, and your life depended on getting the right answer, you would really claim it was an American, and not Russia?

We don't know for sure, and even if it was from Russia, the release of some factual e-mails that showed that the DNC was doing what Bernie people knew it was doing anyways certainly isn't enough to start a new cold war. We're such hypocrites since we've interfered so many times with elections around the world, including to help the guy who named Putin his successor, Yeltsin. And China obviously wanted Hillary to win.

You can't even answer no to that question. All you can do is throw around a bunch of red herrings like bailing luggage from a sinking lifeboat.

Why should I have to prove that Russia wasn't involved? Did you ask every anti-war protester to prove that there wasn't WMD in Iraq?

You don't have to prove anything. But clearly you think Russia was involved, and so do I, and it's not unreasonable to want to see an American president stand up for Americans, even if they happen to be in the opposite party, when they're being attacked by a foreign power.

The release of factual information that proved what the Bernie people already knew wasn't an attack on the United State.

Hacking is a crime, and hacking by the military unit of a foreign power is certainly an attack on American citizens on American soil.

You don't start a new cold war because of alleged hacking. Did Germany start a new cold war with the US when we hacked Merkel's phone? It's ridiculous that NSA and CIA supporters are trying to play the victim here.

So...what would you do then?  No investigation of this that's conducted independently of Trump's Justice Department or a Republican majority congressional committee?  OK, "no new Cold War".  But what would you do about it instead?  Nothing?

Well, they can spend 4 years investigating to make even the BENGHAZI!!!!!! Republicans seem sane in comparison.

Not sure what this is supposed to mean.  We should stop investigating scandals that involve the POTUS because the Republicans made a farce of the Benghazi investigation?

This is all to deflect from the content of some e-mails released by Wikileaks that were factual and had nothing to do with national security.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

Why does this Russia meme resonate so much with boring middle class White women?

It's ironic when in 2012 they were all laughing at Romney for wanting a 1980s-era policy regarding Russia. A lot of it is just uncritically regurgitating NYT talking points, to be honest.

In 2012 Russia had not done any of the stuff it's hated for now. The same people who accuse the Klobuchars of wanting to 'start WW3' are also the ones who see things in black and white: as if an country must be permanently Good or Evil for all of history. Instead of looking at the Democrats' attempted friendliness towards Russia in 2012 as evidence that maybe we're not all unreasonably anti-Russia or looking to pick a fight, they take it as another black mark of inconsistency. The notion of judging a government on the basis of its actions escapes them.

I don't see things in black and white. Putin was a terrible leader in 2012, and is a terrible leader today, but there's no shortage of terrible leaders, and that's no reason for a new cold war. It's pathetic how many Democrats are suddenly anti Russia since the Democrats used that to try to deflect from the Wikileaks e-mails. The Democrats have really become everything I hate about Republicans.

I don't get it; the Russians hacked them. Are they supposed to respond to that with kisses and roses? How do you think the GOP would respond if the Russians hacked the RNC and flipped the election to the Democrats, while the Democratic campaign was in touch with the Russians, and the Democratic nominee asked Russia to hack the Republican nominee? The Democrats didn't start any beef with Russia this year. The Russians started a beef with the DNC.

There's no proof that the Wikileaks e-mails came from Russia. Some UK diplomat claims he got them from an American.

Do you sincerely believe it didn't come from Russia? If someone put a gun to your head, and your life depended on getting the right answer, you would really claim it was an American, and not Russia?

We don't know for sure, and even if it was from Russia, the release of some factual e-mails that showed that the DNC was doing what Bernie people knew it was doing anyways certainly isn't enough to start a new cold war. We're such hypocrites since we've interfered so many times with elections around the world, including to help the guy who named Putin his successor, Yeltsin. And China obviously wanted Hillary to win.

You can't even answer no to that question. All you can do is throw around a bunch of red herrings like bailing luggage from a sinking lifeboat.

Why should I have to prove that Russia wasn't involved? Did you ask every anti-war protester to prove that there wasn't WMD in Iraq?

You don't have to prove anything. But clearly you think Russia was involved, and so do I, and it's not unreasonable to want to see an American president stand up for Americans, even if they happen to be in the opposite party, when they're being attacked by a foreign power.

The release of factual information that proved what the Bernie people already knew wasn't an attack on the United State.

Hacking is a crime, and hacking by the military unit of a foreign power is certainly an attack on American citizens on American soil.

You don't start a new cold war because of alleged hacking. Did Germany start a new cold war with the US when we hacked Merkel's phone? It's ridiculous that NSA and CIA supporters are trying to play the victim here.

So...what would you do then?  No investigation of this that's conducted independently of Trump's Justice Department or a Republican majority congressional committee?  OK, "no new Cold War".  But what would you do about it instead?  Nothing?

Well, they can spend 4 years investigating to make even the BENGHAZI!!!!!! Republicans seem sane in comparison.

Not sure what this is supposed to mean.  We should stop investigating scandals that involve the POTUS because the Republicans made a farce of the Benghazi investigation?

-Not sure what this is supposed to mean. Where's the scandal?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

jfern is on the same side as Eharding. Very progressive.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

jfern is on the same side as Eharding. Very progressive.

-I have long had respect for genuine progressives. I have long had contempt for those progressives and conservatives who sell out at first opportunity.

[Mr. Morden]

This is all to deflect from the content of some e-mails released by Wikileaks that were factual and had nothing to do with national security.

So do nothing to investigate Russia’s role then?  Don’t even investigate, because it’s a “deflection”?  Well OK then.  And of course it has to do with national security.  If the intelligence service of another country is hacking information from American politicians and then releasing it strategically to influence political outcomes in this country, then that’s a national security issue.  It's also a national security issue if they hold any more information on American politicians that can be used as blackmail.  That's why it should be investigated.

Anyway, here’s Klobuchar speaking at that Ukrainian event yesterday:

http://www.fox9.com/news/238290738-story

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

The CIA leaking of info to the WaPo to take down Flynn should definitely be investigated. Hacking can be done by anybody; there's no need to investigate what anybody can do all the time.

Klobuchar's another Russophobic moron. Who's paying her?