Political Roundtable Part XIII

[sfam]

Nothing to see here. Move along.....

Read on Twitter

This brief meeting took place in Trump Tower. So Trump's son in law, who is now his big time advisor in the White House, meets the Russian Ambassador IN TRUMP TOWER and the Donald doesn't know about this? He didn't meet the Ambassador? Is anyone believing this?

We know Trump has to lie about this because he's already said he has no knowledge, but really??? Is anyone gonna believe that Trump didn't know about this meeting? That at a minimum, his favored son-in-law didn't say, "Daddy, guess who I met today!"

[Induveca]

.....

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[Induveca]

Read on Twitter

You're speaking in foamy mouth tongues, possibly understood only by your peers.

What does any of that mean? It reads like nonsense.

[Wizardspride]

Perhaps....but to be fair, any hint of Russian interference is nonsense to you so.....

[Wizardspride]

Fwiw, I'm willing to concede it's POSSIBLE that these Russian connections aren't a big deal...except for one thing:
Trump and his associates keep getting caught lying.


So I can only conclude that apparently, they think it is a big deal.

[dckingsfan]

Fwiw, I'm willing to concede it's POSSIBLE that these Russian connections aren't a big deal...except for one thing:
Trump and his associates keep getting caught lying.

So I can only conclude that apparently, they thing it is a big deal.

What it is doing is keeping down Trump's approval numbers. But he doesn't seem to be focused on it - he doesn't seem to care.

It may well bog down House Rs as they move on their agenda.

[tontoz]

Fwiw, I'm willing to concede it's POSSIBLE that these Russian connections aren't a big deal...except for one thing:
Trump and his associates keep getting caught lying.


So I can only conclude that apparently, they thing it is a big deal.

They lie about everything so I am not sure how you come to that conclusion.

[gtn130]

Read on Twitter

lol at anyone who doesn't think this is even a little suspicious or concerning

[gtn130]

Read on Twitter

You're speaking in foamy mouth tongues, possibly understood only by your peers.

What does any of that mean? It reads like nonsense.

remember when you sided with Wikileaks over the Intel Community? I don't think your opinion on this subject means much to anyone

[gtn130]

Read on Twitter

Liberal Hysteria! Witch Hunt! Sad!

[sfam]

Fwiw, I'm willing to concede it's POSSIBLE that these Russian connections aren't a big deal...except for one thing:
Trump and his associates keep getting caught lying.


So I can only conclude that apparently, they thing it is a big deal.

They lie about everything so I am not sure how you come to that conclusion.

This is a good point, and brings us to the perjury charge for Sessions. Why bother complaining about Sessions lying when literally everyone in the Administration does it as an early option in their talking points (as opposed to most politicians who see is closer to a last or at least later resort)?

The only difference really is Sessions lied under oath. That doesn't seem to matter much to Republicans so far, but we'll see.

[sfam]

Read on Twitter

You're speaking in foamy mouth tongues, possibly understood only by your peers.

What does any of that mean? It reads like nonsense.

Aside from the overt and bizarre threat, I think his general point is showing disgust for a Naval graduate who has gotten so close to all things Russia, including their world view. That this is Trump's early foreign policy advisor is pretty telling.

[nate33]

Shocking. Hate crime hoaxer Juan Thompson was also a reporter for the Intercept. So not only is the media reporting hate hoaxes and trying to pin them on Trump and his supporters, but the media is actually committing the hate hoaxes themselves.

Read on Twitter

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/disgraced-writer-juan-thompson-arrested-anti-semitic-threats-article-1.2987823

[nate33]

This whole thing is fake news.

Note how in the original report, the Washington Post doesn't actually quote Al Franken's question to Sessions. Instead it summarizes the exchange in a way that makes it seem that Sessions was asked if there was any contact at all between the campaign and representatives of the Russian government. That's not actually what was said.

The Post said this:

At his Jan. 10 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign.

The actual transcript from Franken went like this:

Franken: CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week, that included information that “Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say “there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.” Again, I’m telling you this as it’s coming out, so you know. But if it’s true, it’s obviously extremely serious, and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?

Sessions: Senator Franken, I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.

That's a big difference. The Post's summary makes it sound like Sessions was asked if he knew if he or anyone else affiliated with the Trump campaign ever communicated with any Russian intermediaries for any reason whatsoever. The reality was that the context of the question was regarding "continuing exchange of information" between the Trump campaign and the Russians as alleged in the dossier. Why did the Post choose to summarize Franken instead of providing the actual context?

This was a media hit job. This was something you expect to see out of Buzzfeed. This is fake news.

[nate33]

There is open warfare between the CIA and the FBI. The New York Times and Washington Post are being fed stories by the CIA, many of them are false and misleading, in an attempt to undermine Trump:

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) appeared on Fox's First 100 Days Thursday evening after a closed door briefing earlier in the day by FBI director James Comey concerning the agency's investigation into claims of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

The interview begins with host Martha MacCallum mentioning that Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA), who attended the same meeting, was "rattled" over the lack of information Comey gave concerning Russian involvement in the election. Gowdy, on the other hand, seemed shocked at Schiff's apparent lack of enlightenment:

Jim Comey did more today to update us than I have ever had done in the 6 years I have been there, and for Adam to treat it that way - that dismissively, clearly he and I were in two separate rooms this morning.

I have never heard a Federal law enforcement agent give, with that degree of particularity and detail, an update on an inquiry. As you may recall, I was a federal prosecutor for 6 years, so I have talked to lots of FBI agents. He went so far beyond what any other administration official has ever done, whether it's Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, or his predecessor Robert Muller - they never gave us this level of detail and specificity. He bent over backwards.

When pressed on whether or not FBI Director Comey revealed any new information in light of [former CIA Director] John Brennan and [former Director of National Intelligence] James Clapper finding no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, Gowdy deflected - citing the confidential nature of the briefing. He did, however, make a statement concerning the New York Times ($NYT) and Washington Post - publications included in what President Trump and top advisor Steve Bannon refer to as the media "opposition party":

I will tell you this - to the extent people are relying on media reports, whether it's the New York Times or the Washington Post, upon which to base their factual assertions, I would tell them to be very very careful. I'm not gonna say any more than that, other than to say that the person leading the investigation on behalf of the Untied States government, the head of the FBI, listen to what he has to say - don't listen to anonymous sources who leak classified information which, oh by the way, is also against the law.

Between Jim Comey and a reporter from the New York Times, give me Jim Comey.

Takeaways: Rep. Gowdy clearly heard a lot of things he liked during the closed door session, while deflated Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff did not. Second; FBI director Comey obviously discussed the dissemination of leaked classified information to the mainstream media - to the extent that Gowdy, an attorney and former prosecutor, is advising people who rely on the leaks to be "very, very careful" in doing so.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-03/trey-gowdy-r-sc-after-fbi-director-comey-briefing-be-very-very-careful-relying-nyt-a

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[gtn130]

This whole thing is fake news.

Note how in the original report, the Washington Post doesn't actually quote Al Franken's question to Sessions. Instead it summarizes the exchange in a way that makes it seem that Sessions was asked if there was any contact at all between the campaign and representatives of the Russian government. That's not actually what was said.

The Post said this:

At his Jan. 10 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign.

The actual transcript from Franken went like this:

Franken: CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week, that included information that “Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say “there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.” Again, I’m telling you this as it’s coming out, so you know. But if it’s true, it’s obviously extremely serious, and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?

Sessions: Senator Franken, I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.

That's a big difference. The Post's summary makes it sound like Sessions was asked if he knew if he or anyone else affiliated with the Trump campaign ever communicated with any Russian intermediaries for any reason whatsoever. The reality was that the context of the question was regarding "continuing exchange of information" between the Trump campaign and the Russians as alleged in the dossier. Why did the Post choose to summarize Franken instead of providing the actual context?

This was a media hit job. This was something you expect to see out of Buzzfeed. This is fake news.

He said he didn't have communications with Russians, when he in fact did have communications with Russians (facilitated by campaign funds). Seems pretty straightforward to me.

[sfam]

Fake News indeed. That's laughable at this point and really doesn't merit a response.

Meet your new Administration. There are almost no contacts with the Russians, unless you include, well, most people close to Donald Trump.