Jump to content


DOJ Initial Russia Hearings


Recommended Posts


14 hours ago, schriznoeder said:

 

 

 

 

I always assumed that the FBI was lying to Trump when they told him they weren't investigating them, because I thought they had to be investigating him, and it's probably perfectly legal for the FBI to lie to someone they're investigating.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
23 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

I always assumed that the FBI was lying to Trump when they told him they weren't investigating them, because I thought they had to be investigating him, and it's probably perfectly legal for the FBI to lie to someone they're investigating.


This thread points out that there were two separate investigations at that point: the investigation into Russian interference in our election and the counterintelligence investigation into whether Trumps as wittingly or unwittingly working to advance Russian interests.

 

Comes could've in good conscience told Trump he wasn't a subject of the former while they were actively monitoring him as the central subject of the latter. He wouldn't be lying.

 

(No idea the qualifications or identity of this person, but it's a compelling thread and looks really bad for Trump, IMO)

 

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

53 minutes ago, Clifford Franklin said:

This thread points out that there were two separate investigations at that point: the investigation into Russian interference in our election and the counterintelligence investigation into whether Trumps as wittingly or unwittingly working to advance Russian interests.

 

 

I know... I always assumed there were. I thought maybe they didn't find anything on the latter, but maybe they have.

 

The tweet was a good read, but if the GOP leaders are implicated, they're not going to go down without a fight and might protect Trump regardless. I think we might still have to vote him out.

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

I know... I always assumed there were. I thought maybe they didn't find anything on the latter, but maybe they have.

  

The tweet was a good read, but if the GOP leaders are implicated, they're not going to go down without a fight and might protect Trump regardless. I think we might still have to vote him out.

 

My read on the NYT article is that the counterintel investigation is ongoing since it was handed off to Mueller from the FBI.

 

I had a bit of a worrisome thought this morning. What if a third party candidate like Bloomberg does well enough in 2020 that no one gets to 270? In that situation the House would decide the next president BUT... each state's delegation gets one vote. Although the Dems controls the House, enough of their reps come from deeply blue states like CA and NY that they don't have majority representation in enough states to get to 26 votes in the House.

 

Imagine a scenario where Trump loses the popular vote (and potentially doesn't have the most EVs) but a minority of House Republicans re-elect him because they have more majorities in rural/red states. Very federalist and very dark scenario that would continue to leave 60+% of the country up a creek.

Link to comment

This guy is a straight up puppet. What innocent person acts this way?

 

 

Quote

President Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to conceal details of his conversations with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, including on at least one occasion taking possession of the notes of his own interpreter and instructing the linguist not to discuss what had transpired with other administration officials, current and former U.S. officials said.

 

Trump did so after a meeting with Putin in 2017 in Hamburg that was also attended by then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. U.S. officials learned of Trump’s actions when a White House adviser and a senior State Department official sought information from the interpreter beyond a readout shared by Tillerson.

 

The constraints that Trump imposed are part of a broader pattern by the president of shielding his communications with Putin from public scrutiny and preventing even high-ranking officials in his own administration from fully knowing what he has told one of the United States’ main adversaries.


As a result, U.S. officials said there is no detailed record, even in classified files, of Trump’s face-to-face interactions with the Russian leader at five locations over the past two years. Such a gap would be unusual in any presidency, let alone one that Russia sought to install through what U.S. intelligence agencies have described as an unprecedented campaign of election interference.

...

Trump allies said the president thinks the presence of subordinates impairs his ability to establish a rapport with Putin, and that his desire for secrecy may also be driven by embarrassing leaks that occurred early in his presidency.
...

The meeting in Hamburg happened several months after The Washington Post and other news organizations revealed details about what Trump had told senior Russian officials during a meeting with Russian officials in the Oval Office. Trump disclosed classified information about a terror plot, called former FBI director James B. Comey a “nut job,” and said that firing Comey had removed “great pressure” on his relationship with Russia.

 

The White House launched internal leak hunts after that and other episodes, and sharply curtailed the distribution within the National Security Council of memos on the president’s interactions with foreign leaders.

 

I honestly don't understand how Trump supporters can defend this. Knowing what we know, how can you possibly be OK with him meeting several times privately with the man who oversaw the assault on our democracy, and subsequently suppressing any and all details about what was said? You'd have to be a willfully ignorant rube.

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

3 hours ago, Clifford Franklin said:

I honestly don't understand how Trump supporters can defend this. Knowing what we know, how can you possibly be OK with him meeting several times privately with the man who oversaw the assault on our democracy, and subsequently suppressing any and all details about what was said? You'd have to be a willfully ignorant rube.

Trump is their guy, leader of their team, and acknowledging Russia's actions would cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election. I wouldn't even call it willful ignorance. They've got their news sources that they like, and said sources will never touch this in a truly critical light. Anyone else reporting or commenting on the treason at hand is a left wing nutjob to them, because that's how their media and elected officials have painted things for such a long time.

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
19 hours ago, Clifford Franklin said:

 

My read on the NYT article is that the counterintel investigation is ongoing since it was handed off to Mueller from the FBI.

 

I had a bit of a worrisome thought this morning. What if a third party candidate like Bloomberg does well enough in 2020 that no one gets to 270? In that situation the House would decide the next president BUT... each state's delegation gets one vote. Although the Dems controls the House, enough of their reps come from deeply blue states like CA and NY that they don't have majority representation in enough states to get to 26 votes in the House.

 

Imagine a scenario where Trump loses the popular vote (and potentially doesn't have the most EVs) but a minority of House Republicans re-elect him because they have more majorities in rural/red states. Very federalist and very dark scenario that would continue to leave 60+% of the country up a creek.

 

I've had similar thoughts. Luckily, the likelihood of that scenario happening is slim to quite slim, so I try not to go there. But based on how volatile and unpredictable everything has become, we can't rule it out completely. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

A well put-together timeline of events from July, 2017.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here's the text of this rather long twitter thread:

 

THREAD: Has anyone noticed the very disturbing overlap between Trump’s insistence on preventing his own staff from learning about discussions with Putin at the Hamburg G20 meeting in July 2017 and how he handled initial revelations about the infamous Trump Tower meeting? 1/
Consider the following timeline: on July 7–8, 2017,Trump attends the G-20 summit in Hamburg, Germany the site of his first face to face encounter with Putin. 2/ Dw3-Z0OW0AAKzhd.jpg
On the morning of July 7, 2017, the New York Times informs the White House--for the first time--that it has learned about the Trump Tower meeting between Don Jr., Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort and a Russian lawyer with Russian government connections, Natalya Veselnitskaya. 3/ Dw3-zqlXgAEAXUO.jpg
The New York Times asks the White House to comment. 4/
On the afternoon of July 7, 2017, Trump and Putin, accompanied only by Rex Tillerson, Sergei Lavrov and their interpreters, meet for 2 and 1/2 hours. 5/ Dw3_IEoX0AAQ9AF.jpg
Later that evening on July 7, 2017, during the formal G20 summit dinner, Trump seeks out Putin for another conversation. Putin’s interpreter is the only other participant. 7/ Dw3_77aW0AA55Dr.jpg
As Bremmer points out, Trump oddly doesn’t even inform his own staff afterwards that he’s had this second conversation with Putin. 9/ Dw4BGpiWoAAGpgI.jpg
Don Jr.’s statement to @nytimes emphasizes: “We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children” at the meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya 11/ Dw4CPuXXcAAG6kI.jpg
On July 11, 2017 the same @nytimes team breaks the story that Don Jr was told in advance that Veselnitskaya intended to provide dirt on the Hillary Clinton campaign at the behest of the Russian government. Don Jr. replies: "I love it." 13/
In the same interview, Trump also floats the idea that there was nothing inappropriate about his senior-most campaign officials meeting with foreign emissaries who wanted to help his campaign. “Who wouldn’t have taken a meeting like that?” 15/ Dw4ETVdXgAAV79W.jpg
All of this begs the question: What did Trump and Putin actually discuss at that impromptu one-on-one dinner meeting at the Hamburg G20 on July 7, 2017? 16/
Moreover, why did they huddle together by themselves within hours of the White House learning that the at-that-point-still-secret Trump Tower meeting between Trump, Jr. and the Russians was about to become public? 17/
Put another way, shortly after the New York Times reached out to the White House to ask about a secret meeting with the Russians, Trump himself sought a secret meeting with the Russians. 18/
h/t Former federal prosecutor who helped compile this timeline and series of as-yet unanswered questions END
  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

When Mueller reveals this can of worms, it is going to shock the nation. One more day of this is one more day of endangering our country.  If it is found that GOP leaders were also aware of this, then I hope there is a big house cleaning.    McConnell and House GOP leaders have protected Trump at the expense of the country.   I hope the Dems can bring about some transparency without overplaying their hand by which it empowers Trump supporters and gets Trump reelected.

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...