Jump to content

Trump and Russia


Recommended Posts

Washington, Grant, Eisenhauer, and now McGillicuddy.

 

Old soldiers do truly never die

 

I think McGillicuddy would take offense at being called a soldier

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The facilities in Maryland and New York had been closed as punishment for Russian interference in the 2016 election. The Trump administration is weighing restrictions on Russian activities there, including removing the diplomatic immunity the properties once enjoyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ANDREW MCCARTHY: The Real Collusion:

 

 

Maybe it will be remembered as the weekend when, at long last, the media-Democrat complex overplayed its hand on the “Collusion with Russia” narrative. They are still having so much fun with the new “Jared back-channel to the Kremlin” angle, they appear not to realize it destroys their collusion yarn. . . .

 

There is abundant cause for concern that the Obama administration tore down the wall between the missions of law-enforcement and foreign-intelligence, on one side, and partisan politics, on the other. The White House and its politicized security services wanted Hillary Clinton to become president, and they do not want to let Donald Trump be president.

 

There’s a collusion story here, but it’s got nothing to do with Russia.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I want a special counsel to investigate that. Maybe Rudy Giuliani?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ANDREW MCCARTHY: The Real Collusion:

 

 

 

Maybe it will be remembered as the weekend when, at long last, the media-Democrat complex overplayed its hand on the “Collusion with Russia” narrative. They are still having so much fun with the new “Jared back-channel to the Kremlin” angle, they appear not to realize it destroys their collusion yarn. . . .

 

There is abundant cause for concern that the Obama administration tore down the wall between the missions of law-enforcement and foreign-intelligence, on one side, and partisan politics, on the other. The White House and its politicized security services wanted Hillary Clinton to become president, and they do not want to let Donald Trump be president.

 

There’s a collusion story here, but it’s got nothing to do with Russia.

 

 

 

 

 

I want a special counsel to investigate that. Maybe Rudy Giuliani?

Keep dreaming. Click your heals three times and say "Reality doesn't matter...reality doesn't matter....reality doesn't matter...only Trump does"

 

And don't forget, that with Comey testifying next week we move back to the obstruction of justice angle in all this. "Reality doesn't matter..."

 

Will Trump be locked up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comey would have resigned on the spot if interfered with.

 

oops....

What makes you think that? He was the highest ranking official in the country's preeminent law-enforcement agency and, given the active investigation begun in July and his active role in it, it's more reasonable to think he would have dug his heels in deeper to ascertain why he was being interfered with. Indeed, given the previous requests to back off and the notes he kept regarding those requests, it certainly looks like he had no intention of resigning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kelly Ann said Trump might bloc Comey from testifying. That would be interesting

 

Not the least bit surprising. There's almost a 20 year history of presidents blocking testimony to Congress with claims of "executive privilege."

 

Not the least bit interesting, either. Any halfwit knew Trump would at least consider this; likewise, any halfwit knows that Congress' response will be strictly limited to shouting and flapping their arms, with no recourse to do anything about it.

 

What will be really interesting is how Comey reacts to it. I can't begin to imagine the shitstorm if Trump claims executive privilege, and Comey responds "!@#$ you, I'm testifying anyway."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not the least bit surprising. There's almost a 20 year history of presidents blocking testimony to Congress with claims of "executive privilege."

 

Not the least bit interesting, either. Any halfwit knew Trump would at least consider this; likewise, any halfwit knows that Congress' response will be strictly limited to shouting and flapping their arms, with no recourse to do anything about it.

 

What will be really interesting is how Comey reacts to it. I can't begin to imagine the shitstorm if Trump claims executive privilege, and Comey responds "!@#$ you, I'm testifying anyway."

Or the other side of the coin where Comey says "don't worry, I've got nothing that will hurt you", and T Rump doesn't assert anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What’s not is that the president also disappointed—and surprised—his own top national security officials by failing to include the language reaffirming the so-called Article 5 provision in his speech. National security adviser H.R. McMaster, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson all supported Trump doing so and had worked in the weeks leading up to the trip to make sure it was included in the speech, according to five sources familiar with the episode. They thought it was, and a White House aide even told The New York Times the day before the line was definitely include

 

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/05/trump-nato-speech-national-security-team-215227

 

 

If he is compromised and doing Putin's bidding for him. Traitor!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...