Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, February 10, 2018

President Donald Trump blocked the release of a memo written by Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee as a rebuttal to allegations from their Republican counterparts that the FBI abused surveillance laws to improperly spy on the Trump campaign. In a letter to the House Intelligence Committee on Friday, White House counsel Don McGahn said that while the president is "inclined" to declassify the memo, he will not "at this time" due to it containing "numerous properly classified and especially sensitive passages." McGahn said Trump has directed the Justice Department to offer assistance to the House committee to revise the memo. The White House also shared a letter from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray expressing concern about the release of certain parts of the memo. Rosenstein and Wray had expressed similar concern about a GOP-drafted memo that Trump did agree to release last week.

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.

Quelle surprise.... Let's take them at their word and resubmit a redacted version that passes the DOJ/FBI's concerns and see what Trump does then.

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-02-09 09:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Wasn't the Memo already leaked?

#2 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-02-09 09:09 PM | Reply

No. What leaked is some of the counter-information that undercuts the Nunes' memo's false conclusions as matters of fact. The unreleased memo would has more detail and substance completely proving that what Nunes pushed was wholly invented out of cherry-picked mischaracterizations.

#3 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-02-09 09:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Here's the link to the transcript of the House Intel meeting when they voted to release the Dems memo:

docs.house.gov

#4 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-09 09:18 PM | Reply

#3

Is there any reason to believe that the "detail and substance completely proving that what Nunes pushed was wholly invented out of cherry-picked mischaracterizations" will be compromised by redactions?

#5 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-02-09 09:20 PM | Reply

Quick takes from the meeting:

Spencer Ackerman‏ @attackerman

At Monday HPSCI, Schiff gets specific with what he says GOPers are blocking subpoenas on: Michael Cohen's bank/travel/comms records; Don Jr; Deutsche Bank; Don Jr Twitter DMs; Roger Stone Twitter DMs. Turner countercharges Dems want to "prove [dossier] they funded is true"

.@JoaquinCastrotx at Monday's hearing: "We have barely scratched the surface. We have not followed up and subpoenaed any of these records. So how are we supposed to know that these folks are telling us the truth?"

We're a year into the House intel committee's Russia inquiry.

Polly Sigh‏ @dcpoll

Transcript of House Intel vote to release Dem rebuttal memo:

Rep King: Michael Cohen said on national tv that he'd never been to Prague & the Czech Republic.

@RepSwalwell: And Papadopoulos also said he'd never met with Russians until the 3rd interview with the FBI

#6 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-09 09:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yeah, this does seem important. Dems are worried that Nunes wants to get a copy of the FISA warrant in order to give it to Trump, so Trump can have a heads up on what info the FBI has on members of his campaign team and by extension on himself:

mieke eoyang‏ @MiekeEoyang

This seems important. @RepSwalwell suggests that Nunes sent Carter Page's FISA application to Trump, who's currently under investigation by Mueller.

#7 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-09 09:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#5

At this point anything is possible. The reality is it's already irrelevant. The memo's news value is dead now because the consensus amongst everyone but fervent Trump supporters is that the Nunes memo was a dud, and now just another in a continuing series of Republican attempts to turn the Russia investigation back on Obama and Hillary Clinton.

It only matters now for posterity or as a preemptive tool to blunt their next attempts to rewrite history.

#8 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-02-09 09:27 PM | Reply

Damn Gal.... Keep up the good work!

#9 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-02-09 09:30 PM | Reply

Donald the Russian. Donald the Traitor.

#10 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-09 09:35 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Don't worry the leaker Schiff will leak it.

#11 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-09 09:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"the leaker Schiff will leak it."

Did it upset you when Bannon was the major leaker, or does he get a tribal pass?

#12 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-09 09:55 PM | Reply

It's apparent that the------------------- doesn't believe in transparency.

#13 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-02-09 09:58 PM | Reply

#11

Someone in the WH will leak it, out of self-protection, as they've done for the last year.

#14 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-09 09:58 PM | Reply

#11

Or as they did just today. It's taking just three hours for something shady in the WH to hit the world wide press.

#15 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-09 10:00 PM | Reply


The memo was crafted quite intelligently.

There apparently were passages that had to be redacted due to security concerns.

So Pres Trump was faced with the decision of whether to release a redacted memo, and face the consequences of possible censorship...

... or not release the memo at all.

I have to admit,in this situation I do not sympathize with Pres Trump. He had to make a decision that would be against him no matter what he decided.

But that is the tactical issue.

The strategic issue resides in the ongoing effort of the Republicans to taint the investigation of Mr Mueller.

So for this tactic, I give a well-played to the Republicans.

However, strategically, I can only say that I think that their diversions will not be credible.

#16 | Posted by LampLighter at 2018-02-09 10:05 PM | Reply

Don't worry the leaker Schiff will leak it.

You were corrected once for this, so now I know you're a liar.

#17 | Posted by YAV at 2018-02-09 10:12 PM | Reply

What a piece of wretched work Trump is. At every level.

#18 | Posted by YAV at 2018-02-09 10:14 PM | Reply

GOP lawmaker hits Trump over Dem memo: Americans deserve to read both

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) slammed President Trump's decision on Friday not to declassify the Democratic response to the GOP surveillance memo.

Trump said he would not declassify the memo, blocking it from publication after the House Intelligence Committee voted earlier this week to make the document public.

"Both the Republican and Democratic FISA memos should be released," tweeted Amash, a libertarian-leaning lawmaker who has been critical of Trump.

"I've read both memos. Neither one endangers national security. The American people deserve the opportunity to read both memos," he added.

thehill.com

#19 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-09 11:19 PM | Reply

No, the liar is Schiff.

He leaked info to CNN during the Trump Jr. testimony.

You chose not to believe it. Your choice.

#20 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-09 11:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

No, the liar is Schiff.
He leaked info to CNN during the Trump Jr. testimony.

Link?

#21 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-09 11:51 PM | Reply

The term POS (and I don't mean Point of Sale) could have been coined just for Trump.

To buh-lieve him, we have to think that the GOP members voted to have "sensitive passages" in the Dem memo released.

#22 | Posted by Corky at 2018-02-10 01:07 AM | Reply

"A former lawyer in the George W. Bush White House on Friday criticized President Trump's decision to block the release of a memo drafted by Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee.

Jamil Jaffer, who in the past served as senior counsel to the House Intelligence Committee and also as a former law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, said Trump's move was a "massive strategic miscalculation."

"The White House's failure to declassify the House Intelligence Committee minority memo – particularly in the face of unanimous bipartisan vote by the committee – represents a massive strategic miscalculation," Jaffer said, according to Politico.

"The decision to reject the committee's request simply plays into the partisan narrative about the Nunes memo and deprives the American public of the benefit of both sides of highly politicized debate," Jaffer said Friday.

"Even worse," Jaffer continued, "This unforced error undermines the President's own ability to make the case about alleged failures in the intelligence collection process and, as such, is yet another example of this White House being its own worst enemy."

thehill.com

#23 | Posted by Corky at 2018-02-10 01:10 AM | Reply

A former lawyer in the George W. Bush White House

So what!!!

#24 | Posted by Crassus at 2018-02-10 01:16 AM | Reply | Funny: 2

It is humorous, watching all these posting of the same guys over and over again trashing trump.

#25 | Posted by Crassus at 2018-02-10 01:17 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

At this point anything is possible. The reality is it's already irrelevant.

#8 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

====================

I will re-post this comment once the former Obama justice department officials start to be perp walked into jail. There has been massive corruption uncovered and even a blind turd like Sessions will have no choice but to prosecute. The only ones that will survive are those that have enough blackmail material to stop the charges. I think Comey will go down at a minimum. I know, I know, you Dems think this is impossible. We will see who it right. From what I understand, the next shoe to drop on the Dem's Russia story will involve the Aussie ambassador that dropped the dime on Papadopolous. You heard it here first.

#26 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 05:54 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Totally the actions of an innocent man.

#27 | Posted by ness_gadol at 2018-02-10 06:30 AM | Reply

I'm betting all our "transparency champions" on the right will be along any moment to decry this.

We already know where crassy set up his tent.

#28 | Posted by 726 at 2018-02-10 07:36 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Exactly Ness.... totally the actions of an innocent man.

#29 | Posted by 726 at 2018-02-10 07:36 AM | Reply

""It's gonna be released soon," Trump told reporters at the White House, adding, "We're going to release a letter." "

From the man that said he would release his taxes if he won the nomination, then if he won the election....

#30 | Posted by 726 at 2018-02-10 07:38 AM | Reply

#22

And, in the end, Donald Trump will be revealed as a shining pillar of ----------, er, rectitude.

#31 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-10 08:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yes. Trump did not do anything other than win the election.

Mueller has moved on from collusion, and possibly even obstruction. His only play seems to be catching people in perjury traps.

This is turning out to be like the Valarie Plame investigation.

They knew who the culprit was when the investigation was launched (as they do with Mueller... Clinton) and because they had to justify their existence they caught Libby in a perjury trap, just as Mueller is trying to do now.

#32 | Posted by sawdust at 2018-02-10 08:48 AM | Reply

Which one of the wife beaters had to read the memo to the illiterate child rapist?

#33 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-02-10 08:53 AM | Reply

#24

I don't get you. It's much too early to know what Trump's going down for. Money-laundering for the Russian mob, IMO.

Genuinely curious--- Would even that be enough to get you to leave Trump's side?

#34 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-10 08:56 AM | Reply

I will point out that the GOP impeached Clinton secondary to perjury.

Old rules now?

#35 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-10 08:59 AM | Reply

#24 - so Sawdust, no response to Gal's request (#21) for a link from you assertion in #20? Again, nothing? Just another lie on top of the original lie?

"Trump did not provide evidence that Schiff has illegally leaked confidential information."

Trump just spouts off lie after lie, one ad hominem attack after another.

www.cnn.com

You appear no better.

#36 | Posted by YAV at 2018-02-10 09:38 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

On my post #22, I provide this little gem about that Aussie ambassador that told the FBI about Papadopolous. Once again, we get a sleazy friend of the Clinton's passing along information to get the FBI to investigate Trump allowing the Obama admin to wiretap campaign calls. Following their typical pattern, Clinton used Ambassador Downes to steal Aussie taxpayer money to funnel to the Clinton Foundation. This ---- is about hit the fan. The Libs never should have switched the narrative to Papadopolous.

---------------

www.lifezette.com

At the center of Smith's complaints are former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, and multiple Australian government officials, including senior diplomat Alexander Downer, that government's high commissioner to the United Kingdom.

.......

The materials Smith is giving the FBI focus on a 2006 memorandum of understanding between the Australian government and the Clinton Foundation's Clinton HIV/AIDs Initiative (CHAI). Smith claims the foundation received a "$25M financial advantage dishonestly obtained by deception" as a result of actions by Bill Clinton and Downer, who was then Australia's minister of foreign affairs.

Smith claims the foundation received a "$25M financial advantage dishonestly obtained by deception."

Also included in the Smith materials are evidence he believes shows "corrupt October 2006 backdating of false tender advertisements purporting to advertise the availability of a $15 million contract to provide HIV/AIDS services in Papua New Guinea on behalf of the Australian government after an agreement was already in place to pay the Clinton Foundation and/or associates."

#37 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 10:54 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Either release it with the appropriate redactions or kick it back to the Democrats with what needs to be scrubbed as confidential and let them rewrite it.

I have no doubt that they deliberately included sensitive, confidential information to force the WH into this position. It's good political maneuvering.

#38 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-02-10 11:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"Yes. Trump did not do anything other than win the election. "

Actually, serious questions are now being asked by serious writers calling even that into question. Trump is an illigitimate President and more people realize it every day. He will never be reelected and will be lucky if he isn't impeached.

#39 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-10 11:59 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

He will never be reelected and will be lucky if he isn't impeached.

#31 | POSTED BY DANNI

========================

Sounds just like what I heard the day before the first election. I predict the economy stays strong and the Dem blue wave in 2018 doesn't materialize.

#40 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 12:04 PM | Reply

the Dem blue wave in 2018 doesn't materialize.

#32 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 12:04 PMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

The Wave is already in progress, as anyone following the news knows. If the economy tanks it's going to be five times higher.

#41 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-10 12:08 PM | Reply

The Wave is already in progress, as anyone following the news knows.

#33 | POSTED BY ZED

===================

Keep telling yourself that. The Alabama race was a once in a lifetime event and the the GOP will retake it easily. Trump approval is already higher than Obama's through this stage in his first term. Frankly, you are delusional. It will be fun laughing at you at the end of the year.

#42 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 12:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#34

All I can say is that lesbians are winning over Republicans in Oklahoma.

Oklahoma.

#43 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-10 12:31 PM | Reply

"I predict the economy stays strong and the Dem blue wave in 2018 doesn't materialize."

Yeah, like that great Bush economy that brought us the biggest recession since 1929. Your predictions are sort of worthless.

#44 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-10 12:49 PM | Reply

Also included in the Smith materials are evidence he believes shows "corrupt ..... in place to pay the Clinton Foundation and/or associates."
#29 | POSTED BY REX_BUYT

Clinton/Obama crimes committed prior to Inauguration Day 2017 have all been wished into the cornfield.

Any attempt to raise the dead will be shouted down and ridiculed.

#45 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2018-02-10 02:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Crazy this is still back page material.

#46 | Posted by memyselfini at 2018-02-10 04:31 PM | Reply

#29 | POSTED BY REX_BUYT

Oh look. We have ourselves a Mark Levin parrot.

#47 | Posted by jpw at 2018-02-10 05:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Trump approval is already higher than Obama's through this stage in his first term. Frankly, you are delusional. It will be fun laughing at you at the end of the year.

#34 | POSTED BY REX_BUYT

LOL you know someone is intellectually vacuous when they rely on snap shots cherry picked from time to make their position sound good.

Let's forget the past year of approval ratings being largely below 35%. ALL. YEAR.

#48 | Posted by jpw at 2018-02-10 05:10 PM | Reply

Actually, serious questions are now being asked by serious writers calling even that [the Buffoon winning the election] into question.

Citation required.

#49 | Posted by et_al at 2018-02-10 05:45 PM | Reply

LOL you know someone is intellectually vacuous when they rely on snap shots cherry picked from time to make their position sound good.

Let's forget the past year of approval ratings being largely below 35%. ALL. YEAR.

Posted by jpw at 2018-02-10 05:10 PM | Reply

That's not Rex is it???

#50 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-02-10 06:01 PM | Reply

On Saturday morning, President Trump accused Democrats of drafting a rebuttal to the Nunes memo that is too political, too long, and too sensitive that it would force him not to release it. Describing the 10-page Democratic memo, Trump tweeted: "The Democrats sent a very political and long response memo which they knew, because of sources and methods (and more), would have to be heavily redacted, whereupon they would blame the White House for lack of transparency. Told them to re-do and send back in proper form!"

While Trump claims that the Democratic memo is "very political," the House Intelligence Committee voted unanimously on February 5 to release it. In fact, earlier on Friday Trump promised to release the memo.

"It's gonna be released soon," he told reporters. "We're going to release a letter."

Let it be noted that every single Republican on the Intelligence Committee voted to release the memo, yet Trump blames Democrats for trying to pass information they knew should remain classified.

There is little credibility regarding this issue for the President who decided to ignore similar pleas from the DOJ/FBI just one week prior when he believed that the Nunes memo somehow exonerated him when it actually placed a sharper focus on the factual/evidentiary basis for why Carter Page's activities and conduct made him a no-brainer target for surveillance even before he joined the Trump campaign.

#51 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-02-10 06:54 PM | Reply

"Trump approval is already higher than Obama's through this stage in his first term."

YOU LIE.

news.gallup.com

More to the point, who is telling you these lies, and why are you willing to fall for them?

#52 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-10 07:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

YOU LIE.
news.gallup.com
More to the point, who is telling you these lies, and why are you willing to fall for them?

#43 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

=================================

www.washingtontimes.com

You rely on fake news publishing fake polls that lead to your surprise when Trump won in a landslide. You might as well link to Huff Post polls. Enjoy your daily dose of truth.

#53 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 07:40 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

www.washingtontimes.com

Lol. The------------------- has the worst approval rating on record after one year.

news.gallup.com

#54 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-02-10 08:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Lol. The------------------- has the worst approval rating on record after one year.
news.gallup.com

#45 | POSTED BY REINHEITSGEBOT

==================

Child rapist? How much fake news are you trying to push into one response? Do any of your friends in real life agree that Trump is a child rapist? Has anyone you ever spoken to in real life ever agreed with this accusation? If they have, I think that puts you squarely into the 0.0001% of libbies so whacked out with TDS that you are not worth engaging with in intelligent debate because that is beyond your abilities. Come back to reality and we can talk.

#55 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 08:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#46 | POSTED BY REX_BUYt

40% is real news unlike that crap from rasmuusen you're trying to peddle.

#56 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-02-10 08:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

40% is real news unlike that crap from rasmuusen you're trying to peddle.

#47 | POSTED BY REINHEITSGEBOT

===================

Please answer my question on the child rapist accusation. The way you ducked it makes it seem like even you don't believe it.

#57 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 08:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#48 | POSTED BY REX_BUYT

The------------------- has along history of sexual assaults. That's a fact. It's also a fact that the-------------------'s approval rating at this junction is the lowest on record.

www.newsweek.com

#58 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-02-10 08:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The------------------- has along history of sexual assaults. That's a fact. It's also a fact that the-------------------'s approval rating at this junction is the lowest on record.
www.newsweek.com

#58 | POSTED BY REINHEITSGEBOT

==============================

Again, no answer from you. I will give you one more chance to respond before I just ignore you moving forward. Do you believe Trump is a child rapist?

BTW, I love this line from your link along with the fact not a single credible new organization would touch this:

The lawsuit was dropped in November 2016, just four days before the election

#59 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 08:55 PM | Reply

"You rely on fake news publishing fake polls that lead to your surprise when Trump won in a landslide. "

Trump lost the popular vote by nearly three million. Meanwhile, you link to the Moonie Times, and a Rasmussen poll???

Just how desperate were you planning to get?

#60 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-10 08:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#59 | POSTED BY REX_BUYT

Again you ignore the fact that you lied about the-------------------'s dreadful approval ratings. It's hilarious that you'd link to the Moonie Times and then complain about credible news organizations.

#61 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-02-10 08:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Trump lost the popular vote by nearly three million.
#60 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

======================

And yet he is our president despite all your polls prior to the election saying Hillary had a 99.9% chance of winning the night before. Despite this obvious fact, you still cling to the same polls that lied to you as now representing the truth. Good luck with that. I will be here to laugh at you when the blue wave doesn't materialize. Can't wait for that excuse. Will it be Russians, more Macedonian troll farms, or something new and creative?

#62 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 09:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Crazy this is still back page material.

Ka-Boom.

#63 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-02-10 09:02 PM | Reply

Again you ignore the fact that you lied about the-------------------'s dreadful approval ratings.

#61 | POSTED BY REINHEITSGEBOT

=====================

Okay, you are on my ignore list moving forward. Quite clear you don't even believe your own nonsense. You are either so whacked out of reality you can't debate or are simply a troll trying to say shocking things because you can't get people to engage with you otherwise. I feel sad for you.

#64 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 09:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Despite this obvious fact, you still cling to the same polls that lied to you "

I don't cling to anything other than math. Trump won the electoral college, but lost the popular vote.

"I will be here to laugh at you when the blue wave doesn't materialize."

No you won't. You'll either disappear into the ether, or change your screen name.

#65 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-10 09:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"you are on my ignore list moving forward"

Gee...only two days here, and you know about the "ignore" list??

That begs the question: have you ever posted on the Drudge Retort under any other name(s)? If so, which one(s)?

#66 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-10 09:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Okay, you are on my ignore list moving forward.

Good riddance, deplorable. You should probably stick to the Washington Times comments section.

#67 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-02-10 09:07 PM | Reply

I don't cling to anything other than math. Trump won the electoral college, but lost the popular vote.

#65 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

======================

Oh, maybe I had you all wrong. It was my understanding that all the presidential polls did state by state polling and then used that to predict the outcome of the electoral college on a state by state basis. I had no idea that they just did a single national poll so they missed how the electoral college would shake out. I assume you were on here the night before the election predicting Trump would win the electoral college but lose the popular vote? Can you please link me to a single poll that showed that prior to the election? Doesn't seem your talking point now jives with 537 so maybe you can explain the inconsistency.

#68 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 09:09 PM | Reply

Gee...only two days here, and you know about the "ignore" list??

#66 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

=======================

Gee, I didn't realize that choosing to ignore someone was a "feature" of this site. I am simply no longer going to respond to this poster, I don't need some libbie safe space feature to do that.

#69 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 09:12 PM | Reply

"I assume you were on here the night before the election predicting Trump would win the electoral college but lose the popular vote?"

No, I thought he'd lose both. I was wrong.

Then again, I thought he'd become (at the least) slightly Presidential. I was wrong about that, too.

"Doesn't seem your talking point now jives"

My "talking point" was that your claim Trump won in a landslide has to be tempered by the fact he lost the popular vote. This becomes particularly important when idiots like SH Sanders suggests items like the Access Hollywood tape were adjudicated by the November election. If that's the case, Trump lost: there is certainly no electoral college in the court of public opinion.

#70 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-10 09:20 PM | Reply

"I don't need some libbie safe space feature to do that."

Good for you.

Now, would you mind answering the questions?

Have you ever posted on the DR under any other name(s)? If so, what name(s)?

#71 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-10 09:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Did anyone really think Trump was going to release the Democrat's memo???

#72 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-10 09:22 PM | Reply

Have you ever posted on the DR under any other name(s)? If so, what name(s)?

Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-10 09:21 PM |

Like totally duh.

#73 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-02-10 09:26 PM | Reply

My "talking point" was that your claim Trump won in a landslide has to be tempered by the fact he lost the popular vote.

#70 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

========================

That wasn't even my talking point but nice try in shifting the argument. My point is that all the polls (yes, all done on a state by state basis to predict the electoral college) were wrong. My point is that you still cling to these same pollsters now despite this massive failing. I could understand the MSM getting a state or 2 wrong and your faith in this polling remaining strong. But, these guys were completely wrong in EVERY toss up state plus some they considered firmly in the Dem category. You are not alone. I think Hillary would have traveled to WI had she not believed the polls. The question is how you react to this data point that runs counter to your faith in these pollsters. So far, it seems your response is to simply pretend it didn't happen. That is why you still believe in the blue wave nonsense.

#74 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 09:31 PM | Reply

All of this dripping memo leaking and now no one thinks roofs hold water anymore. Replace roofs with ruskies puleese.

Just kill the leakers like they did when Seth Rich got things wet for the dnc...

It was his turn!

#75 | Posted by mutant at 2018-02-10 09:38 PM | Reply

All child rapist kid diddlers should die!...

Hollywood should make a movie about that.

#76 | Posted by mutant at 2018-02-10 09:51 PM | Reply

All child rapist kid diddlers should die!...

#76 | POSTED BY MUTANT

============================

I think this constitutes a threat against Bill Clinton and Bush Sr. You should watch what you say even though I agree with your sentiment.

#77 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 09:53 PM | Reply

All child rapist kid diddlers should die!...

Hear! hear! The------------------- goes first.

#78 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-02-10 09:57 PM | Reply

"My point is that you still cling to these same pollsters"

I'm well aware pollsters can be wrong.

I'm also aware of the massive point turnarounds in race after race. Seats which were red have turned blue. Seats which were soundly red have squeaked by. One area in MO Trump won by 28 points went blue last week. In another, where Trump won by 59 points, the R won 53-47.

It's hard not to see trends in numbers like that.

Here are the real world changes since the election. Who needs pollsters when I've got math?
docs.google.com

#79 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-10 10:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I'm also aware of the massive point turnarounds in race after race.

#79 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

=======================

You are looking at one off local races with low turnout. What we know is that the Dems usually have very poor turnout in midterm elections, the economy is strong and still expanding (will accelerate with the tax cuts), the Dems still don't have a message other than 'hate Trump', the way districts are set up on a state by state level makes it very difficult for the opposing party to ever win. Like I said, when the blue wave is a blue ripple at best, I will be here to laugh at you.

#80 | Posted by Rex_Buyt at 2018-02-10 10:09 PM | Reply

"Dems still don't have a message other than 'hate Trump'"

OH I see. Trump's message was hate Hillary, and immigrants, and those black guys falsely accused of raping the Central Park Jogger, and all his Republican opponents.
You're saying the Democrats need to find more targets to hate if they want to win?
You might be right.

#81 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-10 10:22 PM | Reply

"You rely on fake news publishing fake polls that lead to your surprise when Trump won in a landslide. You might as well link to Huff Post polls. Enjoy your daily dose of truth.

#53 | POSTED BY REX_BUYT AT 2018-02-10 07:40 PM | REPLY"

Are you seriously claiming that Trump won in a landslide? While there seems to be no generally accepted definition, this link gives guidance:

www.thoughtco.com

Since Trump did not win the popular vote, clearly he did not win that by landslide.

Trump won the electoral vote with 306; the link suggests a landslide requires 375 electoral votes. Maybe it should be 350, maybe even 325, but it doesn't matter. Only someone who has closed their minds to objective facts thinks Trump won in a landslide.

#82 | Posted by Foreigner at 2018-02-10 10:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Remember the "bombshell" about Warner secretly contacting Steele? Yeah, no:

Steven Dennis‏ @StevenTDennis

It is not news that Mark Warner personally tried to contact Steele to interview him. Burr said at October press conference he and Warner had *each* personally sought to contact Steele for interviews without success, and hoped he would reconsider.
5:08 AM - 9 Feb 2018

(@Bloomberg reporter. I talk to U.S. Senators in hallways. Russia, health, politics. Ex-WH/CQ/Roll Call.)

#83 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-10 11:05 PM | Reply

It's Rex, guys.

Don't feed him.

#84 | Posted by jpw at 2018-02-10 11:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Rexella Zeitgeist?

#85 | Posted by Corky at 2018-02-10 11:15 PM | Reply

"You are looking at one off local races with low turnout."

Nonsense. I'm looking at VA and AL and MO and other places where the final party winner might've been the same, but the margins were so different it's impossible not to take notice.

"What we know is that the Dems usually have very poor turnout in midterm elections"

We also know midterms are about enthusiasm, something shown in all of the races above.

" the way districts are set up on a state by state level makes it very difficult for the opposing party to ever win"

All the more reason to be stunned by, say, the MO results. Did you bother looking at my math link? What was your analysis of ALL those races. They can't possibly ALL be one-off.

#86 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-02-10 11:26 PM | Reply

Don't know if this is true. If it is and after DOJ/FBI goes over the memo, I support Schiff taking this action:

Jon Cooper @joncoopertweets

Trump is blocking release of the Democratic memo that will expose GOP lies and obstruction of the Russia probe. Although the Democrats can't release the memo, it's entirely legal for @RepAdamSchiff to read it into the record on the House floor.
RETWEET IF YOU THINK HE SHOULD!

#87 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-10 11:53 PM | Reply

It is up to House Intel Committee, not Trump, whether to release Democratic memo on the Page FISA application

Most news outlets, such as the New York Times, are reporting that President Donald Trump has "blocked" the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) from publicly disclosing the Democratic memorandum rebutting Devin Nunes's claims that FBI and other officials acted improperly in seeking FISA warrants concerning Carter Page.

That's not right: The President doesn't have the power to block the HPSCI from releasing its memo. Committee members, including Adam Schiff, will undoubtedly consult with DOJ and the FBI to make reasonable efforts to amend the memo so as not to burn any important sources or methods–something that Schiff himself recommended. Even so, it's ultimately up to the Committee to decide whether to release the memo, and whether to redact certain classified information before doing so.

www.justsecurity.org

#88 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-11 12:02 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Damnit, Gal, should have never given up my sources. Sigh.

Saw it earlier. NW

#89 | Posted by et_al at 2018-02-11 12:10 AM | Reply

Ugh.

#90 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-11 12:12 AM | Reply

Yep, I did get a number of good sources from you Et_Al. Bookmarked them immediately. ;)

#91 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-11 12:14 AM | Reply

Interesting how Trump is so concerned about the contents of the Democratic memo, when he released the Republican memo without reading it. We know he didn't read the Republican memo because (A) it was more than a page in length, and (B) he said it completely vindicated him, which, of course, it didn't -- even if the Republican memo had any investigative weight, which, of course it doesn't. We have a truly lightweight mind in the Oval Office, people.

#92 | Posted by nimbleswitch at 2018-02-11 07:43 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This could also prove to be interesting when it comes to Trump-Russia:

A federal court just unsealed Trump's 20-year-old dirty secrets

A federal appeals court just issued a ruling (embedded below) that will unseal records dating back 20-years about Donald Trump's former senior advisor and original Russian connection, the mobster Felix Sater. Forbes Media LLC and reporter Richard Behar filed the successful request to reveal Felix Sater's criminal past.

Sater's company, Bayrock, developed the Trump SoHo Hotel-Condominium in lower Manhattan and a tower in Fort Lauderdale, which both spawned fraud lawsuits, one of which went all the way to the Supreme Court to partially unseal his criminal past and mafia ties.

washingtonpress.com

#93 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-11 10:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why Sater is important to Trump-Russia as outlined by Simpson, who ran across the Sater-Trump connection while Fusion GPS was working for the GOP and before he hired Steele:

Simpson's testimony, contained in a 165-page transcript, provides at least a dozen leads for investigators, including HPSCI, seeking to unravel Trump's Russia connections.

Let's go sequentially through the transcript.

At the very start, Simpson points out that his Fusion GPS investigation didn't start by looking only at Trump-Russia. It began, he said, by compiling data on Trump's overseas business deals, tax disputes, "labor practices around his factories," his bankruptcies, and his business partners. And what popped up early on was Trump's connection to Felix Sater, whose company, Bayrock, "was engaged in illicit financial business activity and had organized crime connections." (As The Nation reported in September, it was Sater who in November 2015 wrote Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, "Our boy can become president of the USA and we can engineer it. ... I will get all of [Vladimir] Putins [sic] team to buy in on this.")

www.thenation.com

#94 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-11 11:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Hollywood should make a movie about that.
#76 | POSTED BY MUTANT

Already in the works. It will be called "Finding Memo".

#95 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-11 03:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

This is an honest question and it may make me appear pretty dumb but let me throw it out there and see if someone has the answer.

I understand where they would have to get the DOJ/FBI make sure there is nothing that concerns those entities, but why is it up to the President whether they can release what they have written? Different branch of government no?

#96 | Posted by rosemountbomber at 2018-02-11 03:04 PM | Reply

#96 You're not dumb; you are right. See my post #88.

#97 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-11 03:36 PM | Reply

Amazint that the Nunez memo was less than four pages, yet the dem 'rebuttal' memo is much more wordier - much like Pelosi's 8 hour ramble.

#98 | Posted by MSgt at 2018-02-11 07:41 PM | Reply

^#98 - Why amazing?

I expect a memo which is designed to mislead by omission to be shorter than a memo designed to fully inform. Don't you?

#99 | Posted by Foreigner at 2018-02-11 07:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Different branch of government no?"

No, same branch of government. The Executive Branch. And yes, the President is in charge of the Executive Branch much as I don't like Trump he is still the President. The branch which could and should take action against Trump is the Legislative Branch; Congress, but they are sold out Republicans and won't do their duty no matter what.

#100 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-12 06:27 AM | Reply

Either release it with the appropriate redactions or kick it back to the Democrats with what needs to be scrubbed as confidential and let them rewrite it.

Exactly, they need to rewrite it to say I am completely cleared of any collusion.

No collusion, no puppet, no collusion.

- Dotard J. Trump.

#101 | Posted by 726 at 2018-02-12 10:14 AM | Reply

Amazint that the Nunez memo was less than four pages, yet the dem 'rebuttal' memo is much more wordier...

#98 | POSTED BY MSGT

"I like the republicans cuz they don't use no fancy words 'n stuff like dem ebil libruhls."

#102 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-02-12 12:36 PM | Reply

The Democrats are just pissed that someone bogarted their playbook.

#103 | Posted by wisgod at 2018-02-12 01:30 PM | Reply

Yeah, like that great Bush economy that brought us the biggest recession since 1929. Your predictions are sort of worthless.

#44 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2018-02-10 12:49 PM | FLAG:

And your prediction that Hillary would win in a landslide IN THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE! Lol. Oh wait, it was cross check's fault.

#104 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-02-12 04:03 PM | Reply

#104 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Christ, you're really getting lazy these days.

#105 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-02-12 04:20 PM | Reply

My "talking point" was that your claim Trump won in a landslide has to be tempered by the fact he lost the popular vote. This becomes particularly important when idiots like SH Sanders suggests items like the Access Hollywood tape were adjudicated by the November election. If that's the case, Trump lost: there is certainly no electoral college in the court of public opinion.

#70 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2018-02-10 09:20 PM | FLAG:

Poor soul, still clinging to the popular vote. You need to let it go, she's not coming back, she lost. Grab a bottle of cheap whiskey and a box of tissues and drink and cry it out tonight. Hopefully it will help.

#106 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-02-12 04:23 PM | Reply

"...still clinging to the popular vote." - #106 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-02-12 04:23 PM

Denying she did?

Poor soul.

Meanwhile...

Not sure how Hans knew what Boaz said on the Kennedy thread when Hans wasn't here but keep trying.

Posted by fishpaw at 2017-05-18 11:58 AM | Reply | Flagged newsworthy by gracieamazed

Then came the ridicule:
Might want to wash that info off, seeing as you pulled it from your bum, fish

Hans was clearly replying to Boaz (regarding the initial comment on Kennedy's death) who joined in 2005.

Reading is fundamental

#72 | Posted by RevDarko at 2017-05-18 11:37 AM

Fishpaw,

WTF are you babbling about. Hans has been here since before I have been here.

Joined 2005/06/16

#95 | Posted by bocaink at 2017-05-18 12:09 PM

Do you learn from Jeffy how to be wrong about everything or is the training vice-versa?

#98 | Posted by bocaink at 2017-05-18 12:11 PM

"Joined 2005/06/16"

Hilarious. Fishpaw thinks the above means someone joined in 2016. It must be difficult to be that stupid.

#106 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2017-05-18 12:34 PM

Yer mean that isn't the 2005th of June, 2016???

#107 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2017-05-18 12:35 PM

#107 | Posted by Hans at 2018-02-12 04:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#106 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

It was the appropriate response to REXBUYT, so what's your problem?

REXBUYT made the dubious claim that Trump won in a landslide. You can't win in a landslide without first winning the popular vote. If you won without the popular vote, you won on a democratic technicality. That's clearly not a landslide, at least to those of us who are rational, non-Trumpian hacks, like yourself.

#108 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-02-12 04:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#107 Wow Hans, still reliving your love fest with the likes of RevDarko, Bocaink, Montecore and MrSilenceDogood. Reminds me of the fishing trip from One Flew over the Cuckoo's nest.

#109 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-02-12 04:37 PM | Reply

#108 Wrong, you haters just can't get over Hillary losing and the popular vote is your go to every time. Let it go and try harder next time instead of being lazy and figuring your candidate had it in the bag.

#110 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-02-12 04:40 PM | Reply

You can win in a landslide while losing the popular vote by millions?

What kind of win isn't a landslide under those rules, lol.

Make Landslides Great Again.

#111 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-12 04:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"#107 Wow Hans, still reliving your love fest..." - #109 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-02-12 04:37 PM

'Tis true.

Humiliating you is a lot of fun.

As for the rest of your post ("...with the likes of..."), it seems they enjoyed humiliating you, too (" It must be difficult to be that stupid.").

I am in very good company.

#112 | Posted by Hans at 2018-02-12 04:46 PM | Reply

"...and the popular vote is your go to every time." - #110 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-02-12 04:40 PM

"REXBUYT made the dubious claim that Trump won in a landslide. You can't win in a landslide without first winning the popular vote." - #108 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-02-12 04:33 PM
Oops.

#113 | Posted by Hans at 2018-02-12 04:48 PM | Reply

1.1 years later and Hans is treating the election like a 40lb. prime rib.

#114 | Posted by wisgod at 2018-02-12 05:05 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

#110 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Funny, I didn't vote for Hillary. So why you lumping me in with all of her sycophants?

Oh, I see. You have no substantive rebuttal. That's okay. Continue your baseless attempt at lashing out. It fits you, truly.

And lastly, Trump did not win in a landslide no matter how badly he, or you, wish it were true. The fact he, and you, continue hammering that little bit of mythology speaks volumes.

#115 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-02-12 05:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I didn't lump you in with those morons and I'm not defending Trump saying he won in a land slide. I'm defending the election rules where one wins by the electoral college not the popular vote and how morons like Hans still think Hillary won because she won the popular vote.

#116 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-02-13 09:27 AM | Reply

"...Hans still think Hillary won because she won the popular vote." - #116 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-02-13 09:27 AM

Never said that.

Under the rules (Electoral College), President IQ45 won.

It is morons like you who think that the will of the people (the popular vote totals) are meaningless.

But, since all you have are lies then lying's all you can do.

#117 | Posted by Hans at 2018-02-13 09:49 AM | 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