Nope. I stated the opposite: that all of the evidence already pointed us in this direction. No blind trust required.
>The mistake you make here is to assume that we can apply common sense
Ah, yes, the ol' "who ya' gonna trust, me or your lyin' eyes?" defense. Sorry, I prefer that my fellow Americans leave our eyes and brains switched on. We really need them these days, what with the shills and propagandists running rampant.
>the landscape of "facts" we are considering has been contrived and heavily influenced
The landscape of facts to which many of us are referring don't require quotes and include the otherwise inexplicable words out of Trump's mouth, coupled with his actions, removal of key parts of the RNC platform in Russia's favor, secret connections with his aides and the subsequent lying and admissions, etc. We know enough as irrefutable fact without relying on our intelligence agencies. Odd that you suggest we ignore it all.
>I'm not arguing that Russia did not meddle...our default judgement should be to de-escalate rather than escalate tensions
This argument comes straight out of Trump's mouth and makes no sense. It's essentially an argument for encouraging any adversary who wishes to extract concessions from us to simply attack us.
And, where else do we advocate responding to direct attacks with kindness? Where else do we advocate not holding aggressors responsible and instead to appease or "de-escalate", as you put it? Indeed the normally bellicose Trump himself has inexplicably treated our allies far less favorably than a foreign aggressor. Now, why is that?
I do not pay attention to Trump or anything he says. I think your perspective on these issues is unduly influenced by Trump's claims and your conviction that if Trump claims something it must be false.
> And, where else do we advocate responding to direct attacks with kindness? Where else do we advocate not holding aggressors responsible and instead to appease or "de-escalate", as you put it? Indeed the normally bellicose Trump himself has inexplicably treated our allies far less favorably than a foreign aggressor. Now, why is that?
This is the argument George W. Bush made about Iraq and why it was necessary to overthrow Saddam.
> Odd that you suggest we ignore it all.
> Ah, yes, the ol' "who ya' gonna trust, me or your lyin' eyes?" defense
I think it depends on what you consider evidence. If you can't imagine renting a VPS in Ukraine and running some scripts on it, I suppose the evidence is convincing.
>I think your perspective on these issues is unduly influenced by Trump's claims
Nope. Just the facts.
>This is the argument George W. Bush made about Iraq
"Because, Iraq" is not a magical dismissal for everything the U.S. does forevermore. It's possible (and sensible) to disagree with the Iraq War and Russian attacks on our democracy. In fact, that's where most Americans stand.
>If you can't imagine renting a VPS in Ukraine and running some scripts
Yeah, that or the 400lb guy in his basement makes more sense than what the U.S. intelligence agencies concluded.
But, AGAIN, ignore the agencies and just look at Trump's counterintuitive, but consistent behavior.
Nope. I stated the opposite: that all of the evidence already pointed us in this direction. No blind trust required.
>The mistake you make here is to assume that we can apply common sense
Ah, yes, the ol' "who ya' gonna trust, me or your lyin' eyes?" defense. Sorry, I prefer that my fellow Americans leave our eyes and brains switched on. We really need them these days, what with the shills and propagandists running rampant.
>the landscape of "facts" we are considering has been contrived and heavily influenced
The landscape of facts to which many of us are referring don't require quotes and include the otherwise inexplicable words out of Trump's mouth, coupled with his actions, removal of key parts of the RNC platform in Russia's favor, secret connections with his aides and the subsequent lying and admissions, etc. We know enough as irrefutable fact without relying on our intelligence agencies. Odd that you suggest we ignore it all.
>I'm not arguing that Russia did not meddle...our default judgement should be to de-escalate rather than escalate tensions
This argument comes straight out of Trump's mouth and makes no sense. It's essentially an argument for encouraging any adversary who wishes to extract concessions from us to simply attack us.
And, where else do we advocate responding to direct attacks with kindness? Where else do we advocate not holding aggressors responsible and instead to appease or "de-escalate", as you put it? Indeed the normally bellicose Trump himself has inexplicably treated our allies far less favorably than a foreign aggressor. Now, why is that?