Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, December 02, 2017

President Trump's former deputy national security adviser K.T. McFarland told a friend in an email when she was on Trump's transition team that Russia "threw" the U.S. election to Trump, The New York Times reported Saturday. McFarland reportedly wrote in the email that sanctions then-President Obama levied on Russia in response to Moscow's election meddling would make it more difficult for Trump to improve relations with Russia, "which has just thrown the U.S.A. election to him."

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

The report comes one day after Trump's former national security adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with then-Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak in the month before Trump took office.

McFarland served as Trump's deputy national security adviser until May and is currently awaiting confirmation to be his ambassador to Singapore.

Comments

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

No collusion here, move along.

#1 | Posted by bored at 2017-12-02 06:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

KT had better RUN to Mueller and get a deal! She was the go-between for Flynn and Drumpf at Mara Lago, she can confirm that Drumpf was in the loop and knew exactly what Flynn was doing, and probably ordered him to do it.

#2 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2017-12-02 06:52 PM | Reply


It may be old news, but I've seen reports that Ms. McFarland was the second senior person mentioned in Mr Flynn's plea deal.

If so, she probably would prefer to maintain a low profile about now.

#3 | Posted by LampLighter at 2017-12-02 10:03 PM | Reply

Another dumb Russia obsessed thread.

You're going to come up empty, Rcade. Start getting used to it.

#4 | Posted by Ray at 2017-12-03 08:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"You're going to come up empty"

Junior already admitted attempted collusion.

What more were you waiting for?

#5 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-03 08:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Junior already admitted attempted collusion.
#5 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

You're reading into it some kind of illegality that's not there.

#6 | Posted by Ray at 2017-12-03 08:41 AM | Reply

"You're reading into it some kind of illegality that's not there."

Great.

So all we're left with is close to 40 provable lies, all of which you were supposed to fall for.

Meanwhile, you're backing the We didn't collude, but not for lack of trying excuse.

#7 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-03 08:43 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

So all we're left with is close to 40 provable lies, all of which you were supposed to fall for.
#7 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

For the record, I don't give a ---- about Trump. But I also know, you libs will believe anything negative about him because that's what you want to believe.

We're not going to settle this here. Politics is never a search for truth. I think Trump has adjusted to Washington politics, and he's certainly a big Israel supporter. For those reasons, if in fact, he did something illegal, he won't be charged.

Think of the Mueller investigation as an inquisition designed to root out heretics. Then it makes sense.

I can't recall the source and specifically what Flynn did. Whatever it was, he pissed off the wrong poeple. That's not the kind of stuff that makes front page news.

#8 | Posted by Ray at 2017-12-03 08:59 AM | Reply

"But I also know, you libs will believe anything negative about him because that's what you want to believe."

Find one claim against tRump that's false. He DIDN'T get a letter from the NFL, he's NOT being audited every year, this is NOT a middle-class tax cut, his accountant did NOT call him and tell him he'd be killed with the new tax bill, etc, etc.

"if in fact, he did something illegal, he won't be charged."

Not by Mueller. But the crimes will become so apparent--money laundering, obstruction of justice--even the Rs will have to respond.

"Think of the Mueller investigation as an inquisition designed to root out heretics."

Whatever tune you have to whistle past that graveyard.

"I can't recall the source and specifically what Flynn did. "

IOW, you can't be bothered to pay attention when it's something you don't want to believe.

#9 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-03 09:11 AM | Reply

IOW, you can't be bothered to pay attention when it's something you don't want to believe.
#9 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

As I said in the beginning. I don't give a ---- about Trump. I wrote politics off decades ago.

IMO, no charges will be brought against Trump and his family. I'm not interested in arguing with you over this. I can think of better ways to use my time.

#10 | Posted by Ray at 2017-12-03 09:28 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

"IMO, no charges will be brought against Trump and his family."

Whatever you say, Dow 1400. Or was that Dow 30,000?

#11 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-03 09:42 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

You're so predictable. A regular broken record.

#12 | Posted by Ray at 2017-12-03 09:53 AM | Reply

Has anyone ever heard of an event being thrown outside of sports?

If that's the kind of thrown she's talking about we all know it means treason took place.

#13 | Posted by Tor at 2017-12-03 03:56 PM | Reply

I wrote politics off decades ago.
#10 | POSTED BY RAY

So what are you doing here? Masochism?

#14 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-12-03 05:15 PM | Reply

I can think of better ways to use my time.
#10 | POSTED BY RAY

Well, YOU are the one who said you wrote off politics years ago, and yet here you are.

Suck it up, buttercup, and own your ----.

#15 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-12-03 05:16 PM | Reply

What I find unbelievable is the assumption that a foreign country with minimal resources and in a short time could effect the US elections where literally hundreds of millions were spent on each side. It is sort of like blaming Miss O'Learey's cow for the Chicago fire, Or a gnat causing the Hindenburg disaster. Any explanation is better than admitting the truth, Hillery R. Clinton was a lousy candidate. She never made much of a connection with voters. She was about as exciting as watching grass grow. She had not skeletons in the closet, but a collection of bodies under the floor that would make John Wayne Gacy blush. But worse, she promised more of the same and that was not a winning message.

#16 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-12-04 10:22 AM | Reply

" Hillery R. Clinton was a lousy candidate." - #16 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-12-04 10:22 AM

She was so lousy that she received 3,000,000 more popular votes than the "winner."

#17 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-04 11:08 AM | Reply

#17 | Posted by Hans, Maybe many of those votes are tied to the motor voter registration in California, how many non citizens voted? The only two states that went whole hog for Hillery were New York and California. Besides the only votes that count are the ones in the electoral collage. Feel free to amend the Constitution if you desire to change that.

#18 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-12-04 11:41 AM | Reply

"Maybe many of those votes..." - #18 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-12-04 11:41 AM

"Maybe"?

Now that's a convincing "argument." /snark

Meanwhile, there are over 100,000 polling places in America.

Can you find any that didn't have at least one vote each for Clinton or Trump?

#19 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-04 11:53 AM | Reply

"...how many non citizens voted?" - #18 | Posted by docnjo at 2017-12-04 11:41 AM

What proof do you have that non citizens voted? I've never seen credible evidence that they have.

I believe that local elections officials, Democrat, Republican and independent alike, take their jobs seriously and want to protect the integrity of the electoral system in this country.

#20 | Posted by Hans at 2017-12-04 12:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

What I find unbelievable is the assumption that a foreign country with minimal resources and in a short time could effect the US elections where literally hundreds of millions were spent on each side.

How much more resources and time would make it believable?

See, you don't have an answer. You're just using loaded phrases "minimal resources" and "short time" to convince yourself you're right.

You're also saying you don't believe what the US intelligence community has to say about it.

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-04 12:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

When the US intelligence community says something that doesn't make sense, they are usually lying.

You can believe the election was won on Facebook if you want but there are much more reasonable explanations out there, including the ones provided by swing voters in key states.

#22 | Posted by Sully at 2017-12-04 12:46 PM | Reply

Find one claim against tRump that's false. #9 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2017-12-03 09:11 AM | FLAG:

Where were you last Friday?

#23 | Posted by fishpaw at 2017-12-04 12:52 PM | Reply

The long lasting question that has not been and can not be answered is if Russia threw the election how did they do it?

#24 | Posted by fishpaw at 2017-12-04 12:55 PM | Reply

"You can believe the election was won on Facebook if you want but there are much more reasonable explanations out there, including the ones provided by swing voters in key states."

Let's see those reasons. And then let's see which of those reasons align with Russian propaganda. Then we might have some answers as to how influential propaganda was.

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-04 01:06 PM | Reply

"Where were you last Friday?"

What...when Brian Ross had to pay a price for lying, unlike Trump?

#26 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-04 01:08 PM | Reply

For the record, I don't give a ---- about Trump. But I also know, you libs will believe anything negative about him because that's what you want to believe.
#8 | POSTED BY RAY

Except we have reasonable evidence to support our beliefs.

Meanwhile you presume all negative news about him to be false because that's what you want to believe; despite the evidence to the contrary.

Remember, the right is anti-science; and that lack of rationality pervades every aspect of your political wing.

#27 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-12-04 01:38 PM | Reply

The long lasting question that has not been and can not be answered is if Russia threw the election how did they do it?

#24 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

If propaganda doesn't influence the outcome of elections, there wouldn't be any point in creating it. I suppose you also believe that advertising doesn't influence buying decisions.

#28 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-12-05 12:46 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 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort