Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by LSUpride123, Mar 3, 2017.
The senate report is pretty compelling that the Russians actively interfered in 2016 for Trump even breaking out champagne to celebrate when he won. There’s also compelling evidence that too many key players in Trump’s team had questionable at best contact with Russian intelligence operatives. Left open is whether there was actual collaboration though it looks like the the campaign at least encouraged it. The senate including republicans thought Trump lied several times when answering about his knowledge. Only in the tipsy world of today would he get the pass he has.
"thought"... AKA had no evidence.
Why do you do this to yourself? None of you seem to post when the FBI got caught LYING.....
“We can say, without any hesitation, that the Committee found absolutely no evidence that then-candidate Donald Trump or his campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 election,” Rubio said.
on the other hand.....
The Obama administration was “frozen” in combating 2016 Russian election meddling, according to a new report released Thursday by the Senate Intelligence Committee.
The panel released the third volume of its five-part report on the committee’s yearslong bipartisan investigation into Russian interference in the last presidential election.
“After discovering the existence, if not the full scope, of Russia’s election interference efforts in late 2016, the Obama Administration struggled to determine the appropriate response,” committee Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C., said in a statement Thursday. “Frozen by ‘paralysis of analysis,’ hamstrung by constraints both real and perceived, Obama officials debated courses of action without truly taking one.”
Committee Ranking Member Mark Warner, D-Va., said he hoped the panel’s findings would “resonate with lawmakers, national security experts and the American public.”
I'm not sure if the NY Times qualifies as a reliable source.
Well to contradict my earlier post apparently Barr was unable to find a conspiracy against the Trump campaign in 2016. The so-called unmasking scandal investigation the root of the supposed effort was quietly closed with no indictments, no report and no news. If Barr and Dunham couldn’t find anything nothing was there. Right?
the US attorney assigned to the unmasking (not so called) scandal resigned to take a job in the private sector. This is not the entire investigation part and parcel.... what in the bulwark article tells you the investigation has been concluded?
per the article i referenced in the NY Post: "Attorney General William Barr, who tapped Bash in May to head up the investigation, appointed Gregg Sofer, a veteran Justice Department attorney, to replace him."
the bulwark article is evidence of lazy, circular reporting as this and other articles are citing the washington post article which states: Bash’s team was focused not just on unmasking, but also on whether Obama-era officials provided information to reporters, according to people familiar with the probe, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive investigation. But the findings ultimately turned over to Barr fell short of what Trump and others might have hoped, and the attorney general’s office elected not to release them publicly, the people familiar with the matter said. The Washington Post was unable to review the full results of what Bash found.
so.... what is new here? anonymous sources cited and no one from the WAPO has seen what Bash reported. In fact, US Attorney Soler was selected to replace US Attorney Bash to head up what appears to be an ongoing investigation.
c'mom Winston..... #bebetter
I think it's even more telling that they didn't release the results at all. That tells me that there is information in the report that directly refutes Trump's assertions. Otherwise, if there was a shred or morsel of information that might benefit Trump they would have released it. Durham is falling flat too....all trumped up by Trump.