Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 19, 2017, 11:58:48 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
104237 Posts in 2390 Topics by 1091 Members
Latest Member: Phorize
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  The Russian conspiracy, Comey, related matters
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] Print
Author Topic: The Russian conspiracy, Comey, related matters  (Read 4989 times)
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 15052


« Reply #250 on: July 29, 2017, 10:46:35 AM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRKIsBlzVOk

Matthew Bracken on the attempted coup. Makes a lot of sense.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 40839


« Reply #251 on: August 01, 2017, 11:43:51 PM »

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-lawyer-exclusive-idUSKBN1AH5F9
Logged
rickn
Frequent Poster
**
Posts: 52


« Reply #252 on: August 02, 2017, 05:37:35 AM »

Lawyers performing a counterintelligence investigation is a recipe for disaster.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7337


« Reply #253 on: August 02, 2017, 06:13:46 AM »

"Lawyers performing a counterintelligence investigation is a recipe for disaster."

and maybe especially lawyers who are left handed going up against a  right handed pitcher.

often that is by design from the manager.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 06:16:01 AM by ccp » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 40839


« Reply #254 on: August 03, 2017, 06:39:55 PM »

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450113/obama-administration-unmasking-trump-should-declassify?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202017-08-03&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 40839


« Reply #255 on: August 03, 2017, 06:42:30 PM »

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450135/h-r-mcmaster-national-security-council-no-islamist-conspiracy-theory?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202017-08-03&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7337


« Reply #256 on: August 03, 2017, 08:14:45 PM »


Does anyone think for more then a fleeting second the mostly Obama ad Clinton tied lawyers will not find SOMeTHING?

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450149/robert-mueller-grand-jury-appointment

Difference between Clinton is he was a hero to the press and could stay mostly popular in the polls while Trump is neither

It is much harder to believe this could end well then vice a versa   cry
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 40839


« Reply #257 on: August 03, 2017, 10:04:53 PM »

Some serious conversation here

00:00-12:05

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMotHFkwPds
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8992


« Reply #258 on: August 04, 2017, 08:24:18 AM »

Does anyone think for more then a fleeting second the mostly Obama ad Clinton tied lawyers will not find SOMeTHING?

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450149/robert-mueller-grand-jury-appointment
...
It is much harder to believe this could end well then vice a versa   cry

If having a special counsel at all was called for, this would be a routine step.  But given other special prosecutors' history of running wild, this cannot end well.  Mueller is certainly trying to be too entrenched to be dissolved.  Might as well put him in the cabinet at this point, and in the Presidential chain of succession.  It looks like a permanent department, like we had after Fast and Furious and IRS Targeting...  oh skip that.

Grand Juries only hear the prosecutor's side of a story.  Defense comes later, after being charged and in front of a different jury.

Just speculating, they will find irregularities in Trump's past Russian dealings, enough to make the derangement side go nuts  but not enough to impeach or remove him from office.  Like Scooter Libby, somebody will fall, guilty or not, for trying to help the boss, maybe a family member.  

Unless there is some crime they know of and we don't, this is a witch hunt.  If Putin had inside plants in the US government during the 2016 election, those officials were in the Obama administration.  It's hard to believe that's where this is leading but that's where the power was and where the violations of law most likely occurred.  Trump didn't need their money - like the Clintons did.  And everyone seeks opposition rearch.

I can't imagine that a prosecutor staffs up for war and then ends up taking my view that Trump was an oaf for saying he hopes Russia will hack and disclose Hillary's emails and his offspring same thing for taking the fake meeting, but did nothing seriously wrong.

The electorate already ruled on the parts we already knew.  None of that leads to impeachment.  It has to be something new, big and unexpected.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7337


« Reply #259 on: August 04, 2017, 09:16:36 AM »

" The electorate already ruled on the parts we already knew.  None of that leads to impeachment.  It has to be something new, big and unexpected. "

For impeachment yes.  For political destruction no.

Yes the derangement side led by Wash compost NY slimes and fake news CNN will be leading the political damage assault with every legal argument this run away prosecution will dredge up.

The LEFT will use this for campaigning and the very weak Republicans will run in panic flight, which is worst of all.

Tax reform will be half hearted .   

Forget a wall.    IF we do get real enforcement of immigration we can also go ahead and send welcome flowers to everyone already here and to all their extended families whose immigrations lawyers are already working out sytem to get here.

I am pessimistic.

Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7337


« Reply #260 on: August 04, 2017, 07:57:29 PM »

right in 90% african american DC no less..........

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/alan-dershowitz-robert-mueller-grand-jury-russia/2017/08/04/id/805961/

This is all a hit job.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2017, 12:30:12 AM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 40839


« Reply #261 on: August 05, 2017, 12:20:58 AM »

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/04/us/politics/robert-mueller-michael-flynn-turkey.html?emc=edit_na_20170804&nl=breaking-news&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 40839


« Reply #262 on: August 05, 2017, 01:11:14 PM »

https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/08/03/tangled-web-connects-russian-oligarch-money-gop-campaigns
Logged
rickn
Frequent Poster
**
Posts: 52


« Reply #263 on: August 05, 2017, 06:53:53 PM »

Len Blavatnik is not exactly a secretive person.

http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001326628

Blavatnik's investment company's office is on the 20th floor of a large office building across the street from Trump Tower.  So is the Argentine Consulate and many other business.

The gist of the professor's article is that because Blavatnik may know Deripaska and because Deripaska is connected to Putin and other pro-Putin oligarchs, ergo, Blavatnik's donations to the Republican PAC's are motivated by pro-Putin interests rather by Blavatnik's interest in maintaining good relations with the party that might control the SEC and other regulators that have authority over his US based investment business. 

The author's bio

http://www.udallas.edu/cob/about/faculty/may-ruth.php

I am unimpressed with her reasoning in the article.  For example, 48% does not constitute a majority stake in any company.  I thought a CFP and a business professor would know that.  Also, it appears that she is connected with many of the same Ukrainian characters that attempted to assist Hillary Clinton in the 2016 campaign.  In other words, she does not seem all that more credentialed than many posters on this forum.  Yet, she published a sloppily written column designed to make a political point. 
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 15052


« Reply #264 on: August 06, 2017, 08:23:18 PM »

Len Blavatnik is not exactly a secretive person.

http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001326628

Blavatnik's investment company's office is on the 20th floor of a large office building across the street from Trump Tower.  So is the Argentine Consulate and many other business.

The gist of the professor's article is that because Blavatnik may know Deripaska and because Deripaska is connected to Putin and other pro-Putin oligarchs, ergo, Blavatnik's donations to the Republican PAC's are motivated by pro-Putin interests rather by Blavatnik's interest in maintaining good relations with the party that might control the SEC and other regulators that have authority over his US based investment business. 

The author's bio

http://www.udallas.edu/cob/about/faculty/may-ruth.php

I am unimpressed with her reasoning in the article.  For example, 48% does not constitute a majority stake in any company.  I thought a CFP and a business professor would know that.  Also, it appears that she is connected with many of the same Ukrainian characters that attempted to assist Hillary Clinton in the 2016 campaign.  In other words, she does not seem all that more credentialed than many posters on this forum.  Yet, she published a sloppily written column designed to make a political point. 

http://www.opensecrets.org/search?q=Ruth+May&type=donors

Lots of donations to Hillary from a Ruth May, who just happens to work for the University of Dallas.

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 40839


« Reply #265 on: August 07, 2017, 09:25:09 AM »

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/6/donald-trump-fights-robert-mueller-in-public-relat/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTkRRM09EWmxOR1kyTkRReSIsInQiOiJjQWJcL3V5elVGd3NENkF3K1c0eEkzNG5qVnFPMnc3Nmg5bnF1TG91MStjYnIxbHFBV1d0SEhYaG1UaElsQ1NIekpleDIzenQ4ZU9Zd1FmQzhOSjJMUWdvb09MZWFSZERIMjBsQlwvWHJSM252Q1RTSDh1eWNvTVZtVmJ1bld6NkNhIn0%3D
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 40839


« Reply #266 on: August 09, 2017, 11:15:35 AM »

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/09/us/politics/paul-manafort-home-search-mueller.html?emc=edit_na_20170809&nl=breaking-news&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7337


« Reply #267 on: August 10, 2017, 08:33:08 AM »

Judge that is reported to be umpiring Mueller's team of Democrat Party lawyers against the much smaller and weaker team of Trump attorneys

Originally appointed by W for some commission and later Judgeship by no other then Brock.  She did some lobbying briefly for the RIIA  - the corrupt musci business
and her husband is a high level exec at Nat Geo ( we know how liberal that mag has become from multiple posts on this board)
While this does not prove political bias it seems like all the people involved with Mueller have ties to the crats:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryl_A._Howell
« Last Edit: August 10, 2017, 08:49:59 AM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8992


« Reply #268 on: August 10, 2017, 10:15:22 AM »

It was Obama not Trump who was calibrating policy toward Russia

https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/08/04/obamas-weakness-encouraged-russian-meddling/

How Obama’s Weakness Encouraged Russian Election Meddling
DAMIR MARUSIC
From the mysterious death of Mikhail Lesin in Washington DC to the assault on an American in front of our embassy in Moscow, President Obama was very careful in calibrating his responses to Russian provocations throughout 2016. Too careful.

Amid the unrelenting media din accompanying the latest twist in the White House’s ongoing personnel struggles last week, BuzzFeed News managed to cause a minor stir by publishing an update on the circumstances surrounding the mysterious death of Mikhail Lesin, the former Putin advisor instrumental in cowing Russia’s lively media in the early 2000s. Lesin, who died in a Washington DC hotel room on November 5, 2015 of “blunt force injuries of the head,” was said to have fatally injured himself by falling after being “excessively” drunk for several days. The death was officially ruled an accident in October 2016. The BuzzFeed article updated the narrative: two FBI agents with some knowledge of the case seemed to suggest that Lesin had in fact been beaten, perhaps with a baseball bat; that he was in Washington to talk to the Feds, and was put up at his hotel by the Department of Justice; and, implicitly, that there had been some kind of cover-up by the Obama Administration.

I was at a small conference in Lithuania almost two years ago, alongside several other Russia-watchers, when the news of Lesin’s death first broke. As our phones lit up with notifications, the consensus was unanimous: “He’s been whacked!” Russia experts have a kind of gallows humor reflex about unexpected deaths of those surrounding Vladimir Putin. Lesin had stepped down as the head of Gazprom Media a little less than a year before amid rumors of having fallen out with someone well-placed in the Kremlin, so his death immediately conjured up conspiracies in our minds. The fact that the Russian Embassy was furiously spinning the story hours after it had broken, saying Lesin had died of a heart attack when there was no way they could have known, just added fuel to the fire. And when it took more than four months for the D.C. coroner to announce that Lesin had died from a blow to the head, and another seven months for investigators to conclude that he had received it from an unlucky drunken fall, those suspicions hardened into a theory: The Obama Administration didn’t want this spiraling out into a large scandal because, among other things, it sought Russian cooperation on Syria and Ukraine.

Does BuzzFeed’s article confirm the theory? Not necessarily. We on the outside can’t know everything the Obama Administration was seeing at the time as it was calibrating its policy towards Russia, and we won’t know definitively for many more years to come. But given what we know of President Obama’s foreign policy thinking during his second term, largely due to the work of Jeffrey Goldberg and David Samuels, we can say that as a tendency, the President saw Putin’s Russia as a problem child to be corralled, not as an aggressive actor to be confronted. And in practice, that personal tendency of the President manifested itself as an over-reluctance to react on the part of his Administration—a kind of timidity.

This timidity was on display all throughout 2016, well before the President was confronted with a detailed report from the CIA containing evidence of Russian interference in our elections. In July of that year, just a little after Trump, Jr. held his meeting with the so-called Russian lobbyists in New York, an explosive video started making the rounds—footage of a Russian security guard wrestling an alleged U.S. spy to the ground right outside the U.S. embassy in Moscow, in the process fracturing the American’s shoulder. It was an act of unprecedented aggression on the part of the Russians, with at least one former U.S. intelligence official noting how such brazen behavior was unheard of even at the height of the Cold War. And it was but the most egregious manifestation of what appears to have been a concerted effort to intimidate U.S. diplomats in Russia. One American family had found its dog killed upon coming home; another diplomat discovered human feces smeared on his rug; and around the time the video, already months old, was leaked to the press, a military helicopter had repeatedly buzzed a car carrying a U.S. defense attaché in the north of Russia. To these provocations, the Obama Administration repeatedly turned the other cheek, presumably out of a desire to not scotch what they hoped were promising signs of a breakthrough in Ukraine or Syria.

Of course, not only did the promising breakthrough not materialize, but a month later, CIA Director John Brennan was knocking down President Obama’s door with a grim intel assessment: President Putin had personally authorized his agencies to commence meddling in the U.S. elections. It was armed with this knowledge that Obama said he confronted Putin on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Huangzhou, China, telling him to “cut it out, or there would be serious consequences.” Putin must have had himself a hearty laugh.

In explaining how he approached Putin, Obama defended his understated manner at a press conference in December. “There have been folks out there who suggest somehow if we went out there and made big announcements and thumped our chests about a bunch of stuff, that somehow it would potentially spook the Russians,” Obama said. “I think it doesn’t read the thought process in Russia very well.” Given the fuller picture we now can piece together, it’s clear that it is Obama who didn’t read the Russian thought process very well. If Russian agents had bludgeoned Lesin into a pulp on U.S. soil under the nose of the Feds and had beaten a U.S. spy on the threshold of the U.S. embassy in Moscow without any perceptible blowback, what possible danger was there for Putin to roundly ignore Obama’s feeble threats?

And indeed, as the Washington Post reported, while Obama did in the end quietly authorize U.S. intelligence agencies to start developing and deploying a powerful cyber-weapon into critical Russian infrastructure, the most visible element of his response to Russian election meddling was taking two compounds used for intelligence gathering and expelling 35 suspected Russian spies—a symbolic gesture. Adding to the irony, the confiscations and expulsions were originally mooted as a response to the roughing up of the American agent in Moscow. Had Obama acted forthrightly then, Putin would have taken him more seriously when he leveled his threats in September.

Many Democrats seem to have conveniently forgotten just how halting, indecisive, and weak President Obama’s approach to Putin’s Russia had been in practice. When the BuzzFeed story first broke, some of the more prominent conspiracy theorists even tried to tie it to the Trump-Russia investigations:

"BREAKING: Vladimir Putin has likely killed another Russian related to the Trump-Russia probe. That makes it... {counting}... a *lot*."  (Seth Abramson - Twitter)

The truth is, insofar as Russian interference helped elect Donald Trump at the margins, it was Obama’s timidity that encouraged them to try such brazen things in the first place.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 40839


« Reply #269 on: August 10, 2017, 02:09:14 PM »

https://patriotpost.us/articles/50714
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 15052


« Reply #270 on: August 11, 2017, 04:47:56 PM »

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/10/heres-the-memo-that-blew-up-the-nsc/amp/

Here’s the Memo That Blew Up the NSC

Fired White House staffer argued "deep state" attacked Trump administration because the president represents a threat to cultural Marxist memes, globalists, and bankers.
8 HOURS AGO
CATEGORIES: EXCLUSIVE
Jana Winter and Elias Groll
 Featured image

The memo at the heart of the latest blowup at the National Security Council paints a dark picture of media, academics, the “deep state,” and other enemies allegedly working to subvert U.S. President Donald Trump, according to a copy of the document obtained by Foreign Policy.

The seven-page document, which eventually landed on the president’s desk, precipitated a crisis that led to the departure of several high-level NSC officials tied to former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. The author of the memo, Rich Higgins, who was in the strategic planning office at the NSC, was among those recently pushed out.

The full memo, dated May 2017, is titled “POTUS & Political Warfare.” It provides a sweeping, if at times conspiratorial, view of what it describes as a multi-pronged attack on the Trump White House.

Trump is being attacked, the memo says, because he represents “an existential threat to cultural Marxist memes that dominate the prevailing cultural narrative.” Those threatened by Trump include “‘deep state’ actors, globalists, bankers, Islamists, and establishment Republicans.”

The memo is part of a broader political struggle inside the White House between current National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and alt-right operatives with a nationalist worldview who believe the Army general and his crew are subverting the president’s agenda.

Though not called out by name, McMaster was among those described in the document as working against Trump, according to a source with firsthand knowledge of the memo and the events. Higgins, the author, is widely regarded as a Flynn loyalist who dislikes McMaster and his team.

“It was about H.R. McMaster,” the source said. “So, when he starts reading it, he knows it’s him and he fires [Higgins].”

The story of the memo’s strange journey to the Oval Office captures the zeitgeist of what has become the tragicomedy of the current White House: a son trying to please his father, an isolated general on a mission to find a leaker, a right-wing blogger with a window into the nation’s security apparatus, and a president whose closest confidante is a TV personality.

The result is an even wider rift between the president and his national security advisor, marking what may be the beginning of the end of the general’s tenure, and a radical shift of power on the NSC.


The controversy over the memo has its origins in a hunt for staffers believed to be providing information to right-wing blogger Mike Cernovich, who seemed to have uncanny insight into the inner workings of the NSC. Cernovich in the past few months has been conducting a wide-ranging campaign against the national security advisor.

“McMaster was just very, very obsessed with this, with Cernovich,” a senior administration official told FP. “He had become this incredible specter.”

In July, the memo was discovered in Higgins’s email during what two sources described to Foreign Policy as a “routine security” audit of NSC staffers’ communications. Another source, however, characterized it as a McCarthy-type leak investigation targeting staffers suspected of communicating with Cernovich.

Higgins, who had worked on the Trump campaign and transition before coming to the NSC, drafted the memo in late May and then circulated the memo to friends from the transition, a number of whom are now in the White House.

After the memo was discovered, McMaster’s deputy, Ricky Waddell, summoned Higgins, who was told he could resign — or be fired, and risk losing his security clearance, according to two sources.

Higgins, who agreed to resign, was escorted out of the building. He later learned from his colleagues still at the NSC that his association to this now-infamous memo was the reason he was removed.

Following Higgins’s departure, McMaster set out to clean house, a source close the White House said — getting rid of NSC staffers linked to the memo, perceived as loyal to his predecessor, Michael Flynn, or simply those with whom he’d butted heads over foreign policy. Among those fired was Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the NSC’s top intelligence official, and Derek Harvey, who handled the NSC’s Middle East portfolio.

In the meantime, however, the memo had been working its way through the Trump White House. Among those who received the memo, according to two sources, was Donald Trump Jr.

Trump Jr., at that time in the glare of media scrutiny around his meeting with a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower during the presidential campaign, gave the memo to his father, who gushed over it, according to sources.

In a comedy of errors, Trump later learned from Sean Hannity, the Fox News host and close friend of the president, that the memo’s author had been fired. Trump was “furious,” the senior administration official said. “He is still furious.”

The memo lays out what it described as a concerted campaign to undermine the president.

“The administration has been maneuvered into a constant back-pedal by relentless political warfare attacks structured to force him to assume a reactive posture that assures inadequate responses,” it reads. “The president can either drive or be driven by events; it’s time for him to drive them.”

The purpose of the memo, said a source familiar with the document, was to educate others in the White House about just what the president is allegedly up against.

“The memo maybe reads a little crazy, sure, but it’s not wrong and Rich isn’t crazy,” an administration official said.

Many inside the White House had only seen the first page or two of the memo — or had only read the excerpts published in the Atlantic, which first reported the existence of the memo, several sources said.

The memo’s repeated references to the Muslim Brotherhood — which is grouped among “key international players that includes the European Union and the United Nations — surprised few inside the NSC familiar with what been a Flynn obsession. “Oh look, it’s the newest member of the Muslim Brotherhood,” was a common joke among those critical of Flynn loyalists, and what they regarded as a conspiracy theory, a source close to the NSC said.

This 3,500-word memo was written in a personal capacity, according to a source familiar with its drafting. The source described it as a “technical assessment” of the current political situation, and said it was never disseminated from the NSC in any official manner, but shared with personal contacts from the Trump campaign.

“While opposition to President Trump manifests itself through political warfare memes centered on cultural Marxist narratives, this hardly means that opposition is limited to Marxists as conventionally understood,” the memo reads. “Having become the dominant cultural meme, some benefit from it while others are captured by it; including ‘deep state’ actors, globalists, bankers, Islamists, and establishment Republicans.”

“It’s not wrong per se,” said another official. “Actually, it’s not wrong at all. The not-wrong part is just, well, buried a bit I guess by some of the wackier parts.”

The memo calls out those pushing for rights “based on sex or ethnicity,” which is a “direct assault on the very idea of individual human rights and natural law around which the Constitution was framed.” It also says that “transgender acceptance” is “denying a person the right to declare the biological fact of one’s sex.”

Contacted by FP, Higgins declined to comment on the memo or his departure from the NSC.

The recent NSC shake-up appears to go beyond concerns about the memo. The recently ousted NSC staffers had been brought in by Flynn, who resigned for allegedly lying to Vice President Mike Pence about the substance of a December phone call he had with a Russian official.

Flynn is now under investigation for, among other things, failing to report income for lobbying on behalf of Turkey shortly before he became involved in the campaign.

The elimination of Higgins, Cohen-Watnick, and Harvey has helped McMaster assert control of the NSC, which was staffed during the early days of the administration by those loyal to Flynn and Steve Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist.

Late last week, McMaster also planned to put at least four other NSC staffers on the chopping block, but was prevented from doing so by newly installed Chief of Staff John Kelly, according to two sources. All but one of those staffers had ties dating back to the campaign or transition.

A source close to McMaster denied those planned firings.

The White House press office did not respond to FP‘s request for comment. A NSC spokesman declined to comment, citing a policy against speaking about internal personnel issues.

Despite Higgins’s firing, McMaster’s difficulties inside the White House aren’t going away anytime soon — though he might.

McMaster “doesn’t really have any allies,” said a source familiar with the NSC staff. “It doesn’t seem as though he has the ear of the president, which is obviously essential to his survival.”

Kate Brannen and Jenna McLaughlin contributed reporting to this article.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7337


« Reply #271 on: August 11, 2017, 05:35:45 PM »

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/10/heres-the-memo-that-blew-up-the-nsc/amp/ "
IF true then McMAster covering it up

Trump knows of memo yet he defends McMaster so I don't know what to think.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8992


« Reply #272 on: August 15, 2017, 11:05:34 AM »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-campaign-emails-show-aides-repeated-efforts-to-set-up-russia-meetings/2017/08/14/54d08da6-7dc2-11e7-83c7-5bd5460f0d7e_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_russians-558pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.be1058cc6362

Amazing (or predictable?) how they put negative stories ahead of this one and then write and title this to sound like more appearances of collusion before you read far enough to see they kept turning down those offers.

"Trump campaign emails show aide’s repeated efforts to set up Russia meetings"

Yet the higher up you go in the organization, the more emphatic the answer NO was to the offers.

Mueller must be moving on to try to find 'evidence of other crimes that came up in the investigation'.

Don't ever let an IC and a good Grand Jury go to waste.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2017, 11:15:27 AM by DougMacG » Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!