Mueller is putting together a strong team to follow the money

6/17/2017 10:08:16 AM

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/338266-trump-administration-pushing-to-weaken-russia-sanctions-bill-report

Quote :

"President Trump’s White House is expected to push House Republicans to change the Senate’s Russia sanctions bill to make it more friendly to Russia, according to a new report. A senior administration official said that the White House is concerned that the bill will hurt U.S.-Russia relations and the administration is hoping to work with Republicans in the House to soften the bill, Politico reported. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) told Politico that he has heard the Trump administration is asking House members to “slow and block” the legislation."

6/17/2017 8:37:23 PM

We need to open up an investigation into the Russian interference in the Georgia 6th election. Democrats brought out the same gameplan as November and still lost so one can only conclude that this election was also hacked.

6/21/2017 1:48:59 AM

Actually all of that post is awful.

Ossoff barely mentioned Trump at all unlike the entire D platform in November which was anti-Trump. Late on he made it about healthcare in a district where most have employer-sponsored. Probably would have been served better to make it MORE about Trump in this case.

[Edited on June 21, 2017 at 7:51 AM. Reason : He was also a boring moderate]

6/21/2017 7:43:45 AM

^ Tulsi was so hyped that Ossoff lost last night he shitposted in 3 political threads in the span of two hours

6/21/2017 8:49:15 AM

lol

6/21/2017 9:32:49 AM

To be fair this entire thread is 17 pages of conspiracy theory shit posting.

6/21/2017 10:43:43 AM

kinda related, mainly just an interesting read(and bonus for triggering the bot by using buzzfeed)

Buzzfeed has a 4 part serious about suspected kremlin assasination plots:

Part 1
Poison in the System
When a financier dropped dead in Britain shortly after exposing a vast Russian crime, police said it was not suspicious. But with his inquest now underway, BuzzFeed News has uncovered explosive evidence of a suspected Kremlin assassination plot – and a secret assignation in Paris on the eve of his death – that the British authorities have sidelined.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/heidiblake/poison-in-the-system?utm_term=.go8Nxgp0#.qsxYwJjG

Part 2
From Russia With Blood
Lavish London mansions. A hand-painted Rolls-Royce. And eight dead friends. For the British fixer Scot Young, working for Vladimir Putin's most vocal critic meant stunning perks – but also constant danger. His gruesome death is one of 14 that US spy agencies have linked to Russia – but the UK police shut down every last case. A bombshell cache of documents today reveals the full story of a ring of death on British soil that the government has ignored.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/heidiblake/from-russia-with-blood-14-suspected-hits-on-british-soil?utm_term=.mkxnQZ5v#.wg0oYKp6

Part 3
The Man Who Knew Too Much
His nuclear research helped a judge determine that former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko had been assassinated – likely on Putin’s orders. Just months after the verdict, the scientist himself was found stabbed to death with two knives. Police deemed it a suicide, but US intelligence officials suspect it was murder.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/janebradley/scientist-who-helped-connect-litvinenkos-murder-to-the?utm_term=.guZ3mLa2#.euz3Rmxq

Part 4
The Secrets Of The Spy In The Bag
After the dead body of an MI6 spy was found locked in a sports bag in London, police said the death was “probably an accident” – but British and American spy agencies have secret intelligence suggesting Gareth Williams may have been assassinated over highly sensitive work on Russia.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomwarren/secrets-of-the-spy-in-the-bag?utm_term=.evMdDm17#.ldaX5A7Z

6/21/2017 12:27:16 PM

I don't have a link since it was on terminal but Bloomberg had a loooonngggg article about Felix Sater and his connections to Trump business world.

I'll edit with link when I find it.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-21/trump-russia-and-those-shadowy-sater-deals-at-bayrock


[Edited on June 21, 2017 at 12:31 PM. Reason : There it is]

6/21/2017 12:30:25 PM

Buzzfeed conspiracy articles... this is just adorable. Can we move this thread to chit chat now?

Or can we get a new "Conspiracy Theory" section for the fluoride guy and dtownral, or anyone else who watches too much FakeNews?

6/21/2017 2:19:35 PM

Quote :

"Buzzfeed has a 4 part serious about suspected kremlin assasination plots"

Read all of those over the past two days or so. Crazy shit.

6/21/2017 3:53:48 PM

What is the media going to do when Trump meets Putin?

Is CNN going to need an auditorium for their panel to fit to analyze and discuss?

6/22/2017 7:26:08 PM

Televised news is awful. All of them.

Best to just skip television all together and simply read the news.

6/22/2017 8:01:56 PM

Reading the new WaPo article and it still baffles me that Democrats were scared off by McConnell from really calling out what they KNEW was going on. Bunch of politically correct idiots.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/world/national-security/obama-putin-election-hacking/?utm_term=.96ab5f8965dd&tid=sm_tw

(I'd appreciate it if you guys could ignore JCE when he wakes up and spams about fake news in this thread)

[Edited on June 23, 2017 at 8:13 AM. Reason : Take with a grain of salt but that article is bananas -- and highly detailed]

6/23/2017 8:01:20 AM

can you post some highlights for those of us who are not subscribers?

6/23/2017 8:33:10 AM

May take a few posts but I'll post in entirety

Quote :

"Obama’s secret struggle to punish Russia for Putin’s election assault The White House debated various options to punish Russia, but facing obstacles and potential risks, it ultimately failed to exact a heavy toll on the Kremlin for its election meddling. Early last August, an envelope with extraordinary handling restrictions arrived at the White House. Sent by courier from the CIA, it carried “eyes only” instructions that its contents be shown to just four people: President Barack Obama and three senior aides. Inside was an intelligence bombshell, a report drawn from sourcing deep inside the Russian government that detailed Russian President Vladi­mir Putin’s direct involvement in a cyber campaign to disrupt and discredit the U.S. presidential race. But it went further. The intelligence captured Putin’s specific instructions on the operation’s audacious objectives — defeat or at least damage the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, and help elect her opponent, Donald Trump. At that point, the outlines of the Russian assault on the U.S. election were increasingly apparent. Hackers with ties to Russian intelligence services had been rummaging through Democratic Party computer networks, as well as some Republican systems, for more than a year. In July, the FBI had opened an investigation of contacts between Russian officials and Trump associates. And on July 22, nearly 20,000 emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee were dumped online by WikiLeaks. CIA Director John Brennan first alerts the White House in early August that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered an operation to defeat or at least damage Hillary Clinton and help elect her opponent, Donald Trump. The president instructs aides to assess vulnerabilities in the election system and get agencies to agree on the intelligence that Putin was seeking to influence the election. Brennan calls Alexander Bortnikov, the director of Russia’s main security agency, and warns him about interfering in the U.S. presidential election. Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson’s efforts to secure the U.S. voting systems run aground when some state officials reject his plan, calling it a federal takeover. Alexander Bortnikov See full graphic But at the highest levels of government, among those responsible for managing the crisis, the first moment of true foreboding about Russia’s intentions arrived with that CIA intelligence. The material was so sensitive that CIA Director John Brennan kept it out of the President’s Daily Brief, concerned that even that restricted report’s distribution was too broad. The CIA package came with instructions that it be returned immediately after it was read. To guard against leaks, subsequent meetings in the Situation Room followed the same protocols as planning sessions for the Osama bin Laden raid. It took time for other parts of the intelligence community to endorse the CIA’s view. Only in the administration’s final weeks in office did it tell the public, in a declassified report, what officials had learned from Brennan in August — that Putin was working to elect Trump. [Putin ‘ordered’ effort to undermine faith in U.S. election and help Trump, report says] Over that five-month interval, the Obama administration secretly debated dozens of options for deterring or punishing Russia, including cyberattacks on Russian infrastructure, the release of CIA-gathered material that might embarrass Putin and sanctions that officials said could “crater” the Russian economy."

6/23/2017 8:41:02 AM

Quote :

"The Washington Post's national security reporters unveil the deep divisions inside the Obama White House over how to respond to Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election. (Whitney Leaming, Osman Malik/The Washington Post) But in the end, in late December, Obama approved a modest package combining measures that had been drawn up to punish Russia for other issues — expulsions of 35 diplomats and the closure of two Russian compounds — with economic sanctions so narrowly targeted that even those who helped design them describe their impact as largely symbolic. Obama also approved a previously undisclosed covert measure that authorized planting cyber weapons in Russia’s infrastructure, the digital equivalent of bombs that could be detonated if the United States found itself in an escalating exchange with Moscow. The project, which Obama approved in a covert-action finding, was still in its planning stages when Obama left office. It would be up to President Trump to decide whether to use the capability. In political terms, Russia’s interference was the crime of the century, an unprecedented and largely successful destabilizing attack on American democracy. It was a case that took almost no time to solve, traced to the Kremlin through cyber-forensics and intelligence on Putin’s involvement. And yet, because of the divergent ways Obama and Trump have handled the matter, Moscow appears unlikely to face proportionate consequences. Those closest to Obama defend the administration’s response to Russia’s meddling. They note that by August it was too late to prevent the transfer to WikiLeaks and other groups of the troves of emails that would spill out in the ensuing months. They believe that a series of warnings — including one that Obama delivered to Putin in September — prompted Moscow to abandon any plans of further aggression, such as sabotage of U.S. voting systems. Denis McDonough Denis McDonough White House chief of staff. McDonough was one of the first few officials to discuss details of the intelligence. , who served as Obama’s chief of staff, said that the administration regarded Russia’s interference as an attack on the “heart of our system.” “We set out from a first-order principle that required us to defend the integrity of the vote,” McDonough said in an interview. “Importantly, we did that. It’s also important to establish what happened and what they attempted to do so as to ensure that we take the steps necessary to stop it from happening again.” But other administration officials look back on the Russia period with remorse. “It is the hardest thing about my entire time in government to defend,” said a former senior Obama administration official involved in White House deliberations on Russia. “I feel like we sort of choked.” The post-election period has been dominated by the overlapping investigations into whether Trump associates colluded with Russia before the election and whether the president sought to obstruct the FBI probe afterward. That spectacle has obscured the magnitude of Moscow’s attempt to hijack a precious and now vulnerable-seeming American democratic process. Beset by allegations of hidden ties between his campaign and Russia, Trump has shown no inclination to revisit the matter and has denied any collusion or obstruction on his part. As a result, the expulsions and modest sanctions announced by Obama on Dec. 29 continue to stand as the United States’ most forceful response. “The punishment did not fit the crime,” said Michael McFaul, who served as U.S. ambassador to Russia for the Obama administration from 2012 to 2014. “Russia violated our sovereignty, meddling in one of our most sacred acts as a democracy — electing our president. The Kremlin should have paid a much higher price for that attack. And U.S. policymakers now — both in the White House and Congress — should consider new actions to deter future Russian interventions.” The Senate this month passed a bill that would impose additional election- and Ukraine-related sanctions on Moscow and limit Trump’s ability to lift them. The measure requires House approval, however, and Trump’s signature. This account of the Obama administration’s response to Russia’s interference is based on interviews with more than three dozen current and former U.S. officials in senior positions in government, including at the White House, the State, Defense and Homeland Security departments, and U.S. intelligence services. Most agreed to speak only on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the issue. The White House, the CIA, the FBI, the National Security Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment. The CIA breakthrough came at a stage of the presidential campaign when Trump had secured the GOP nomination but was still regarded as a distant long shot. Clinton held comfortable leads in major polls, and Obama expected that he would be transferring power to someone who had served in his Cabinet. The intelligence on Putin was extraordinary on multiple levels, including as a feat of espionage. For spy agencies, gaining insights into the intentions of foreign leaders is among the highest priorities. But Putin is a remarkably elusive target. A former KGB officer, he takes extreme precautions to guard against surveillance, rarely communicating by phone or computer, always running sensitive state business from deep within the confines of the Kremlin. [Vladimir Putin: From the KGB to president of Russia] The Washington Post is withholding some details of the intelligence at the request of the U.S. government. In early August, Brennan John Brennan CIA director. Brennan first alerts the White House to the Putin intelligence and later briefs Obama in the Oval Office. alerted senior White House officials to the Putin intelligence, making a call to deputy national security adviser Avril Haines Avril Haines Deputy national security adviser and former deputy director of the CIA under Brennan. and pulling national security adviser Susan E. Rice Susan Rice National security adviser. Rice orders the National Security Council to finalize a list of options to use against Moscow. aside after a meeting before briefing Obama along with Rice, Haines and McDonough Denis McDonough White House chief of staff. McDonough was one of the first few officials to discuss details of the intelligence. in the Oval Office. Officials described the president’s reaction as grave. Obama “was deeply concerned and wanted as much information as fast as possible,” a former official said. “He wanted the entire intelligence community all over this.” Then-CIA Director John Brennan testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee in June 2016. (Photo by J. Scott Applewhite/AP; photo illustration by Nick Kirkpatrick/The Washington Post) Concerns about Russian interference had gathered throughout the summer. Russia experts had begun to see a troubling pattern of propaganda in which fictitious news stories, assumed to be generated by Moscow, proliferated across social-media platforms. Officials at the State Department and FBI became alarmed by an unusual spike in requests from Russia for temporary visas for officials with technical skills seeking permission to enter the United States for short-term assignments at Russian facilities. At the FBI’s behest, the State Department delayed approving the visas until after the election. Meanwhile, the FBI was tracking a flurry of hacking activity against U.S. political parties, think tanks and other targets. Russia had gained entry to DNC systems in the summer of 2015 and spring of 2016, but the breaches did not become public until they were disclosed in a June 2016 report by The Post. [Russian government hackers penetrated DNC] Even after the late-July WikiLeaks dump, which came on the eve of the Democratic convention and led to the resignation of Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) as the DNC’s chairwoman, U.S. intelligence officials continued to express uncertainty about who was behind the hacks or why they were carried out. At a public security conference in Aspen, Colo., in late July, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. noted that Russia had a long history of meddling in American elections but that U.S. spy agencies were not ready to “make the call on attribution” for what was happening in 2016. “We don’t know enough .?.?. to ascribe motivation,” Clapper said. “Was this just to stir up trouble or was this ultimately to try to influence an election?”"

[Edited on June 23, 2017 at 8:45 AM. Reason : There is a lot more -- I'll post later. Have to run now..]

6/23/2017 8:42:18 AM

Quote :

"can you post some highlights for those of us who are not subscribers?"

FYI, if you put Internet Explorer in 'In Private' mode and then go to the link above, it'll bypass the paywall.

6/23/2017 9:30:41 AM

Quote :

"an unprecedented and largely successful destabilizing attack on American democracy."

How is exposing the DNC destabilizing American democracy, a destabilizing attack on American democracy?

Oh that's right, its leftist propaganda

6/23/2017 10:20:42 AM

^i don't think they meant the dnc aspect was destabilizing, i think they were referring to the fake news bots, working to elect a specific candidate and things like that.

exposing the truth about the dnc was only destabilizing to people trying to maintain a lie

I actually found it incredibly frustrating, the part about the state representatives pushing back as the government somehow encroaching on states' rights when it was suggested they take federal funds to shore up their election security.

[Edited on June 23, 2017 at 10:32 AM. Reason : a]

6/23/2017 10:29:22 AM

I mean, it was partisan.

The GOP wanted to protect Trump and win. Period. No other way to take it. And weak ass Democrats took it like always because they are afraid of the GOP.

6/23/2017 10:34:39 AM

Quote :

" i think they were referring to the fake news bots, working to elect a specific candidate and things like that."

Who knows what they are referring to... they move the goalposts daily.

Russia "hacked" the election
Russia "interfered" with the election
Russia "colluded" with Trump
Russia "influenced" the election

Unless the voting numbers were actually changed, which they clearly weren't, nobody cares about the vague insinuations from leftist media. Especially the accusations of Russia FakeNews, which is laughable coming from the leftist mainstream media.

6/23/2017 11:00:21 AM

Quote :

"Russia "hacked" the election Russia "interfered" with the election Russia "colluded" with Trump Russia "influenced" the election Unless the voting numbers were actually changed, which they clearly weren't, nobody cares"

I've only heard "hacked the election" from right-leaning outlets. As in, they constantly say "Russia didn't hack the election." But no one has ever said that happened.

Russia did interfere with the election. If I shine a flashlight on a moving ball, by the laws of physics I am interfering with the ball's trajectory, even if it isn't moved enough to have a meaningful effect.

The only articles I've ever seen regarding Trump and collusion are in the context of "the possibility of collusion is being investigated." Now, there have definitely been a few nutcase representatives who have gone out and flat out said he did collude. But not a single media outlet that I can think of (and no, Huffington Post is not a legit media outlet so I'm not referring to a site like that) has ever flat out stated with certainty that Trump's campaign has colluded with Russia.

Russia did influence the election. Again, it may not have had a meaningful impact (that is, Trump may still have inevitably won), but the fact they jumped in is interference. See previous comment regarding physics.

The last part is one of the things that really bothers me about the right, here. Basically that sentiment is equivalent to "Yea, Japan attacked us in Pearl Harbor, but it's not like they sunk any aircraft carriers so why are we going to war?"

[Edited on June 23, 2017 at 11:53 AM. Reason : a]

6/23/2017 11:52:14 AM

please do not engage the troll in this thread

6/23/2017 12:12:17 PM

Quote :

"Internet Explorer"

Hello 2005!!!

But yeah, for articles behind a paywall or a subscription service, I just open them in an Incognito tab in Chrome.

6/23/2017 12:23:10 PM

don't know why i didn't think of that haha, i always switch to ie

6/23/2017 12:53:44 PM

Quote :

"I've only heard "hacked the election" from right-leaning outlets. As in, they constantly say "Russia didn't hack the election." But no one has ever said that happened."

? The "Hacking" has been a leftist talking point for months. The initial phising scam that John “Spirit Cooking” Podesta fell for was referred to as “Hacking”.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Russia+hack+the+election

CNN, NYT, BBC, etc... all using it in headlines as talking points to claim Russia wanted to undermine confidence in the election (as they, the media, undermine confidence in the election just because it didn’t go in their favor).

Quote :

"Russia did interfere with the election. If I shine a flashlight on a moving ball, by the laws of physics I am interfering with the ball's trajectory, even if it isn't moved enough to have a meaningful effect."

Yes, and by that logic every country interferes with every election. I'm not saying cyber attacks aren't a big deal, but I'll be dammed if I'll take the word of sources that are trying to twist that into their political agenda. To them it isn't about America being attacked, its about covering for Clinton's loss that they all went all-in for, and rather than face that they need a spooky Russian scapegoat.

Quote :

" The only articles I've ever seen regarding Trump and collusion are in the context of "the possibility of collusion is being investigated." "

Exactly. When you have that many qualifiers in your headline, you know you are reading fake news. It is all insinuation, no facts or substance. All narrative, like this entire thread.
“Possible” “Alleged” Collusion “maybe” (with a disclaimer on page 5 that no evidence exists, lol NYT)

6/23/2017 2:05:28 PM

Quote :

"i'd encourage everyone to just ignore JCE2011 in this thread, it should be obvious to you that he is trolling and has no interest in a good intentioned debate or discussion"

6/23/2017 2:38:04 PM

His posts read like Hannity clips

6/23/2017 3:02:21 PM

Quote :

"James Risch: "that report by The New York Times was not true. Is that a fair statement?” James Comey: “In the main, it was not true. The challenge, and I’m not picking on reporters, about writing stories about classified information is that people talking about it often don’t really know what is going on.""

This is what happens when you watch too much #FakeNews like the New York Times. You start believing in conspiracy theories, and think any attempt to help you be less stupid is "trolling".

6/23/2017 3:13:37 PM

I wish someone would publish a statistically significant number of "fake news" stories so we could end this debate once and for all.

Anyone can use Google and find 100 instances of "fake news" over the past year but when thousands of news articles are posted every day I'm not buying into this idea that fake news has taken over.

Really getting tired of this argument.

Me - Check out Washington Post's article on _________.

Friend - *sends me a 4chan screenshot of a Washington Post article from six months ago where the headline was changed between the first day and the second day (while none of the actual content changed, mind you)

Me - Show me a statistically significant sample of stories you claim are fake news. You sent me one out of hundreds of thousands.

Friend - ...

(he can't)

[Edited on June 23, 2017 at 4:29 PM. Reason : a]

6/23/2017 4:29:44 PM

It's easy. If someone spams "fake news" dozens of times a day that person should not be engaged.

Fake news: The Clinton's have systematically killed dozens of people and John Podesta is a satist who does human sacrifices.

Real news: The Clinton's have shady business and charity practices that should be investigated.

Real news is real news even when sources may be incorrect (as we've seen with Clinton and Trump). Fake news is complete and utter made up bullshit. But people interested in having real dialogue know this already.

[Edited on June 23, 2017 at 4:34 PM. Reason : Not invested ]

6/23/2017 4:33:45 PM

https://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=648694&page=2#16434648

6/23/2017 5:09:48 PM

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-21/trump-russia-and-those-shadowy-sater-deals-at-bayrock

6/24/2017 3:04:18 AM

Trump has now admitted that russian interference is real

6/24/2017 3:14:53 PM

Can someone smarter then me explain how Obama's inaction toward Russia benefited Clinton over Trump?

This is in regards to Trump's tweets this afternoon, specifically:

Quote :

"Obama Administration official said they "choked" when it came to acting on Russian meddling of election. They didn't want to hurt Hillary?"

6/24/2017 6:55:16 PM

Why do people take Trump seriously regarding Obama/Clinton? Or anything that isn't a statement on policy stance.

6/24/2017 7:11:25 PM

Quote :

"Can someone smarter then me explain how Obama's inaction toward Russia benefited Clinton over Trump?"

The only way it can be construed that way is if he went public on the Russia stuff at the time and then Trump started screaming about Obama rigging the election against him causing even higher voter turnout on the GOP side to put him in power. Or, Hillary wins and then her entire presidency the GOP talks about how the Russians got her elected somehow even though their expressed goal was to get Trump elected.

As for Trump's dumb ass tweet, the administration didn't choke. It has two awful options - go public, escalate and hear about how it swung the election forever. Or, keep it silent and try to retaliate without escalating too much and risk Trump winning due to Russia's efforts.

Quote :

"Why do people take Trump seriously regarding Obama/Clinton? Or anything that isn't a statement on policy stance."

Because the White House stated that his tweets are official Presidential statements.

[Edited on June 24, 2017 at 8:49 PM. Reason : a]

6/24/2017 8:39:04 PM

Why do we take his white house seriously. Everything is spin, smoke screen, playing to his base, etc.

6/25/2017 8:16:57 AM

And he's the first President who does that, huh?

Pull your head out.

6/25/2017 4:28:10 PM

Kdogg bringing th heat!

6/25/2017 7:24:23 PM

Quote :

"Friend - *sends me a 4chan screenshot of a Washington Post article from six months ago where the headline was changed between the first day and the second day (while none of the actual content changed, mind you)"

When all the "content" amounts too is insinuation, it doesn't really matter. It's fake news because it is agenda over "content".

What "content" is selected as "news" and how it is spun is what most people mean when they call out CNN, NYT, etc, for being fake.

Sure, it isn't factually inaccurate that Bob Smith on Trump's cabinet once did business with a company that once did business in Russia... but when a global businessman does deals in every country, and you cherry pick 1/100 instances to paint a narrative... yea it is fake news. Because it isn't newsworthy.

6/25/2017 8:32:37 PM

Quote :

"And he's the first President who does that, huh? Pull your head out. "

Just never seen a President lie so blatantly.

6/25/2017 8:46:53 PM

He finally got one right, though the GOP had a hand in it by threatening to politicize. Ultimately his indecision was his fault alone though, as it is with Presidents.

Quote :

"The reason that President Obama did NOTHING about Russia after being notified by the CIA of meddling is that he expected Clinton would win.."

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/879317636164841474

6/26/2017 8:46:52 AM

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/879320905608044544

I give him credit and he immediately follows it up with some bigly projection. FFS.

6/26/2017 8:54:13 AM

Quote :

"Just never seen a President lie so blatantly."

WMDs in Iraq and Obamacare making health insurance affordable didn't seem like blatant lies to you at the time?

6/26/2017 10:53:57 AM

Do you see Obama's statements about insurance premiums to be on the same level as say, "I'm going to release my taxes after the audit?"

6/26/2017 11:01:38 AM

the Obamacare lie was much worse - Trumps tax returns will never affect the financials of over half this country.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/passantino/cnn-russia-coverage-publishing-restrictions?utm_term=.fi9dbjvgE#.gxVYoLzmX

CNN is finally reeling their Russia-Trump narrative back in after realizing it's costing them viewers and reputation.

6/26/2017 11:13:57 AM

Bizarre that the conservative talking points have shifted in recent days to "collusion wouldn't be illegal anyway." Which, technically is correct isn't it?

6/26/2017 11:40:24 AM

I mean, this all goes back to the GOP and most of it's constituents viewing Russia/Putin as an ally for the better part of the last 8 years. Russia hates gays, women, loves killing Muslims, and drilling for oil. It's the conservative Christian machismo society that the modern GOP can only dream about creating here. That's also why Romney's "Russia is our real enemy" pleas in 2012 fell on deaf ears. That's why they are floating out this "collusion isn't actually illegal" narrative the past few days because what's wrong with colluding with an ally anyway?

6/26/2017 11:48:26 AM