DOJ Initial Russia Hearings

[knapplc]

 

This is one of the most significant statements I have heard in a very very long time.

https://twitter.com/ava/status/862680443937619968

This isn't a recent statement, right? I swear I saw this exact clip on here months ago. Doesn't make it any less impactful. Putin used the voting population's desire for BS click bait confirming their own beliefs against us, and the masses didn't notice or don't care.

 

 

It's from 3/30/17.

[BigRedBuster]

I'm confused on something, so maybe someone here can explain in.

 

Trump claims that Comey told him three times that he wasn't under investigation. This seems like it's a huge issue right now.

 

Question....why??

Let's say Comey WAS investigating Trump and Trump flat out asked him if he was under investigation. Wouldn't it be possibly normal for Comey to possibly say "no" so that Trump isn't aware of the investigation and possibly destroy evidence..etc.?

Trump seems to think that this is some huge conspiracy theory by Comey simply telling him this.

 

FYI.....I believe the FBI's statements on this.

 

So....why is this such a point of contention?

[knapplc]

I'm confused on something, so maybe someone here can explain in.

 

Trump claims that Comey told him three times that he wasn't under investigation. This seems like it's a huge issue right now.

 

Question....why??

 

Let's say Comey WAS investigating Trump and Trump flat out asked him if he was under investigation. Wouldn't it be possibly normal for Comey to possibly say "no" so that Trump isn't aware of the investigation and possibly destroy evidence..etc.?

 

Trump seems to think that this is some huge conspiracy theory by Comey simply telling him this.

 

FYI.....I believe the FBI's statements on this.

 

So....why is this such a point of contention?

 

This has a very "Peter denies Jesus in the courtyard" feel, doesn't it? Peter is asked three times if he was one of Jesus' disciples and he denies it three times, making Jesus' prediction come true.

 

I can see how Trump could consider himself another leader in the mold of Jesus. He's nutso that way.

 

 

 

 

Regarding your question, where is it a point of contention? I don't think Comey denied this, or responded to it in any way. The only person pushing this narrative is Mister Twitter, far as I know.

[Nebfanatic]

I'm confused on something, so maybe someone here can explain in.

 

Trump claims that Comey told him three times that he wasn't under investigation. This seems like it's a huge issue right now.

 

Question....why??

 

Let's say Comey WAS investigating Trump and Trump flat out asked him if he was under investigation. Wouldn't it be possibly normal for Comey to possibly say "no" so that Trump isn't aware of the investigation and possibly destroy evidence..etc.?

 

Trump seems to think that this is some huge conspiracy theory by Comey simply telling him this.

 

FYI.....I believe the FBI's statements on this.

 

So....why is this such a point of contention?

what I was thinking as well. Why does Comey have to tell Trump anything anyway?

[Moiraine]

Did Trump not also think Comey's testimony proved him innocent?

 

Trump is kinda dumb you guys.

[BigRedBuster]

 

I'm confused on something, so maybe someone here can explain in.

 

Trump claims that Comey told him three times that he wasn't under investigation. This seems like it's a huge issue right now.

 

Question....why??

 

Let's say Comey WAS investigating Trump and Trump flat out asked him if he was under investigation. Wouldn't it be possibly normal for Comey to possibly say "no" so that Trump isn't aware of the investigation and possibly destroy evidence..etc.?

 

Trump seems to think that this is some huge conspiracy theory by Comey simply telling him this.

 

FYI.....I believe the FBI's statements on this.

 

So....why is this such a point of contention?

 

This has a very "Peter denies Jesus in the courtyard" feel, doesn't it? Peter is asked three times if he was one of Jesus' disciples and he denies it three times, making Jesus' prediction come true.

 

I can see how Trump could consider himself another leader in the mold of Jesus. He's nutso that way.

 

 

 

 

Regarding your question, where is it a point of contention? I don't think Comey denied this, or responded to it in any way. The only person pushing this narrative is Mister Twitter, far as I know.

 

LOL...I actually had thought of the Peter/Jesus story too.

 

I don't think Comey has responded because it's came out after he was fired...(I believe).

 

McCabe was asked about it yesterday in the intelligence hearing. He emphatically stated that no member of the FBI would ever tell someone if they were or weren't under investigation. I think someone else from the intelligence community said the same thing yesterday. Then, Trump sends this tweet out about the conversation possibly being "taped".

 

It just seems like for some reason Trump is pushing this narrative and everyone else involved is denying it and Trump becomes more and more belligerent about it.

 

It just doesn't make sense to me.

[TGHusker]

This is one of the most significant statements I have heard in a very very long time.

 

Ok, I couldn't get the video to play and that is my Senator Langsford on the screen. What did it say in a nutshell? Thanks

[TGHusker]

 

 

I'm confused on something, so maybe someone here can explain in.

 

Trump claims that Comey told him three times that he wasn't under investigation. This seems like it's a huge issue right now.

 

Question....why??

 

Let's say Comey WAS investigating Trump and Trump flat out asked him if he was under investigation. Wouldn't it be possibly normal for Comey to possibly say "no" so that Trump isn't aware of the investigation and possibly destroy evidence..etc.?

 

Trump seems to think that this is some huge conspiracy theory by Comey simply telling him this.

 

FYI.....I believe the FBI's statements on this.

 

So....why is this such a point of contention?

 

This has a very "Peter denies Jesus in the courtyard" feel, doesn't it? Peter is asked three times if he was one of Jesus' disciples and he denies it three times, making Jesus' prediction come true.

 

I can see how Trump could consider himself another leader in the mold of Jesus. He's nutso that way.

 

 

 

 

Regarding your question, where is it a point of contention? I don't think Comey denied this, or responded to it in any way. The only person pushing this narrative is Mister Twitter, far as I know.

 

LOL...I actually had thought of the Peter/Jesus story too.

 

I don't think Comey has responded because it's came out after he was fired...(I believe).

 

McCabe was asked about it yesterday in the intelligence hearing. He emphatically stated that no member of the FBI would ever tell someone if they were or weren't under investigation. I think someone else from the intelligence community said the same thing yesterday. Then, Trump sends this tweet out about the conversation possibly being "taped".

 

It just seems like for some reason Trump is pushing this narrative and everyone else involved is denying it and Trump becomes more and more belligerent about it.

 

It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

He is going to explode into a mental basket case. Time to look at the 25th Amendment Section 4

 

 

So, what’s Article 4 to the 25th Amendment? In the abstract, the amendment itself is about presidential succession, and includes language about the power of the office when a president is incapacitated. But Digby recently highlighted the specific text of growing relevance:

“Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President

is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,

the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.”

And what does that mean exactly?

 

Well, it means Congress isn’t the only institution that can remove a president from office between elections. Under the 25th Amendment, a sitting vice president and a majority of the executive branch’s cabinet could, on their own, agree to transfer power out of the hands of a sitting president. At that point, those officials would notify Congress, and the vice president would assume the office as the acting president.

 

And what if the challenged president wasn’t on board with the plan to remove him/her from the office? As Vox recently explained, “If the president wants to dispute this move, he can, but then it would be up to Congress to settle the matter with a vote. A two-thirds majority in both houses would be necessary to keep the vice president in charge. If that threshold isn’t reached, the president would regain his powers.”

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/why-the-25th-amendment-suddenly-getting-so-much-attention

[BigRedBuster]

 

This is one of the most significant statements I have heard in a very very long time.

 

Ok, I couldn't get the video to play and that is my Senator Langsford on the screen. What did it say in a nutshell? Thanks

 

You really need to find a way to watch the clip.

 

The Senator asks the intelligence officer why Russia interference into our elections has become more aggressive and successful.

 

The answer was chilling.

 

He basically explained that it's because the now President Trump used their tactics in his campaign. Russia would tweet conspiracy theories to him under "gray sites" and he would believe them and then trump and his campaign would repeat those "facts" on the campaign trail and people would believe them.

 

He claimed he knows of specific "gray sites" that know when Trump gets on twitter and they tweet to him.

 

He said that this will work up until we figure out in our country how to figure out what is facts and what isn't.

 

Again...figure out how to listen to the clip. It's important to hear.

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

I'm confused on something, so maybe someone here can explain in.

 

Trump claims that Comey told him three times that he wasn't under investigation. This seems like it's a huge issue right now.

 

Question....why??

 

Let's say Comey WAS investigating Trump and Trump flat out asked him if he was under investigation. Wouldn't it be possibly normal for Comey to possibly say "no" so that Trump isn't aware of the investigation and possibly destroy evidence..etc.?

 

Trump seems to think that this is some huge conspiracy theory by Comey simply telling him this.

 

FYI.....I believe the FBI's statements on this.

 

So....why is this such a point of contention?

 

This has a very "Peter denies Jesus in the courtyard" feel, doesn't it? Peter is asked three times if he was one of Jesus' disciples and he denies it three times, making Jesus' prediction come true.

 

I can see how Trump could consider himself another leader in the mold of Jesus. He's nutso that way.

 

 

 

 

Regarding your question, where is it a point of contention? I don't think Comey denied this, or responded to it in any way. The only person pushing this narrative is Mister Twitter, far as I know.

 

LOL...I actually had thought of the Peter/Jesus story too.

 

I don't think Comey has responded because it's came out after he was fired...(I believe).

 

McCabe was asked about it yesterday in the intelligence hearing. He emphatically stated that no member of the FBI would ever tell someone if they were or weren't under investigation. I think someone else from the intelligence community said the same thing yesterday. Then, Trump sends this tweet out about the conversation possibly being "taped".

 

It just seems like for some reason Trump is pushing this narrative and everyone else involved is denying it and Trump becomes more and more belligerent about it.

 

It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

 

You're over thinking it.

 

Everyone involved is saying that Comey wouldn't say that. I would think a neutral observer would assume that Comey wouldn't tell him that, since he was just fired for not pledging his loyalty to Trump.

 

Trump's a counterpuncher that loves to push conspiracy theories. He wants to counterpunch to wow his base, and he knows that pushing whacko claims against all available evidence will generate headlines.

 

He doesn't like being told he's wrong, and insisting upon this obvious lie is the only way to be right in this situation.

 

Shoot, he milked the birther thing for upwards of 5 years. Same deal, that was just more racist.

 

That's pretty much it.

[knapplc]

But it wasn't to ensure Comey's loyalty. Nope. Definitely not that.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Very very interesting...

 

 

 

[QMany]

[QMany]

[knapplc]

House majority leader to colleagues in 2016: ‘I think Putin pays’ Trump

 

KIEV, Ukraine — A month before Donald Trump clinched the Republican nomination, one of his closest allies in Congress — House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy — made a politically explosive assertion in a private conversation on Capitol Hill with his fellow GOP leaders: that Trump could be the beneficiary of payments from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

 

“There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump,” McCarthy (R-Calif.) said, according to a recording of the June 15, 2016 exchange, which was listened to and verified by The Washington Post. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher is a Californian Republican known in Congress as a fervent defender of Putin and Russia.

 

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) immediately interjected, stopping the conversation from further exploring McCarthy’s assertion, and swore the Republicans present to secrecy.

 

Before the conversation, McCarthy and Ryan had emerged from separate talks at the U.S. Capitol with Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, who had described a Kremlin tactic of financing populist politicians to undercut Eastern European democratic institutions.

 

News had just broken the day before in The Washington Post that Russian government hackers had penetrated the computer network of the Democratic National Committee, prompting McCarthy to shift the conversation from Russian meddling in Europe to events closer to home.

 

Some of the lawmakers laughed at McCarthy’s comment. Then McCarthy quickly added: “Swear to God.”

 

Ryan instructed his Republican lieutenants to keep the conversation private, saying: “No leaks...This is how we know we’re a real family here.”

 

Evan McMullin, who in his role as policy director to the House Republican Conference participated in the June 15 conversation, said: “It’s true that Majority Leader McCarthy said that he thought candidate Trump was on the Kremlin’s payroll. Speaker Ryan was concerned about that leaking.”

 

McMullin ran for president last year as an independent and has been a vocal critic of Trump.

 

When initially asked to comment on the exchange, Brendan Buck, a spokesman for Ryan, said: “That never happened,” and Matt Sparks, a spokesman for McCarthy, said: “The idea that McCarthy would assert this is absurd and false.”

 

After being told that The Post would cite a recording of the exchange, Buck, speaking for the GOP House leadership, said: “This entire year-old exchange was clearly an attempt at humor. No one believed the majority leader was seriously asserting that Donald Trump or any of our members were being paid by the Russians. What’s more, the speaker and leadership team have repeatedly spoken out against Russia’s interference in our election, and the House continues to investigate that activity.”