You don’t think asserting that someone is a Russian asset today is in any way similar to asserting that someone is a Communist during the McCarthy era. Ok then.
What are the consequences to asserting that someone is a Russian asset?
Aren't the GOP the one's asserting Dems are communists?
Let me just recap to make sure I understand. You post a link to an article about Tulsi Gabbard and conclude that she is a Russian asset. I write 16 words, calling you out for it, which you characterize as a “huge miss”, apparently believing that I don’t know what McCarthyism is.
I will explain one more time since previous attempts have apparently failed to land with with you. Saying that Gabbard appears to be someone who is being influenced by a foreign nation is not even remotely engaging in McCarthyism. Whether or not you actually know what McCarthyism is beside the point. Attempting to paint it as such is a huge miss. McCarthyism was a widespread effort to target large number of individuals via threats of blackballing etc.
Quote:
I then elaborate because I guess you didn’t understand when I said in jest, “Let the McCarthyism flow through you, that I was comparing your accusation that she is a Russian asset to McCarthyism accusations of someone being a Russian asset. (It’s either that, or you were being disingenuous.)
"In jest"? That's not what you said above: "calling you out for it".
Apparently someone is being disingenuous.
I don't see how you can counter that argument.
Quote:
In a 2016 conversation with fellow members of House leadership, the majority leader, Kevin McCarthy, suggested that Donald Trump was on Vladimir Putin’s payroll.
In an exchange first reported by the Washington Post, McCarthy said: “There’s …there’s two people, I think, Putin pays: [California Representative Dana] Rohrabacher and Trump … [laughter] … swear to God.”
According to the transcript, speaker Paul Ryan immediately responded: “This is an off-the-record … [laughter] … NO LEAKS … [laughter] … alright?!”
But let's just ignore that little slip of the tongue by a republican, who happens to literally be a McCarthy, saying that two members of the republican party, one of whom happens to be the president, are on Putin's payroll.
As many herein are likely aware, Matt used to write for Rolling Stone, appeared on various liberal/progressive shows, and seemed to have solid credentials as a solid liberal/progressive.
In the article, Matt is making the point that though Trump is as horrible as many suggest, that Russiagate is a "highly politicized, phony narrative . . ." and the various leaks from the intelligence community, regarding Russiagate, amount to a coup in the US. He is suggesting that the impeachment is CIA/FBI backed.
Quote:
The agencies’ new trick is inserting themselves into domestic politics using leaks and media pressure. The “intel chiefs” meeting was just the first in a series of similar stories, many following the pattern in which a document was created, passed from department from department, and leaked.
Quote:
Trump stands accused of using the office of the presidency to advance political aims, in particular pressuring Ukraine to investigate potential campaign rival Joe Biden. He’s guilty, but the issue is how guilty, in comparison to his accusers.
Quote:
My discomfort in the last few years, first with Russiagate and now with Ukrainegate and impeachment, stems from the belief that the people pushing hardest for Trump’s early removal are more dangerous than Trump. Many Americans don’t see this because they’re not used to waking up in a country where you’re not sure who the president will be by nightfall. They don’t understand that this predicament is worse than having a bad president.
I am still "digesting" this. I do not agree with his assessment of Russiagate, but I did not find that he ever misreported the facts regarding it, as do conservatives regularly. I do not agree with his assessment that liberals/progressives were stating that Trump committed treason before Mueller's report came out, as though this was the universal, or even the substantial, opinion of the left. I also do not subscribe to his conspiracy theory regarding this coup, or most other conspiracy theories for that matter, but I can't state as fact what he describes, or something to that effect, is not possible either. _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 10:23 am Post subject:
The problem with Tulsi Gabbard is that like Jill Stein, she appeals primarily to a brand of leftist who is saturated with Russian agitprop. Virtually all of her fans that I've come across are some form of Russia Truthers, to a fault. She's also really popular with the anti vaccine people where I live. Those groups tend to cross pollinate easily. And of course, concerned Republicans root for her in the Democratic primaries too... _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29352 Location: La La Land
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 10:27 am Post subject:
Omar Little wrote:
The problem with Tulsi Gabbard is that like Jill Stein, she appeals primarily to a brand of leftist who is saturated with Russian agitprop. Virtually all of her fans that I've come across are some form of Russia Truthers, to a fault. She's also really popular with the anti vaccine people where I live. Those groups tend to cross pollinate easily. And of course, concerned Republicans root for her in the Democratic primaries too...
Last Presidential candidate to support impeaching Trump. Even after Republican Bill Weld.
Her portrayal of Mueller's findings is laughable.
Pretty easy to see why she is loved by Breitbart, Fox News, and Russia. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
As many herein are likely aware, Matt used to write for Rolling Stone, appeared on various liberal/progressive shows, and seemed to have solid credentials as a solid liberal/progressive.
In the article, Matt is making the point that though Trump is as horrible as many suggest, that Russiagate is a "highly politicized, phony narrative . . ." and the various leaks from the intelligence community, regarding Russiagate, amount to a coup in the US. He is suggesting that the impeachment is CIA/FBI backed.
Quote:
The agencies’ new trick is inserting themselves into domestic politics using leaks and media pressure. The “intel chiefs” meeting was just the first in a series of similar stories, many following the pattern in which a document was created, passed from department from department, and leaked.
Quote:
Trump stands accused of using the office of the presidency to advance political aims, in particular pressuring Ukraine to investigate potential campaign rival Joe Biden. He’s guilty, but the issue is how guilty, in comparison to his accusers.
Quote:
My discomfort in the last few years, first with Russiagate and now with Ukrainegate and impeachment, stems from the belief that the people pushing hardest for Trump’s early removal are more dangerous than Trump. Many Americans don’t see this because they’re not used to waking up in a country where you’re not sure who the president will be by nightfall. They don’t understand that this predicament is worse than having a bad president.
I am still "digesting" this. I do not agree with his assessment of Russiagate, but I did not find that he ever misreported the facts regarding it, as do conservatives regularly. I do not agree with his assessment that liberals/progressives were stating that Trump committed treason before Mueller's report came out, as though this was the universal, or even the substantial, opinion of the left. I also do not subscribe to his conspiracy theory regarding this coup, or most other conspiracy theories for that matter, but I can't state as fact what he describes, or something to that effect, is not possible either.
Basically Taibbi is saying that if you work in the FBI and CIA and you see the government taken over by a cabal who use all of its levers to squash any investigation of stuff they are doing quite openly and have been exhaustively detailed to have done, you're running a coup by blowing the whistle in the only ways you can.
It's sloppy work designed to be provocative. He's basically mining the deep state conspiracy theory for senationalism. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
As many herein are likely aware, Matt used to write for Rolling Stone, appeared on various liberal/progressive shows, and seemed to have solid credentials as a solid liberal/progressive.
In the article, Matt is making the point that though Trump is as horrible as many suggest, that Russiagate is a "highly politicized, phony narrative . . ." and the various leaks from the intelligence community, regarding Russiagate, amount to a coup in the US. He is suggesting that the impeachment is CIA/FBI backed.
Quote:
The agencies’ new trick is inserting themselves into domestic politics using leaks and media pressure. The “intel chiefs” meeting was just the first in a series of similar stories, many following the pattern in which a document was created, passed from department from department, and leaked.
Quote:
Trump stands accused of using the office of the presidency to advance political aims, in particular pressuring Ukraine to investigate potential campaign rival Joe Biden. He’s guilty, but the issue is how guilty, in comparison to his accusers.
Quote:
My discomfort in the last few years, first with Russiagate and now with Ukrainegate and impeachment, stems from the belief that the people pushing hardest for Trump’s early removal are more dangerous than Trump. Many Americans don’t see this because they’re not used to waking up in a country where you’re not sure who the president will be by nightfall. They don’t understand that this predicament is worse than having a bad president.
I am still "digesting" this. I do not agree with his assessment of Russiagate, but I did not find that he ever misreported the facts regarding it, as do conservatives regularly. I do not agree with his assessment that liberals/progressives were stating that Trump committed treason before Mueller's report came out, as though this was the universal, or even the substantial, opinion of the left. I also do not subscribe to his conspiracy theory regarding this coup, or most other conspiracy theories for that matter, but I can't state as fact what he describes, or something to that effect, is not possible either.
Not sure what there is to "digest". What he is suggesting is that all the elements in place to keep a rouge President from ignoring his/her Constitutional duties are powerless to prevent a President from wrestling the country s his own personal fiefdom.
So apparently we need to just sit back and realize that the President is actually the King.
That's freaking absurd! _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52657 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 11:04 am Post subject:
Hector the Pup wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Surfitall wrote:
Let me just recap to make sure I understand. You post a link to an article about Tulsi Gabbard and conclude that she is a Russian asset. I write 16 words, calling you out for it, which you characterize as a “huge miss”, apparently believing that I don’t know what McCarthyism is.
I will explain one more time since previous attempts have apparently failed to land with with you. Saying that Gabbard appears to be someone who is being influenced by a foreign nation is not even remotely engaging in McCarthyism. Whether or not you actually know what McCarthyism is beside the point. Attempting to paint it as such is a huge miss. McCarthyism was a widespread effort to target large number of individuals via threats of blackballing etc.
Quote:
I then elaborate because I guess you didn’t understand when I said in jest, “Let the McCarthyism flow through you, that I was comparing your accusation that she is a Russian asset to McCarthyism accusations of someone being a Russian asset. (It’s either that, or you were being disingenuous.)
"In jest"? That's not what you said above: "calling you out for it".
Apparently someone is being disingenuous.
I don't see how you can counter that argument.
Quote:
In a 2016 conversation with fellow members of House leadership, the majority leader, Kevin McCarthy, suggested that Donald Trump was on Vladimir Putin’s payroll.
In an exchange first reported by the Washington Post, McCarthy said: “There’s …there’s two people, I think, Putin pays: [California Representative Dana] Rohrabacher and Trump … [laughter] … swear to God.”
According to the transcript, speaker Paul Ryan immediately responded: “This is an off-the-record … [laughter] … NO LEAKS … [laughter] … alright?!”
But let's just ignore that little slip of the tongue by a republican, who happens to literally be a McCarthy, saying that two members of the republican party, one of whom happens to be the president, are on Putin's payroll.
_________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29352 Location: La La Land
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 12:29 pm Post subject:
Hunter Biden resigned from a Chinese firm. Strictly politically speaking. Stupid move.
He could've always resigned later if Biden won the election. But doing it now doesn't help with combating the BS narrative Trump is pushing. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Not sure what there is to "digest". What he is suggesting is that all the elements in place to keep a rouge President from ignoring his/her Constitutional duties are powerless to prevent a President from wrestling the country s his own personal fiefdom.
So apparently we need to just sit back and realize that the President is actually the King.
That's freaking absurd!
No. I guess you didn't get his concern. What he is suggesting is that other elements of our democracy, not the mechanisms of our constitutional democratic republic as designed by our framers, but those in our intelligence operations, unelected civil servants, who are working to effect a coup, in part by leaking sensitive information. We might say fine, the means justifies the end, but does this end here with Trump? What if the roles were reversed, or what if our intelligence operations are coalescing power, becoming something behind the curtain beyond their assigned duties as civil servants, that go after who and what they do not agree with, that dictate rather than are dictated to?
Since I am so far from the many mechanisms and layers of our democracy, the many, many gears and the tentacles of our very complex apparatus, not to mention the heart and brains at and near the center of it, it is a scary possibility--at least to me.
This is a philosophical issue that should be examined in the broader sense and not just as to the current situation. _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Last edited by ribeye on Mon Oct 14, 2019 1:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Hunter Biden resigned from a Chinese firm. Strictly politically speaking. Stupid move.
He could've always resigned later if Biden won the election. But doing it now doesn't help with combating the BS narrative Trump is pushing.
It was coordinated with Joe's campaign IMO...
Joe just came out with a quote that "if elected president, none of my relatives will be on my staff, or have an office in the White House".
They are turning the narrative back on to Drumpf.
Lets see if it works (I think it does and will). _________________ Creatures crawl in search of blood, To terrorize y'alls neighborhood.
Not sure what there is to "digest". What he is suggesting is that all the elements in place to keep a rouge President from ignoring his/her Constitutional duties are powerless to prevent a President from wrestling the country s his own personal fiefdom.
So apparently we need to just sit back and realize that the President is actually the King.
That's freaking absurd!
No. I guess you didn't get his concern. What he is suggesting is that other elements of our democracy, not the mechanisms of our constitutional democratic republic as designed by our framers, but those in our intelligence operations, unelected civil servants, who are working to effect a coup, in part by leaking sensitive information. We might say fine, the means justifies the end, but does this end here with Trump? What if the roles were reversed, or what if our intelligence operations are coalescing power, becoming something behind the curtain beyond their assigned duties as civil servants, that go after who and what they do not agree with, that dictate rather than are dictated to?
Since I am so far from the many mechanisms and layers of our democracy, the many, many gears and the tentacles of our very complex apparatus, not to mention the heart and brains at and near the center of it, it is a scary possibility--at least to me.
This is a philosophical issue that should be examined in the broader sense and not just as to the current situation.
I read and get Taibbi's point but he is basing the whole article on the opinion that coup's are bad.
I suggest that some coup's are righteous, and justified- the French revolution and in 1895 Robert Wilcox's unsuccessful coup attempt to restore the Hawaiian Monarchy are two that come to mind.
If this is a "coup" (and none of us really know)- and Matt is right... but if that's the case...I argue that it is essential that we do coup, and if someone happens to go "John Wilkes Booth" , that person will live in infamy forever in History.
It really is that bad, IMO. _________________ Creatures crawl in search of blood, To terrorize y'alls neighborhood.
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90307 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 1:20 pm Post subject:
ribeye wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Not sure what there is to "digest". What he is suggesting is that all the elements in place to keep a rouge President from ignoring his/her Constitutional duties are powerless to prevent a President from wrestling the country s his own personal fiefdom.
So apparently we need to just sit back and realize that the President is actually the King.
That's freaking absurd!
No. I guess you didn't get his concern. What he is suggesting is that other elements of our democracy, not the mechanisms of our constitutional democratic republic as designed by our framers, but those in our intelligence operations, unelected civil servants, who are working to effect a coup, in part by leaking sensitive information. We might say fine, the means justifies the end, but does this end here with Trump? What if the roles were reversed, or what if our intelligence operations are coalescing power, becoming something behind the curtain beyond their assigned duties as civil servants, that go after who and what they do not agree with, that dictate rather than are dictated to?
Since I am so far from the many mechanisms and layers of our democracy, the many, many gears and the tentacles of our very complex apparatus, not to mention the heart and brains at and near the center of it, it is a scary possibility--at least to me.
This is a philosophical issue that should be examined in the broader sense and not just as to the current situation.
And that's Taibbi's goal, even at the expense of helping a despot. He wants to sell you that fear, because a huge portion of his leftist readers (ironically very much like their far right opponents) really love the establishment/deep state conspiracy theories.
Let's say instead of analogies we look at the reality. What if you have a completely rogue administration that is protected by an abetting Senate majority. How do the civil servants in the bureaucracies check or report on the malfeasance of their politically appointed masters? Vote? That's part of their job, the nonpartisan ideal, where they, many of them conservatives, nonetheless blow the whistle. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
It just occurred to me that in 2016, my dream ticket was Biden/Warren... _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29352 Location: La La Land
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 1:52 pm Post subject:
eddiejonze wrote:
kikanga wrote:
Hunter Biden resigned from a Chinese firm. Strictly politically speaking. Stupid move.
He could've always resigned later if Biden won the election. But doing it now doesn't help with combating the BS narrative Trump is pushing.
It was coordinated with Joe's campaign IMO...
Joe just came out with a quote that "if elected president, none of my relatives will be on my staff, or have an office in the White House".
They are turning the narrative back on to Drumpf.
Lets see if it works (I think it does and will).
I hope you're right! _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
There was also a poll in Iowa with Biden/Warren/Sanders tied for first, but Mayor Pete with 14 percent, which is not too far behind them. Even in the national poll you cited, he's not far behind Sanders. I've read that Warren and Mayor Pete have the best organizations in Iowa. And his fundraising is still strong. He could outperform expectations significantly there, and that could change things in the contests that follow. It would certainly help his VP chances. _________________ ¡Hala Madrid!
Not sure what there is to "digest". What he is suggesting is that all the elements in place to keep a rouge President from ignoring his/her Constitutional duties are powerless to prevent a President from wrestling the country s his own personal fiefdom.
So apparently we need to just sit back and realize that the President is actually the King.
That's freaking absurd!
No. I guess you didn't get his concern. What he is suggesting is that other elements of our democracy, not the mechanisms of our constitutional democratic republic as designed by our framers, but those in our intelligence operations, unelected civil servants, who are working to effect a coup, in part by leaking sensitive information. We might say fine, the means justifies the end, but does this end here with Trump? What if the roles were reversed, or what if our intelligence operations are coalescing power, becoming something behind the curtain beyond their assigned duties as civil servants, that go after who and what they do not agree with, that dictate rather than are dictated to?
Since I am so far from the many mechanisms and layers of our democracy, the many, many gears and the tentacles of our very complex apparatus, not to mention the heart and brains at and near the center of it, it is a scary possibility--at least to me.
This is a philosophical issue that should be examined in the broader sense and not just as to the current situation.
And that's Taibbi's goal, even at the expense of helping a despot. He wants to sell you that fear, because a huge portion of his leftist readers (ironically very much like their far right opponents) really love the establishment/deep state conspiracy theories.
Let's say instead of analogies we look at the reality. What if you have a completely rogue administration that is protected by an abetting Senate majority. How do the civil servants in the bureaucracies check or report on the malfeasance of their politically appointed masters? Vote? That's part of their job, the nonpartisan ideal, where they, many of them conservatives, nonetheless blow the whistle.
So, you seem to be saying, the end does indeed justify the means (with leaking), which is what the Republicans also said when Wikileaks published their reports. But then, and this gets to what civil servants should do when they see irregularities in government, there is another technique, go the route of a whistle blower, as in Ukrainegate.
But the issue is not just about whistle blowers and Ukrainegate, which appears to be above board, but leakers of sensitive information and Russiagate. These are vastly different issues, one using the system and one that abused it--for the greater good one might say. Many, if not most, of us, accept the latter to some degree, and where, to some degree, I disagree with Taibbi, but we must understand what this means or could mean. We must understand that this means it is OK for civil servants to break laws and rules (meaning the rule of men over the rule of law) when they think they are right or when it is for the greater good.
I see a problem with this. There are Republicans in government also, particularly in the judiciary and law enforcement. Is it also OK that they break laws and rules when they think they are right or when it is for the greater good? _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52657 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:07 pm Post subject:
ribeye wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
Not sure what there is to "digest". What he is suggesting is that all the elements in place to keep a rouge President from ignoring his/her Constitutional duties are powerless to prevent a President from wrestling the country s his own personal fiefdom.
So apparently we need to just sit back and realize that the President is actually the King.
That's freaking absurd!
No. I guess you didn't get his concern. What he is suggesting is that other elements of our democracy, not the mechanisms of our constitutional democratic republic as designed by our framers, but those in our intelligence operations, unelected civil servants, who are working to effect a coup, in part by leaking sensitive information. We might say fine, the means justifies the end, but does this end here with Trump? What if the roles were reversed, or what if our intelligence operations are coalescing power, becoming something behind the curtain beyond their assigned duties as civil servants, that go after who and what they do not agree with, that dictate rather than are dictated to?
Since I am so far from the many mechanisms and layers of our democracy, the many, many gears and the tentacles of our very complex apparatus, not to mention the heart and brains at and near the center of it, it is a scary possibility--at least to me.
This is a philosophical issue that should be examined in the broader sense and not just as to the current situation.
Fair enough. But the current situation is so untenable that not addressing it would make any future scenarios in regards to the above moot. The Constitutional crisis we face right now is so deep that what might happen in the future is the least of our problems. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52657 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:16 pm Post subject:
"Anyone who wants to assist Syria in protecting the Kurds is good with me, whether it is Russia, China, or Napoleon Bonaparte. I hope they all do great, we are 7,000 miles away!" Trump wrote on Twitter.
But I guess our biggest concern is not stopping this mad man, but worrying about a scenario where intelligence operatives might get out of hand somewhere down the line and stage a coup . . . _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
As many herein are likely aware, Matt used to write for Rolling Stone, appeared on various liberal/progressive shows, and seemed to have solid credentials as a solid liberal/progressive.
In the article, Matt is making the point that though Trump is as horrible as many suggest, that Russiagate is a "highly politicized, phony narrative . . ." and the various leaks from the intelligence community, regarding Russiagate, amount to a coup in the US. He is suggesting that the impeachment is CIA/FBI backed.
Quote:
The agencies’ new trick is inserting themselves into domestic politics using leaks and media pressure. The “intel chiefs” meeting was just the first in a series of similar stories, many following the pattern in which a document was created, passed from department from department, and leaked.
Quote:
Trump stands accused of using the office of the presidency to advance political aims, in particular pressuring Ukraine to investigate potential campaign rival Joe Biden. He’s guilty, but the issue is how guilty, in comparison to his accusers.
Quote:
My discomfort in the last few years, first with Russiagate and now with Ukrainegate and impeachment, stems from the belief that the people pushing hardest for Trump’s early removal are more dangerous than Trump. Many Americans don’t see this because they’re not used to waking up in a country where you’re not sure who the president will be by nightfall. They don’t understand that this predicament is worse than having a bad president.
I am still "digesting" this. I do not agree with his assessment of Russiagate, but I did not find that he ever misreported the facts regarding it, as do conservatives regularly. I do not agree with his assessment that liberals/progressives were stating that Trump committed treason before Mueller's report came out, as though this was the universal, or even the substantial, opinion of the left. I also do not subscribe to his conspiracy theory regarding this coup, or most other conspiracy theories for that matter, but I can't state as fact what he describes, or something to that effect, is not possible either.
Not sure what there is to "digest". What he is suggesting is that all the elements in place to keep a rouge President from ignoring his/her Constitutional duties are powerless to prevent a President from wrestling the country s his own personal fiefdom.
So apparently we need to just sit back and realize that the President is actually the King.
That's freaking absurd!
If you're still digesting here's Richard Engel warning Rachel Maddow almost 3 years ago that the essence of Russiagate is b.s., and the intelligence community is angry at Trump.
That Engel interview was narrowly focused on the specific issue of Russia having kompromat on Trump and that no one has been able to prove that one way or the other. No one has been able to prove Trump is a Russian asset. But all his actions of the last 3 years line up perfectly for someone who constantly makes decisions that benefit Russia. Engel wasn't saying Russian hacking of US election didn't happen.
And there are 3 years of subsequent Trump actions favoring Russia to factor in -- which hadn't all happened yet as Engel was taping this interview.
Good lord.
Last edited by ChefLinda on Mon Oct 14, 2019 4:16 pm; edited 2 times in total
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
