Suck it up, Donald.

Innuendo? Not unless you join Trump in discrediting the United States’ multiple intelligence services.

They’ve just confirmed, and reported to POTUS & Citizen Trump, that there is credible evidence that Russia does have incriminating/embarrassing material on Trump.

Which they would naturally be using to control Trump — after rigging the U.S. election to put him in office. (All that talk about “The election is rigged!” was probably just a compromised Trump trying to warn us… Who was listening?)

Uh, odd way of phrasing it. But what’s wrong with what you quoted??? Or is this just a hate spew about scientists who DARE to tell you that AGW is real?

“There’s a word for what you’ve posted here: innuendo.”

Tell me, is the word for it “proven wrong”? No? Then so what.

“And it may well be the case that he’d like to have something on Donald J. Trump ”

Money. Rex Tillerson put in charge of things like sanctions against Russia for the Ukraine issues. Meanwhile Exxon (Rex’s company) has a 1/5 trillion dollar deal that was killed by the sanctions.

“But, really, from notorious Leftists’ favorite poster-boy for Deplorable White Guy”

The amusing thing here is that you right wingers are all against “PC” hate against white guess, especially old and rich ones, yet here you are doing exactly that, WHILE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE LEFT.

But guess what you said there is? Innuendo.

“that Trump would concede and make himself amenable to the pressures and demands which should then follow?”

Rex Tillerson.

“Had she been elected instead of Trump, what reason is there to suppose that Hillary Clinton could be less susceptible to such an effort on the part of Putin?”

You are just insisting that it COULD have been as bad. Begging the question, innuendo and blank assumption.

And rightwingers call themselves “rational”!!! LOL!

“because, first, “the offspring””

The term “offspring” in that law is defined in that law, and it covers all of those nepotistic payoffs.

And the republicans call themselves “the law and order” party!

” Jared Kushner and his wife are the ones in the meetings”

Jared’s wife being…? Oh, that’s right, Drumpf’s daughter. What was that about “those in (1) are not the same ones in (2)”?

“That’s neither news nor something that can be cordoned off from Trump’s decisions.”

So you agree with the quoted sections you just derided with zero evidence or explanation…

“Putin probably owns Trump. In the past, Trump has spent enough high profile time traveling in and out of Russia, that any smart intelligence agency would have long ago gotten the goods on such a sloppy self absorbed person. Assume there are movies. Young girls. Whatever. Putin probably owns Trump. The ex KGB officer probably owns a lot of people, a lot of foreign rich or influential individuals. That’s how these things work.

“Trump is a man that relies on the image of great personal wealth. But, if he has great personal wealth it is a mere couple of billion or so. Alternatively, he may have mostly debt and a few hundred million handy. Nobody knows, and he’s not releasing that information. The point is, he views himself as righteously rich, but he may not be as rich as he considered his right. There are a lot of hungry people in this world, and he is not one of them. But he probably thinks he is.

“Putin is the richest person on the planet now or ever. He beats second place Bill Gates by several billion. Putin has gotten this rich by exploiting his position as the permanent leader of Russia (despite a democracy there).

Did I mention that Putin probably owns Trump?”

And scientists claim to be intellectually rigorous.

There’s a word for what you’ve posted here: innuendo. It stinks. And I’m no fan–far, far from it–of Vladimir Putin. If you regard him as an assassin, a man who puts out “hits” on his foes, has opponents poisoned (Alexander Litvinenko – 2006) or shot (opposition leader Boris Nemtsov, 2015; Anna Politkovskaya – 2006) I agree with you.

And it may well be the case that he’d like to have something on Donald J. Trump which is so solid and so damning that it would seem to place Trump in an impossible position. I wonder: after all that’s been alleged against Trump–both true and false, without scuttling his prospects–what would that be?

But, really, from notorious Leftists’ favorite poster-boy for Deplorable White Guy to Putin’s puppet because Putin has something terrible to contemplate in knowledge about Trump is quite a stretch.

And what is it exactly about Trump that we’ve actually seen and can point to that suggests that, if an attempt to coerce him by threats–of what, revealing terrible information about his past (or even present?)?–from Putin or others working for him, that Trump would concede and make himself amenable to the pressures and demands which should then follow?

Had she been elected instead of Trump, what reason is there to suppose that Hillary Clinton could be less susceptible to such an effort on the part of Putin? Shouldn’t he want to “have the ‘goods'” on whomever it is that gets into the White House? Who’d have been the easier target? Trump or Clinton?, for crying out loud!

_____________________

By the way, as I understand it so far, these factors are somewhat off the mark

1) Put the offspring in charge of the business.

2) Place the offspring in the room at all important presidential meetings.

because, first, “the offspring” in case #1 above are not the same offspring as those in case #2 above. Jared Kushner and his wife are the ones in the meetings, the ones serving as counselors to, respectively, father-in-law and father. The offspring minding the Trump businesses are the Trump sons–who aren’t sitting in on high-level meetings or advising their father on political and economic affairs.

We know that Trump’s routine interests are already firmly established as being those of the extremely wealthy corporate elite. That’s neither news nor something that can be cordoned off from Trump’s decisions.

I am afraid mankind hasn’t lived together as one good family since Cain killed Abel.

Nothing wrong with wishing though.