Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, November 03, 2017

If President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the presidency, its "worse than Watergate," journalist Carl Bernstein says. ... Now 73, Bernstein waxed lyrical about the parallels between the early 1970s and today's political scene, describing "this orange haired president" as a "spectacularly ignorant ... grifter" who has "contempt for the law." "What Watergate was about at it's most basic level was a vast campaign of political espionage and sabotage to undermine the democratic political process in this country," he told David Axelrod in an onstage interview following a screening of All the President's Men at the Revival Theater.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Yes. It's much worse than Watergate. President Pence will offer Trump a pardon, just to prevent him from barricading inside the WH and calling upon his followers to riot, or worse

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-03 09:48 PM | Reply

Well duh. He was colluding with a country who's goal is to harm the USA.

And he's supported by a republican party so greedy and obsessed with tax cuts for the rich that they don't care about anything else, including treason.*

*if the involved parties are republicans. If they were democrats, repubs would be screaming for blood.

#2 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-03 09:59 PM | Reply

Watergate seems pretty tame now by comparison. Just a couple good 'ol boys on a spree compared to the hostile takeover by a foreign authoritarian regime with the cooperation of a colluding president of the United States.

#3 | Posted by Twinpac at 2017-11-04 12:26 AM | Reply

Imagine if Putin had been trolling for Hillary rather than Trump... she can't even get away with saving the DNC financially without being locked up, much less something like colludin' wif Putin!

And all because Donald wanted the biggest hotel in Moscow... and hotels across Russia. Why else would he have taken this job?

Watergate happened when I was in college. Nixon was the 70's Reagan who also got caught being a traitor to his country. Watergate was about legitimate democracy though, like Russiagate, Reagan got a pass for dealing with Iran because he was senile.

Trump is worse than senile, he's a dedicated grifter who doesn't give a frack about legitimate democracy, or much of anything else other than himself; other than how he is perceived. Like his ghost writer said, if you really want to upset him, question the figure he gives about his wealth.

Or maybe convict him of collusion with a foreign power to delegitimize our democracy... which he basically did in public anyway.

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-04 12:29 AM | Reply

The only one we know colluded with Russia is Michael Steele who circled up with his KGB cronies to create opposition material on Trump. Sure he was working for Fusion GPS and HRC and the DNC were one step removed as financiers. If that would have been the POTUS, so many panties in a bunch. I love the use of "if" in the article.

All of you who predicted DT would last less than one year - are you nervous? I'd guess probably not because every other prediction you've made hasn't panned out either. Does it hurt being so wrong, so often?

#5 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2017-11-04 07:49 AM | Reply | Funny: 5

#5

Supporters of Donald Trump are confused, sick, or Russians.

#6 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-04 08:12 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#5

Donald Trump is confused, sick, and a Russian.

#7 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-04 08:15 AM | Reply

#5

In regards to how long Donald lasts, I'm surprised how quickly Mueller's organized crime investigation progresses.

If Donald mounts a coup to protect himself, I know whose side you're on.

#8 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-04 08:18 AM | Reply

I'm surprised how quickly Mueller's organized crime investigation progresses.

It's mainly because they weren't organized, they were completely disorganized. That is why it's crumbling so quickly. We give Trumpers way too much credit for being devious when in reality they were a bunch of self-serving, geopolitically-ignorant ----- far in over their heads once the Russian counterintelligence apparatus got a hold of them, each in their own way and collectively once Trump weaponized the information they stole and released through Wikileaks.

We have to remember that Trump has no idea how governments work nor a clue how intelligence agents target their marks. I don't doubt for a second that Trump himself really thinks that the Russians (nee Putin) just liked him better and wanted the same thing that he did, which was Hillary defeated. He doesn't comprehend that their incursion into his campaign was a treasonous act on his part for accepting what they offered. He just thinks that's how politics works, you take your help where you can find it. Of course, Trump truly wanted to serve the interests of his favorite "investors" (read Russian-connected money launderers) who are the foundation of his modern real estate business and saw nothing wrong in shaping his nascent foreign policy in their favored direction.

However, our laws are pretty clear about things in this area, and a host of Trump surrogates did indeed have conversations, negotiations, and financial connections to Russian operatives and oligarchs. This much is pretty clear by what has already become public this week with the Manafort/Gates indictments and the Papadopoulos plea agreement. The buying and selling of high-end real estate through the use of shell corporations and LLCs is obviously a way to evade international laws on the movement of money, and this helps explain why so many of Trump's "deals" never involve the buyers actually occupying the real estate they've acquired. All of this will become much clearer very soon and will lead to the downfall not only of the Trump administration but also the Trump business empire. This die has already been cast.

#9 | Posted by tonyroma at 2017-11-04 09:17 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- Does it hurt being so wrong, so often?

You tell us....

www.forbes.com

Even Forbes knows it.

#10 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-04 12:41 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

"If President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the presidency..."

#11 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-04 12:58 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

The other side of the coin.

Evidence has emerged that the FBI withheld information from Congress and from the American people about Russian corruption of American uranium companies. A confidential U.S. witness, working in the Russian nuclear industry, revealed that Russia had deeply compromised an American uranium trucking firm through bribery and financial kickbacks.

Although federal agents possessed this information in 2010, the Department of Justice continued investigating this "matter" for over four years. The FBI, led at the time by Robert Mueller, required the confidential witness to sign a non-disclosure agreement. When the witness attempted to contact Congress and federal courts about the bribery and corruption he saw, he was threatened with legal action. By silencing him, Obama's Justice Department and Mueller's FBI knowingly kept Congress in the dark about Russia's significant and illegal involvement with American uranium companies.

#12 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-11-04 01:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"If President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the presidency, its "worse than Watergate," journalist Carl Bernstein says"

True. But since Watergate, alot of worse things have been done by Presidents and candidates. Just the obvious stuff during my liftetime: Iran-Contra was worse than Watergate. Lying us into Iraq was worse than Watergate. Bailing out the criminal bankers with no consequences was worse than Watergate (x2 presidents). Helping jihadists wreck Libya while lying about it was worse than Watergate. Hillary taking over the DNC before she was the nominee was worse than Watergate. If we knew more about the backroom dealings of presidents the list would be pages long given how corrupt the government-corporate partnership is.

The bar has been set way, way lower than Watergate.

But yes, if this happened it is much, much worse than Watergate.

#13 | Posted by Sully at 2017-11-04 01:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The only one we know colluded with Russia is Michael Steele who circled up with his KGB cronies to create opposition material on Trump. Sure he was working for Fusion GPS and HRC and the DNC were one step removed as financiers. If that would have been the POTUS, so many panties in a bunch. I love the use of "if" in the article.

All of you who predicted DT would last less than one year - are you nervous? I'd guess probably not because every other prediction you've made hasn't panned out either. Does it hurt being so wrong, so often?

#5 | Posted by Nuke_Gently

Inform yourself before speaking. All you're doing is demonstrating your ignorance.

Trump Jr's emails PROVE he was trying to collude with russia. After that, anyone who says nothing bad happened looks like a fool, including you.

Change the channel. Get your news from a real news source. Join the real world.

#14 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-04 01:59 PM | Reply

@#14 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-04 01:59 PM
Is failing to collude actionable?

#15 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-04 02:06 PM | Reply

I thought it was called oppo research.

#16 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2017-11-04 02:10 PM | Reply

I thought it was called oppo research.

#16 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Not when it makes you owe favors to our enemies.

Oppo research people don't get to tell you who to appoint to your cabinet.

#17 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-04 02:27 PM | Reply

Is failing to collude actionable?

#15 | Posted by Avigdore

Attempted collusion means anyone who says collusion didn't happen look like an idiot.

#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-04 02:28 PM | Reply

@#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-04 02:28 PM
You are of the opinion that attempting to do something is the same as successfully doing something?

#19 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-04 04:30 PM | Reply

Attempted murder is a crime

#20 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 05:01 PM | Reply

Is attempted collusion?

#21 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-04 05:07 PM | Reply

Yes

You don't get points for being incompetent

#22 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 05:40 PM | Reply

Yes, just ask the stars of to catch a predator

#23 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 05:41 PM | Reply

Let me know what line of the legal code attempted collusion is breaking, Truthhurts.

#24 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-04 10:27 PM | Reply

Christ are you playing semantic games?

grow up

#25 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 10:33 PM | Reply

educate yourself

www.politico.com

#26 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 10:34 PM | Reply

"Christ are you playing semantic games?"

Well, he claims he's not defending Trump, so...

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 10:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#26 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 10:34 PM
You just posted a link that said both that "Collusion is not a federal crime" and "Although "collusion" is a word that has been thrown around a lot lately, it doesn't have any specific legal meaning." Did you actually read your own posting?

And yet people above are claiming that that non-specifically defined term has been "PROVE"d to have happened.

he claims he's not defending Trump, so... - #27 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 10:36 PM
I'll say it again. You can defend the truth without defending Trump.

#28 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-04 10:57 PM | Reply

Who else do you defend the truth for?
Anyone that isn't Trump, or a member of the Trump administration?

#29 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 10:59 PM | Reply

#26 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 10:34 PM
You just posted a link that said both that "Collusion is not a federal crime" and "Although "collusion" is a word that has been thrown around a lot lately, it doesn't have any specific legal meaning." Did you actually read your own posting?
And yet people above are claiming that that non-specifically defined term has been "PROVE"d to have happened.
he claims he's not defending Trump, so... - #27 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 10:36 PM
I'll say it again. You can defend the truth without defending Trump.
#28 | Posted by Avigdore

Stop
playing
semantic
games
Trump
is
guilty
of
crimes
however
people
want
to
call
those
specific
crimes
i.e.
conspiracy
fraud
election
violations
money
laundering
etc

#30 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 11:03 PM | Reply

Can
You
Show
Any
Proof
Of
That
Statement?
A link is fine.

#31 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-04 11:17 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Can
You
Show
Any
Proof
Of
That
Statement?
A link is fine.
#31 | Posted by Avigdore

if you cant see the evidence mounting, including his own campaign people pleading guilty, well you need a seeing eye dog

#32 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 11:36 PM | Reply

The link in #26 says
"For example, if Donald Trump Jr. sought "dirt" on Hillary Clinton from the Russians, he might be charged with conspiring to violate the election laws of the United States, which prohibit foreign nationals from contributing any "thing of value" to an electoral campaign. "

And this happened,
"The emails show music promoter Rob Goldstone telling the future US president's son that "the crown prosecutor of Russia" had offered "to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father".
www.theguardian.com

#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 11:37 PM | Reply

if you cant see the evidence mounting, including his own campaign people pleading guilty, well you need a seeing eye dog - #32 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-04 11:36 PM
You flat out stated that Trump was guilty of crimes. That kind of claim deserves some proof. Or maybe you just want to retract the statement? 2 previous campaign members being charged with non-campaign related crimes and a 3rd campaigner charged with lying to the FBI is not in any way shape or form 'mounting evidence' of Trump's guilt. Or is it merely guilt by association?

@#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-04 11:37 PM
The assumption is 'Trump' refers to President Trump and 'Trump Jr' doesn't.

#34 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-04 11:45 PM | Reply

AVIGDORE

First of all, you should stop pretending that you know everything that Mueller knows. Or for that matter, that you know everything, by way of "association," that Manafort, Gates and Papadopoulos (to name the first three so far) have provided to Mueller for his use in ongoing investigations ~ or that you even know who is next in the queue of campaign associates or what kind of charges they are facing ~ or what they'll give up to save their own hides. Colluding, or an attempt to collude, can quickly turn into conspiracies and yes, that really is a legal term.

Speculating is good fun and we all do it. But that's all it is. Definitive conclusions and games of semantics is a fool's errand. Are you sure you want to be that fool?

#35 | Posted by Twinpac at 2017-11-05 01:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Someone saying Trump is guilty isn't speculation. I haven't pretended to know anything other than what has been released, which is why when someone says things like 'he is DEFINITELY guilty' and I ask for a citation that leads them to believe such, the only response is deflection, name-calling and crickets.

#36 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-05 12:58 PM | Reply

Comrade Avigdore,

Did Russia attack America with the intent to undermine the election and to sow chaos and discord in an effort to undermine our Democracy?

Did Trump know about this before or after he was President?

Does Trump still deny we were attacked?

Has Trump done anything to stop the attacks or prevent future attacks?

If the answer is yes to all of the above then Trump is a traitor to his own country and needs to be removed from office.

#37 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-05 01:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Has Trump NOT done anything to stop the attacks or prevent future attacks?

Doh...

#38 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-05 02:08 PM | Reply

Because you added the 'undermine Democracy' bit of the first question, the answer is no. Each person had the opportunity to make their vote. That was not undermined in any way.
2nd question: I don't know, and neither do you. I will say that there's been no evidence of it so far.
3rd: He has stated that the election wasn't attacked. There was no changing of votes or hacks into voting machines or voting tabulations made according to any sources that I have seen, which would back his claim.
4th: I don't know. Do you have a listing of all of his memoranda and statements to the various executive branch organizations that would indicate he's done nothing? What would you have him do?

#39 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-05 02:28 PM | Reply

Each person had the opportunity to make their vote

#39 | Posted by Avigdore

Sophism.

#40 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-05 03:03 PM | Reply

Tell us about air craft carriers, AVIGDORE.

#41 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-05 03:04 PM | Reply

Each person had the opportunity to make their vote

#39 | Posted by Avigdore

Each person had the opportunity to buy the car of their choice based on fabricated dealer information.

#42 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-05 03:06 PM | Reply

Because you added the 'undermine Democracy' bit of the first question, the answer is no. Each person had the opportunity to make their vote. That was not undermined in any way.
2nd question: I don't know, and neither do you. I will say that there's been no evidence of it so far.
3rd: He has stated that the election wasn't attacked. There was no changing of votes or hacks into voting machines or voting tabulations made according to any sources that I have seen, which would back his claim.
4th: I don't know. Do you have a listing of all of his memoranda and statements to the various executive branch organizations that would indicate he's done nothing? What would you have him do?
#39 | Posted by Avigdore

What is probably true is that the Russians attempted and probably succeeded in hacking our election systems (see. Reality Winner). We don't know 10% of the truth and our government is hiding this information from us in the name of National Security.

What we KNOW thanks to the courage of Ms. Winner is that Russia at least attempted to hack.

And Trump does nothing

#43 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-05 03:14 PM | Reply

What do you want to know about carriers, Zed? Number of Main Coolant Pumps? Voltage of the deck edge doors? How about which side you refuel on? Number of unrep stations? You want to know how many JP-5 pump rooms? What are you asking for, they're big ships.

#44 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-05 03:16 PM | Reply

What we KNOW thanks to the courage of Ms. Winner is that Russia at least attempted to hack. - #43 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-11-05 03:14 PM
A vendor of voting machines, not the agencies that have those machines. Fun story. This happened in Augusta GA, my hometown.

#45 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-05 03:24 PM | Reply

You are of the opinion that attempting to do something is the same as successfully doing something?

#19 | Posted by Avigdore

Are you of the opinion that one failed attempt means they probably didn't try it in any other ways?

#46 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-05 04:38 PM | Reply

#44

I want something you can't get off the internet. Figured "spot" out yet?

#47 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-05 05:05 PM | Reply

Nobody I've spoken with, chief, senior chief, EM1 have any idea what the 'spot' is. Admittedly all 3 are EMs, so it may be something more rate specific. How about paces from the 1 VPC to another?

#48 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-05 05:24 PM | Reply

Are you of the opinion that one failed attempt means they probably didn't try it in any other ways? - #46 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-05 04:38 PM
No, which is why I didn't say that. Are you going to answer the question I posed that you deflected from?

#49 | Posted by Avigdore at 2017-11-05 05:35 PM | Reply

No, which is why I didn't say that. Are you going to answer the question I posed that you deflected from?

#49 | Posted by Avigdore

Happily. YES - attempting to collude with our enemies to win an american election is just as bad as successfully colluding, because either way, it shows they are willing to commit treason if it benefits them.

#50 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-06 01:12 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort