Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, July 15, 2018

During an infamous July 27, 2016 press conference that would prove to be the last he would hold during the campaign, then-candidate Donald Trump encouraged Russian hackers to go after Hillary Clinton. "Russia, if you're listening -- I hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," Trump said. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let's see if that happens."

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

After Trump won the election, administration officials tried to downplay his public encouragement of Russian hackers as a joke. But the latest indictment filed by special counsel Robert Mueller indicates Russia was indeed listening, and took Trump seriously.

According to the indictment, on the same day Trump made those comments, Russian hackers "attempted after hours to spearphish for the first time email accounts at a domain hosted by a third-party provided and used by Clinton's personal office. At or around the same time, they also targeted seventy-six email addresses at the domain for the Clinton Campaign."

Comments

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

Treason

#1 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-07-14 11:21 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

www.azquotes.com

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-14 11:21 PM | Reply

"Russia, if you're listening -- I hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," Trump said. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let's see if that happens."

What a very odd thing for someone who supposedly doesn't believe that Putin and Russians hacked the Democrats to say.

#3 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-14 11:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

According to Trump, Russian hacking was Obama's Fault(tm).

Not to be confused with Balcones Fault...

www.youtube.com

www.youtube.com

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-14 11:42 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Pretty damning stuff.

#5 | Posted by moder8 at 2018-07-14 11:50 PM | Reply

Before anyone comes in and starts yapping about "how do we know it was the Russians?", they should take a look at these findings from the House GOP intelligence committee's report:

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Report on Russian Active Measures
March 22, 2018

(U) While the intelligence case for attribution to Russia is significant, alternative scenarios have been examined to include an insider threat or another cyber actor. No credible evidence was found supporting either alternative, including a review of information contained in classified intelligence reports.

(U) Finding #8: Russian-state actors and third-party intermediaries were responsible for the dissemination of documents and communications stolen from U.S. political organizations.

(U) Russian-state actors and third party intermediaries were responsible for the selective dissemination of information from hacked U.S. political systems. This represents a "significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort" in Russia's "longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order." It is therefore likely that high-level Russian government approval was required in both planning and execution of the operation.

docs.house.gov

#6 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-15 12:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Report on Russian Active Measures
March 22, 2018

^
They simply dismiss those fake news findings as the work of the Deep State.

Facts don't work on them. (Except ostensibly related facts about Clinton or Obama.)

#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-07-15 12:06 AM | Reply

I think trump asked Russia to hack Hillary during his press conference because he wanted cover after making the same request in private earlier that day.

#8 | Posted by bored at 2018-07-15 03:09 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

I think trump asked Russia to hack Hillary during his press conference because he wanted cover after making the same request in private earlier that day.

#8 | Posted by bored at 2018

I think you may be right.

#9 | Posted by Zed at 2018-07-15 10:05 AM | Reply

Remember that shortly after trump received the nomination he started chumming the water with suggestions that the election was a rigged process and that if he appeared to lose, the results should be questioned. trump is a traitor. trump is the same kind of traitor as dick cheney. there's the cheney cartel and there's the trump cartel and the hope-too-be-one-day-soon romney cartel. trump knew what was happening..he just didn't think it would yield the results that it did

#10 | Posted by ABlock at 2018-07-15 01:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Advertisement

Advertisement

Maybe we should be thankful that David Dennison is so transparent. He says right up front what he intends to do -- steal the election.

Next he's meeting privately with Putin -- right after calling the European Union our "foe."

Incredible. Yet, through all of this, he gets nothing but love from the Republicans.

#11 | Posted by cbob at 2018-07-15 01:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Yet, through all of this, he gets nothing but love from the Republicans."

Because their hatred of liberals is larger than their love of their country.

#12 | Posted by danni at 2018-07-15 01:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

They get tax cuts, Xenophobia, Gutting of Health Care Insurance, Unlimited Military spending, Machiavellian cuts to spending on the Social Safety Net, and now, the ongoing attack on SS, Medicare and Medicaid, and loads of Culture war.

The Republicans are all-for Trump leading them to join the Evil Axix if they think they can make a Trans Person pee their pants, a Muslim feel threatened in any crowd, an undocumented worker live in fear, Assylum Seekers lose their Children, and a SCOTUS who will kill R vs W.

There is no bottom for them.

#13 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2018-07-15 01:34 PM | Reply

'There is no bottom for them."

We knew that when Nixon blew up the Paris peace talks and cost America 25,000 soldiers' lives. Nothing has ever changed about them since. Greedy bastards hiding behind the flag, God and hate. I have absolutely hated them since 1968. Totally immoral, unpatriotic scumbags who value money over the lives of their fellow countrymen. I will die hating them, I've tried to train my children to hate them, and very successfully I might add.

#14 | Posted by danni at 2018-07-15 02:27 PM | Reply

When will the Trump supporters take responsibility for their actions? Oh, never. That's right, the G.W. Bush supporters never did either. The Reagan supporters never did either. The Nixon supporters never did either. Because Republicans have no moral compass, America is burdened by them. We could be an incredibly great country without them. They won't let us be great. Look at the progress we made under FDR, JFK, LBJ, BHO. No progress ever happens under Republicans, as we see with DJT, they more interested in destroying progress as we watch as he tries to destroy Obamacare. Born a millionaire he wants to deprive millions of healthcare he has always taken for granted. Who can support that?

#15 | Posted by danni at 2018-07-15 02:37 PM | Reply

Good read:

cynthia kouril @cynthiakouril

Thread here. I used to be a federal prosecutor. I read the Russian hacking indictment the day it came out. It details crimes by BOTH Russian GRU officers and American citizens. It is irrelevant whether they US persons knew they were dealing with GRU. THAT IS A RED HERRING!

You can commit a crime where the other side of the transaction is an undercover cop or agent. All that matters is that you knew you were committing a crime and believed you were dealing with other criminals.

So, if you thought the criminals you were dealing with were Lucchese crime family, but they turned out to be Bonanno crime family, YOU HAVE STILL COMMITTED A CRIME. Hell, you have still committed a crime even if the other party is legally incapable of committing a crime.

Also, the timing of this indictment relative to the last dates of crimes mentioned in the indictment suggest that this phase of the investigation was over many months ago and this indictment was held in secret for quite a while. Why release now?

Read the rest here:

twitter.com

#16 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-15 03:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Strangely not a single anti-American alt-right traitor in this thread to defend, deflect, and throw some whataboutism out there.

#17 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2018-07-15 05:12 PM | Reply

Well number sebnteen.. we're not taking the troll bait. Just settin here chuckling about how we're gonna pull every single R lever.

#18 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2018-07-15 05:34 PM | Reply

Well number sebnteen.. we're not taking the troll bait. Just settin here chuckling about how we're gonna pull every single R lever.

#18 | POSTED BY comrade fester's boils

Hey dumbass, you just did Cletus!
Just admit you are a traitor to ‘merica!

#19 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2018-07-15 07:12 PM | Reply

Russia, if you're listening -- I hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," Trump said. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let's see if that happens."
What a very odd thing for someone who supposedly doesn't believe that Putin and Russians hacked the Democrats to say.

#3 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Exactly!

Also thanks Gal for posting the links and info you do. You are a Saint and a REAL American Patriot! :)

#20 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2018-07-15 07:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#20 Heck no, I ain't no saint. Hope I'm a patriot as there are going to be some trying times ahead for patriots of all stripes, I suspect. Glad you like the links & info. Posting them here helps me to not overdo it ("Look at this! Listen to this!") with people in my RL. :-)

#21 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-15 08:52 PM | Reply

@ Gal, well anyways your good work is appreciated. :)

Keep fighting the good fight!

#22 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2018-07-15 09:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Treason

Increasingly, I am beginning to hear the word treason enter the public lexicon to describe what Trump et al. did during Trump's campaign. Just as the word lying was slow to emerge, it is now widely used to describe Trump's pronouncements. So will it be with treason being used to describe his and his presidential campaign's efforts.

#23 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2018-07-16 06:32 AM | Reply

Strangely not a single anti-American alt-right traitor in this thread to defend, deflect, and throw some whataboutism out there.

#17 | POSTED BY ABORTED_MONSON AT 2018-07-15 05:12 PM | FLAG:

Maybe it is because claiming Trump was colluding with Russia because during a campaign speech he said this jokingly is perhaps the dumbest thing the left has cited as evidence. Don't you think maybe, if he really was colluding with Russia he would have told the hackers in private to hack her emails? Second of all the real meatheads in this whole hack are the Dems and the DNC for being such idiots that they allowed the hacking to happen by using "1234" and "password" as passwords.

#24 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-07-16 09:38 AM | Reply

www.realclearpolitics.com

#25 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-07-16 09:41 AM | Reply

1)
This is conspiracy. And he is going down.

2)
He runs his mouth too much, and he meant this in jest. And he didn't realize it was this bad. In which case, he might still go down.

Can someone give me a big picture scenario on WHY and HOW Trump collided/plans on colliding with Russia?

I get it, he wanted crooked Hillary to lose--what thinking person didn't?

But is he getting a financial incentive?

Does he just love and respect "strong leaders"/Dick Tators?

#26 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 10:06 AM | Reply

As a Republicannever-Trumper, my friend and I thought it was UNTHINKABLE he would win the GOP nomination.

So we went and asked the local GOP on the college campus, "Why Trump?" They stumbled through some crappy answers. "He could beat Hillary." That was very appealing to us, but COME ON! Trump would never get the nomination. I literally bet against it.

But then they said, "Trump LOVES America."
I think he really does. In ways I think are great.

And in ways that are misguided.
And in ways that are monstrous.

May God have mercy on us.

#27 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 10:18 AM | Reply

#26

Trump's getting a huge financial incentive AND he's being blackmailed.

#28 | Posted by Zed at 2018-07-16 10:18 AM | Reply

Zed,
What is he getting? Wild speculation included.

What could he blackmail him with?
He REALLY DID get a------------- from Russian whores?

#29 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 10:26 AM | Reply

#29 - What Putin has on Trump and his family is far worse than that.

OBVIOUSLY!

#30 | Posted by getoffmedz at 2018-07-16 11:01 AM | Reply

What could it POSSIBLY be?

#31 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 11:04 AM | Reply

#24,25 - Blame the victims!

Got it.

#32 | Posted by getoffmedz at 2018-07-16 11:10 AM | Reply

#31 - Mueller knows and time will tell.

#33 | Posted by getoffmedz at 2018-07-16 11:12 AM | Reply

Come on! You guys don't have any WILD GIESSES?

#34 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 12:38 PM | Reply

Can someone give me a big picture scenario on WHY and HOW Trump collided/plans on colliding with Russia?
I get it, he wanted crooked Hillary to lose--what thinking person didn't?
But is he getting a financial incentive?
Does he just love and respect "strong leaders"/Dick Tators?

#35 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 12:51 PM | Reply

"Does he just love and respect "strong leaders"/Dick Tators?" - #35 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 12:51 PM
"Does he just love and respect "strong leaders"/Dick Tators?" - #26 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 10:06 AM
Dementia?

Or Tourette?

#36 | Posted by Hans at 2018-07-16 12:55 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#24,25 - Blame the victims!
Got it.

#32 | POSTED BY GETOFFMEDZ AT 2018-07-16 11:10 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Sure, two reasons. 1. If the DNC had not been so stupid they would not have been hacked and we would not be having this conversation.
2. If they had not been hacked the emails by the Dems saying Bernie supporters were morons and basement dwellers would not have got out and Bernie supporters would have voted for Hillary instead of staying home which means again we would not be having this conversation.

#37 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-07-16 02:06 PM | Reply

"After Trump won the election, administration officials tried to downplay his public encouragement of Russian hackers as a joke. But the latest indictment filed by special counsel Robert Mueller indicates Russia was indeed listening, and took Trump seriously."

Now that's Funny as Hell right there I don't care who you are!

#38 | Posted by Javelin at 2018-07-16 04:13 PM | Reply

@38 if your an Anti-American piece of ---- it's probably funny.

#39 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2018-07-16 08:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Dementia?
Or Tourette?

Both is not out of the question.

#38

JavelinCatcher, more like. Yet another nameless rwing "libertarian" (see: "I voted for GW, twice, so now I call myself a "libertarian", because I can't think of anything else, and have to change my handle here as often as Melania has to change Donnie Tiny Hands' diapers.)

#40 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-16 08:30 PM | Reply

#37 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

What's with your selective ridicule? Russians hacked the Repubs as well, just chose to hold back the embarrassment because Putin wanted Trump to win.

#41 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 08:37 PM | Reply

www.realclearpolitics.com
#25 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Are you inferring that there are posters here on the DR who are claiming the election was stolen or rigged? If so, who?

Because all I've seen is people claiming "meddling," since there's no clear-cut way to determine whether said meddling was the sole variable handing the election to Trump.

#42 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 08:40 PM | Reply

Maybe it is because claiming Trump was colluding with Russia because during a campaign speech he said this jokingly is perhaps the dumbest thing the left has cited as evidence. -- FISHPAW

Joking or not, it was incompetent to do so and led to Russians attempting to do exactly what he requested the same day he made the request. Is that something that you are ignoring?

#43 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 08:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Furthermore, it's not JUST the Left pointing out said incompetence. Get out of your binary thinking; it's that thinking that is destroying the country.

#44 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 08:43 PM | Reply

"Does he just love and respect "strong leaders"/Dick Tators?" - #35 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 12:51 PM
"Does he just love and respect "strong leaders"/Dick Tators?" - #26 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 10:06 AM
Dementia?
Or Tourette?

#36 | POSTED BY HANS

How about one of you smarty pants who hates our President answer the question?!

"Can someone give me a big picture scenario on WHY and HOW Trump collided/plans on colliding with Russia?
I get it, he wanted crooked Hillary to lose.
But is he getting a financial incentive?
Does he just love and respect "strong leaders"/dictators?"

#45 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 08:45 PM | Reply

But is he getting a financial incentive?
Does he just love and respect "strong leaders"/dictators?"

Yes.

#46 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-07-16 08:49 PM | Reply

- But is he getting a financial incentive?

He's been trying to get a permit from Russia to build Trump Hotels all over Russia, the largest in the world in Moscow, since 1987... when he returned from Russia, suddenly all about politics, and ran for Pres the first time Now he's got a shot at it.

Hopefully your ignorance on the subject is willful, one would hate to think you are that naive.

#47 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-16 08:52 PM | Reply

Hopefully your ignorance on the subject is willful, one would hate to think you are that naive.
#47 | POSTED BY CORKY

Seconded.

#48 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 08:53 PM | Reply

"I get it, he wanted crooked Hillary to lose.
But is he getting a financial incentive?"

Trump enacted a tariff that sent China's soybean order from America to Russia.

Trump enacted steel and aluminum tariffs on our allies but not on Russia.

You head is buried firmly in the... sand.

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-07-16 08:56 PM | Reply

Guilty as charged. Head in the sand, ignorant, naive. Whatever.

I've asked anti Trump people this question but have never received a knowledgeable answer.

And I honestly doubted the collision charge.
Im paying much more attention NOW.

Thanks for some answers.

#50 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 09:07 PM | Reply

I love how conservatives pretend that if you can't explain a motive and prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt on an anonymous blog, that this means Trump is innocent and the entire investigation is a sham.

Grow up you traitorous scum.

#51 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-16 09:08 PM | Reply

www.bbc.com

According to that article by the BBC, the steel tariffs hurt Russia.
Hmmm.

The Russian hotels thing sounds plausible.

#52 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 09:10 PM | Reply

I've asked anti Trump people this question but have never received a knowledgeable answer.

I doubt that, but "whatever. "

#53 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 09:10 PM | Reply

Not what I am claiming, Joe.

And it's not my fault everyone of you communists and liberals simply calls names, and rarely back up your assertions.

#54 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 09:12 PM | Reply

The Russian hotels thing sounds plausible.
#52 | POSTED BY DRIVELIKEJEHU

That's just the quid-pro-quo to keep Trump thirsty.

The real impetus for treason was behind the dirt they dug up on him and other Republican party members.

What, you don't think there's a reason why SOME Republicans are head over heals for Putin and Russia, like Trump, and the rest are "never Trumpers"?

Are you also ignorant that Guccifer 2.0 hacked Republicans as well, not just the DNC?

Hope some of this helps. Naivete is not fun; believe me, I'd know more than most.

#55 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 09:13 PM | Reply

Go read some Seth Abramson threads if you require a comprehensive explanation. In the meantime, try not to confuse your own ignorance with Trump's innocence.

#56 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-16 09:13 PM | Reply

In the meantime, try not to confuse your own ignorance with Trump's innocence.
#56 | POSTED BY JOE

Oooh, I like that.

Permission requested to use on the DR in the future.

#57 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 09:14 PM | Reply

And it's not my fault everyone of you communists and liberals simply calls names, and rarely back up your assertions.
#54 | POSTED BY DRIVELIKEJEHU

Those critical of Trump are pinko-commies now?

Whooo-weeeee! Boy, I tell you whut! This is startin' tuh git a tid bit messy!

#58 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 09:16 PM | Reply

What If Trump Has Been a Russian Asset Since 1987?

nymag.com

Trump is also owned by Russian banks, the only banks that were willing to deal with him after all his debacles.

"Well sure, every big bank may have some Russian customer somewhere. But there are a couple of things that distinguish Deutsche Bank in this regard. For one thing, it was fined $630 million in January 2017 for its involvement in a $10 billion Russian money-laundering scheme.

For another, during the time-period the bank was washing the Russian cash, it was also doling out huge sums of money to reality television star and real estate developer Donald Trump. Deutsche Bank is itself the nexus, in other words. As someone dimly aware of, let alone leading, the Russia investigation, Conaway should know these things.

According to a December 2016 analysis by Bloomberg, Trump owed the German bank roughly $300 million as he was poised to assume the presidency.

As The Guardian's Luke Harding recounts in his book "Collusion: Secret Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win," this debt was not only unprecedented but bizarre: He had borrowed the money from Deutsche's private wealth division, using the money to pay back a $330 million loan that he had defaulted on from the bank's real estate division.

"Asked whether it was normal to give more money to a customer who was a bad credit risk and a litigant, one former senior Deutsche Bank staff member said: 'Are you [expletive] kidding me?'" Harding wrote.

www.usnews.com

People who don't know this stuff; reports from basic objective news media, don't know it because they don't want to know it.

#59 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-16 09:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#59

WILFUL ignorance is the most difficult to combat, IMO. You're not just debating facts, you're combatting ego. Someone who is wilfully ignorant doesn't want to know the facts. They want what they believe to be true; absolutely cultish.

#60 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-07-16 09:42 PM | Reply

@38 if your an Anti-American piece of ---- it's probably funny.

#61 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2018-07-16 09:47 PM | Reply

I appreciate the answers. Thanks.

Naïve isn't childish innocence, it includes a willful ignorance. As i understand it. I was asking honestly.

Buckle up, America.

#62 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-16 10:06 PM | Reply

"As i understand it."

You misunderstand it.

na·ive
adjective
(of a person or action) showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgment.
"the rather naive young man had been totally misled"

(of a person) natural and unaffected; innocent.
"Andy had a sweet, naive look when he smiled"

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-07-16 10:38 PM | Reply

Snoofy,

Perhaps there are other definitions you haven't conceived, or aren't aware of.

""For the waywardness of the naive will kill them, And the complacency of fools will destroy them."
‭‭Proverbs‬ ‭1:32‬ ‭NASB‬‬

NAIVE (adj)
silly, seducible
simplicity, naivete
simple, foolish, open-minded

The concept is innocence PLUS unwillingness to observe warnings.

#64 | Posted by drivelikejehu at 2018-07-17 12:49 AM | Reply

The Day Trump Asked Russian Hackers to Attack, They Did! AND he was on the golf course with a blonde and a martini!

OMG!!!

#65 | Posted by AuntieSocial at 2018-07-17 01:01 AM | Reply

NAIVE (adj)
silly, seducible
simplicity, naivete
simple, foolish, open-minded

^
This is no different than the Google definition in #63

"The concept is innocence PLUS unwillingness to observe warnings."

No it's not

It's innocence to the point of not being able to recognize the warning signs.

#66 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-07-17 02:35 AM | Reply

Not a good election strategy this "Russia collusion" story. Trump supporters will double down. Kind of like how Bush fils and Karl Rove did in 2004 re the wisdom of the Iraq war.
Democrats have to do better. Or its another 4 years of screeching for them.

#67 | Posted by tunde at 2018-07-17 08:31 AM | Reply

Trump supporters will double down

Posted by tuned

They always double down, regardless.

#68 | Posted by Zed at 2018-07-17 09:35 AM | Reply

Not a good election strategy this "Russia collusion" story.

#67 | Posted by tunde at 2018-07-17 08:31 AMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

If treasonous behavior as broadcast live Monday is not a thing we can talk about then I think we play into the hands of the traitors.

Donald Trump took sides against his own country. It can only get just a little bit worse than that. Even so, what he did was a High Crime and Misdemeanor. We need to get rid of the SOB before he hurts any one or anything more than he has.

#69 | Posted by Zed at 2018-07-17 09:37 AM | Reply

Donald Trump took sides against his own country. It can only get just a little bit worse than that. Even so, what he did was a High Crime and Misdemeanor. We need to get rid of the SOB before he hurts any one or anything more than he has.

#69 | POSTED BY ZED AT 2018-07-17 09:37 AM | FLAG:

Funny how you were not calling Obama's apology treason. What Obama did was embarrasing and his off mic comments to the Russian embassador was sleazy, what Trump said was stupid. Difference was Obama was still holding onto his beliefs from Harvard that the US is an evil country, Trump said it because he loves our country and wants to prevent nuclear war.

#70 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-07-17 10:00 AM | Reply

Funny how you were not calling Obama's apology treason.

#70 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-07-17 10:

No funnier than you not calling Trump's behavior treason. I'll point out to you that Obama is not longer president after having left quietly.

Trump will try to pull the pillars of the temple in on him when he's made to go. He disgusts me, as the anti-American goon he is.

#71 | Posted by Zed at 2018-07-17 10:34 AM | Reply

Trump said it because he loves our country and wants to prevent nuclear war.

#70 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-07-17 10:00

All available evidence is that Donald Trump hates the United States when he can get something for himself by hating.

The is act you've got? It's old. You may as well sign up for Trump's Army now and defend him against the pitchforks. Maybe you'll be the first to shoot a fellow citizen.

#72 | Posted by Zed at 2018-07-17 10:36 AM | Reply

Trump said it because he loves our country and wants to prevent nuclear war.

#70 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Trump said "it" because he loves money and himself. Nothing he did was for America.

#73 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-07-17 10:36 AM | Reply

Trump said it because he loves our country and wants to prevent nuclear war.

#70 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

You're stupid. Abysmally, disturbingly stupid.

#74 | Posted by jpw at 2018-07-17 10:43 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Trump's press conference was disgraceful but it wasn't treasonous.

You people need to get a grip.

#75 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 11:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Coming up with the 'Trump Does What He Does For Love Of Country' is full-blown-category-5 cultism.

He's done nothing but attack America: our institutions, businesses, citizens

#76 | Posted by schifferbrains at 2018-07-17 11:02 AM | Reply

"Trump's press conference was disgraceful but it wasn't treasonous."

Whereas if HRC had done the same, you'd be apoplectic.

#77 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-07-17 11:04 AM | Reply

Trump's press conference was disgraceful but it wasn't treasonous.

On what basis do you make that distinction?

And even if it were only "disgraceful," what do you think should happen next? Surely not just wishy-washy statements by a few congressmen?

#78 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 11:24 AM | Reply

Trump's press conference was disgraceful but it wasn't treasonous.
You people need to get a grip.
#75 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 11:00 AM

Standards for Impeachment: Trump's Defense of Putin in the Face of Russia's Electoral Attacks

Bringing Trump's behavior in relation to Russia into the discussion of impeachment is neither "piling on" nor a concession that other grounds, such as obstruction or aiding and abetting Russian electoral interference, lack merit. Over the course of almost two years, much has been learned about the Russian cyberattack on American democracy as well as about this president's position on this critical national security issue: He will minimize the threat, refrain from the full use of his constitutional and legal authority to defend against it, and will not marshal public opinion and bipartisan support behind a vigorous program of countermeasures. Impeachment would be appropriately considered and debated as a remedy for this extraordinarily irresponsible, reckless and dangerous behavior.
www.lawfareblog.com

#79 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 11:41 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Danforth,

Had HRC done the same I wouldn't have called it treason.

#80 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 11:42 AM | Reply

Had HRC done the same I wouldn't have called it treason.

#80 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 11:42 AM | FLAG:

Stop lying, Jeff.

#81 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-07-17 11:46 AM | Reply

Had HRC done the same I wouldn't have called it treason.

#80 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

So who do you think you are fooling?

#82 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-07-17 11:46 AM | Reply

Had HRC done the same I wouldn't have called it treason.

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 11:42 AM | REPLY

You're as dishonest as it comes. Hell if Obama had done it you would have expected him to be impeached or worse. Can't you ever be honest about this stuff???

#83 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 11:47 AM | Reply

#77 Here, study a little history www.brookings.edu

#84 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-07-17 11:48 AM | Reply

Trump's press conference was disgraceful but it wasn't treasonous.
You people need to get a grip.

#75 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 11:00 AM | FLAG:

We have a grip you just need to be honest that's all.

#85 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 11:48 AM | Reply

I wouldn't have labeled it treasonous had HRC done it because I know what the word means.

The only grip you gave Laura is a grip on insanity.

#86 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 11:55 AM | Reply

Like I said, you people are completely unhinged. It was a disgusting display and it was flat out embarrassing. It wasn't treasonous.

#87 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 11:57 AM | Reply

"Had HRC done the same I wouldn't have called it treason."

We had half an evening where you couldn't find a single quid pro quo from the Clinton Foundation, yet trashed her up one side and down the other. Shortly after, you were silent on the thread where the Trump Foundation was (correctly) accused of multiple financial violations for personal use of charity funds.

No one is fooled by your claim.

#88 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-07-17 11:58 AM | Reply

"Had HRC done the same I wouldn't have called it treason." - #80 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 11:42 AM

This is entirely plausible.

Now, had BHO done the same...

JeffJ blames Obama for Ronnie Jackson's downfall

#89 | Posted by Hans at 2018-07-17 12:03 PM | Reply

"Like I said, you people are completely unhinged. It was a disgusting display and it was flat out embarrassing. It wasn't treasonous."

While Trump's performance may have fallen short of treasonous, it went far beyond "flat out embarrassing".

#90 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 12:03 PM | Reply

Like I said, you people are completely unhinged. It was a disgusting display and it was flat out embarrassing. It wasn't treasonous.

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 11:57 AM | REPLY

I'm not at all unhinged hunny. I'm as sedate as you can get. You on the other hand are a partisan hack. To expect anything else on my part is stupid.

#91 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 12:05 PM | Reply

If not treasonous, how about some of these adjectives?:

Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1

Madeleine Albright: "Does anybody say to him, to the president, what in god's name were you thinking about when you did that? Because somebody needs to make it clear to Trump that his behavior in that press conference was un-American, outrageous, ridiculous, stupid." @Morning_Joe

I like "un-American" myself.

#92 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 12:07 PM | Reply

Jeff doesn't want to discuss the merits of his own comments. Just wants to generically bash "you people." Move along and don't bother feeding such a pathetic troll.

#93 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 12:08 PM | Reply

Gal,

Un-American is fine. I don't think that is unfair or even inaccurate.

#94 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 12:08 PM | Reply

#88 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Had HRC done this you'd be defending her til you were blue in the face, just like you did all things Obama.

As for the Clinton Foundation, do you find it strange that the donations have largely dried up once she lost the election? Nah, me neither.

#95 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 12:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

PS Minimizing and normalizing Trump's behavior by referring to it as "embarrassing" ain't gonna fly here. You were on more solid footing when you called it "disgraceful". Assuming you weren't one of the ones who thought Obama was "disgraceful" for wearing a tan suit or not wearing a flag pin.

#96 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 12:11 PM | Reply

Joe,

'Treason' has a very precise meaning and Trump's words, as disgraceful as they were, don't fit.

I point that out and the personal attacks fly.

#97 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 12:11 PM | Reply

"Un-American is fine. I don't think that is unfair or even inaccurate." - #94 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 12:08 PM

Reminds me of the story...

After picking up his 10 million dollar lottery check, a man decides to go to the nearest bar to celebrate.

Upon entering the man spies a beautiful woman seated at the bar. The man takes up the stool next to her and tells her about his good luck. She's awestruck upon hearing the news. The man then says to her, "Would you sleep with me for half of my winnings?"

Breathlessly, the woman answers "Why, yes I would!"

"Well then," the man continued, "would you sleep with me for 20 dollars?"

Shocked and insulted the woman answers, "Of course not! What do you think I am?"

To which the man responded, "Well, ma'am, we've already determined what you are. Now we're just negotiating."

#98 | Posted by Hans at 2018-07-17 12:11 PM | Reply

Gal,

His behavior was disgraceful and embarrassing. Is it not OK to label it as both?

Criticisms of Obama's attire and Michelle's sleeveless shirt was beyond stupid and I said so at the time. I was also very consistent in pointing out the stupidity of ripping on Obama for playing golf.

#99 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 12:13 PM | Reply

#98 FF!

#100 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 12:14 PM | Reply

Mark Hertling ‏ @MarkHertling

For those gobsmacked and disgusted by what you just saw, imagine being part of the military leadership in the Pentagon or in Europe, or anywhere in the intelligence community, as you REALLY have information that makes this unfathomable.

Lots of bourbon for them tonight.

#101 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 12:18 PM | Reply

Treason' has a very precise meaning and Trump's words, as disgraceful as they were, don't fit.

I agree, and while i'm no expert on federal criminal law, let's examine the statute:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States...adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

18 U.S.C.A. 2381.

To me, whether Trump is currently guilty of treason would depend on whether Russia is an "enemy" in the statutory sense. I don't know how the Code and case law define "enemy" and I doubt you do either. In my opinion, there is less doubt that Trump "adhered" to Russia yesterday in lieu of his own intel agencies, so the remainder of the elements may well have been met.

With all of that in mind, i find it odd that you would simply flat-out conclude that there was no treason.

#102 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 12:19 PM | Reply

Here's a little tidbit regarding treason:

www.quora.com

#103 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 12:32 PM | Reply

The very first sentence from your link:

Treason is defined as working against the interests of your nation.

How does this help your claim?

#104 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 12:34 PM | Reply

Joe,

The reason I say it ins't treason is because POTUS is given the power to conduct foreign policy.

Letting Russia off easy for their transgressions is wrong, but it's well within the purview of POTUS to take such actions.

I thought the Iran nuclear deal was a fiasco - it gave all sorts of aid and comfort to the Iranian government (much moreso than Trump has with Russia and Iran is an actual enemy of the US whereas Russia is a geopolitical foe) - but I never once questioned Obama's power to craft such a deal and never even remotely considered it treasonous.

#105 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 12:36 PM | Reply

"As for the Clinton Foundation, do you find it strange that the donations have largely dried up once she lost the election?"

After a years long libelous campaign against it by rightist conspiracy nuts? Not particularly.

#106 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-07-17 12:37 PM | Reply

I would absolutely love it if all of the Democratic Senators drafted a letter to Putin informing him that any deals reached between he and Trump are not binding unless ratified by the Senate.

#107 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 12:37 PM | Reply

it's well within the purview of POTUS to take such actions.

It's well within the purview of the presidency to ignore the conclusion of your Director of National Intelligence and instead publicly side with the word of a foreign dictator who is arguably our enemy? I'd say that's a lot more borderline of an act than you make it out to be.

#108 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 12:40 PM | Reply

But i'm still curious how you parse the actual statutory definition of "treason," Jeff. You rightly brought up that the term has a specific meaning. How does Trump's conduct yesterday fall outside the statutory definition?

#109 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 12:42 PM | Reply

"But... but... Hillary! Obama! Michelle!" - Lil' Jeffy

#110 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 12:50 PM | Reply

I'd like to know if JeffJ thinks Iran-Contra was treasonous and if so who committed treason.

#111 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-07-17 12:59 PM | Reply

Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1

John Brennan: "When I use the term, 'this is nothing short of treasonous,' I equate it to the betrayal of one's nation. Basically aiding and abetting, giving comfort to an enemy. Mr. Trump had the opportunity to say ... do not do this again ... And he failed." @TODAYshow

#112 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 01:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Trump is just following a long line of treasonous/criminal Republican Presidents... Nixon, Reagan, GW, now Trump. It takes a lot of balls to defend their ilk... and their tradition.

#113 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:03 PM | Reply

I'd like to know if Snoofy thinks Bay of Pigs was treasonous and if so who committed treason.

#114 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:04 PM | Reply

I'd like to know if Snoofy thinks Bay of Pigs was treasonous and if so who committed treason.

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 01:04 PM | REPLY

WOW Here we go crap got too deep for him so now deflection time. As per the usual.

#115 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 01:05 PM | Reply

I would absolutely love it if all of the Democratic Senators drafted a letter to Putin informing him that any deals reached between he and Trump are not binding unless ratified by the Senate.

#107 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 12:37 PM | FLAG:

Are they going through the UNSC??

#116 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 01:06 PM | Reply

#114 |

More Soviet-style Whataboutism. Try post something on the merits of THIS Trump performance yesterday.

#117 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:06 PM | Reply

But i'm still curious how you parse the actual statutory definition of "treason," Jeff. You rightly brought up that the term has a specific meaning. How does Trump's conduct yesterday fall outside the statutory definition?

#109 | POSTED BY JOE

The reason being POTUS is afforded a pretty wide berth when it comes to conducting foreign policy.

Now, if he was attempting to give the state of Alaska to Russia, yeah, that would be treasonous and the Senate would demand the deal be put to a ratification vote. If such a demand were ignored he'd be impeached and removed within a day, and rightly so. He would then be charged with treason and would go to trial.

#118 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:07 PM | Reply

Oh and you're NOW advocating for Logan Act violations. Brilliant slick.

#119 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 01:08 PM | Reply

WOW Here we go crap got too deep for him so now deflection time. As per the usual.

#115 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

I was just giving Snoofy the response he deserved. Interesting you don't take him to task for bringing Iran-Contra into the discussion.

#120 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:08 PM | Reply

#118 Deflecting to the technicalities of the statutes on Treason isn't a response to the what John Brennan and the rest of America is talking about. See 112.

#121 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:09 PM | Reply

#119

I would applaud Democrats if they sent Putin such a letter, Laura and it would NOT be a Logan Act violation. There is a reason nobody has even been prosecuted for violating it in its ~200 years of existence.

#122 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:09 PM | Reply

#121

I understand what Brennan is talking about. He seeks to criminalize policy differences.

#123 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:10 PM | Reply

I would applaud Democrats if they sent Putin such a letter, Laura and it would NOT be a Logan Act violation. There is a reason nobody has even been prosecuted for violating it in its ~200 years of existence.

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 01:09 PM | REPLY

Damned straight it would be.

#124 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 01:11 PM | Reply

#117 | POSTED BY CORKY

Like Laura, you ignore #111 which is the post I was mirroring. Is it because Snoofy is a member of your team?

#125 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:11 PM | Reply

-I'd like to know if Snoofy thinks Bay of Pigs was treasonous and if so who committed treason.

you know you'll never get an honest answer out of him nor anyone else on this matter.

Obviously a lot of people had reason to believe the Bay of Pigs constituted treason on the part of our president.

but let's be honest.....nobody using that term (treason) really means it. It's about politics.....nothing more.

#126 | Posted by eberly at 2018-07-17 01:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Laura,

Did Jimmy Carter violate the Logan Act when he negotiated with N Korea (which pissed Clinton off) for a nuke deal back in the '90's?

#127 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:12 PM | Reply

The reason being POTUS is afforded a pretty wide berth when it comes to conducting foreign policy.

The statute makes clear that it applies to people "owing allegiance to the United States," and that includes him. So again, how does his conduct yesterday fall outside the parameters of the statute? You are the one who brought up the fact that "treason" has a specific definition, but now that i've posted it you seem intent on reading an exemption into the statute that is not in its text. Come on with it, Jeff.

#128 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 01:13 PM | Reply

but let's be honest.....nobody using that term (treason) really means it. It's about politics.....nothing more.

#126 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Which is what I'm trying to get them to admit.

#129 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:13 PM | Reply

- Like Laura, you ignore #111

My post was about your usual "I don't like what Trump did, but here, let me deflect for him anyway" posts.

And about you addressing the letter of the law, but not the spirit.

#130 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:14 PM | Reply

"Obviously a lot of people had reason to believe the Bay of Pigs constituted treason on the part of our president." - #126 | Posted by eberly at 2018-07-17 01:12 PM

How is training and arming a coup to overthrow a foreign government considered treason against the United States of America?

#131 | Posted by Hans at 2018-07-17 01:15 PM | Reply

= It's about politics.....nothing more.

Horse ----. Had that been Obama with Putin yesterday saying what Trump did, Dems would be calling for him to resign.... not deflecting with absurd Whataboutisms.

#132 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:16 PM | Reply

131

It's not.

#133 | Posted by eberly at 2018-07-17 01:16 PM | Reply

Joe,

I've already explained it - POTUS is conducting foreign policy. Heck, if a pundit had made those exact same comments would that be treason or would it be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?

For whatever reason Trump has decided that playing nice with Putin is in the best interests of the US. I think he's, at best, misguided but he was elected POTUS and with that position he's given the power to conduct foreign policy. Cozying up with Putin is not a treasonous act just as cozying up with the Mullahs was not a treasonous act. Handing our nuclear codes to Putin would be a treasonous act. Reaching out to N Korea is not a treasonous act.

#134 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:17 PM | Reply

#133

Agreed.

#135 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:18 PM | Reply

Did Jimmy Carter violate the Logan Act when he negotiated with N Korea (which pissed Clinton off) for a nuke deal back in the '90's?

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 01:12 PM | REPLY

Are you sure it was without Clinton's blessing but made the appearance it pissed him off publicly??? Sitting presidents do call on formers to help with deals in secret you know.

#136 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 01:18 PM | Reply

- Trump has decided that playing nice with Putin is in the best interests of the US

Trump has decided that playing nice with Putin is in the best interests of Trump.

ft, nc

#137 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:19 PM | Reply

Horse ----. Had that been Obama with Putin yesterday saying what Trump did, Dems would be calling for him to resign.... not deflecting with absurd Whataboutisms.
#132 | POSTED BY CORKY

You're delusional if you believe that. Their response would have been a bit more tepid (Obama was more popular with his party than Trump is with his) than the GOP's response to Trump over this.

#138 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I see. So you insist that we all apply the statutory definition of "treason," but then when confronted with that statute you refuse to consider or apply any of the words in the statute, and instead read-in a presidential exemption that doesn't exist in the statute's text.

Thanks Jeff. I was right, you are a troll.

#139 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 01:20 PM | Reply

#95
Deflection, deflection.

You were accusing HRC, without a shred of evidence, of the exact stuff the Trump Foundation very credibly did.

As I recall, your only two factual points were 1) The CF's donations dropped after she lost the election, and 2) Paul Ryan used to sleep on the couch in his office.

Meanwhile, your condemnation of the Trump Foundation's clear corruption is nowhere to be found.

#140 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-07-17 01:20 PM | Reply

"I understand what Brennan is talking about. He seeks to criminalize policy differences."

That's a glib answer in this case. What policy of Trump's makes him insist on siding with Putin's denials about Russian interfernce in the election over the findings of the American IC, and the Senate and House (GOP-led) Intelligence committees findings?

#141 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 01:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Sitting presidents do call on formers to help with deals in secret you know.

#136 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

I'm well aware. The first president to reach out to a former POTUS was Truman to Hoover over the starvation crisis in the aftermath of WWII.

From everything I've read (including in a book called "The President's Club") Carter acted on his own and it caused a big rift between the two because it countered Clinton's policy toward N Korea. It was pressure from his own party that caused him to go along with it.

#142 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:22 PM | Reply

#140

Bugger off troll, or try to stay on topic.

Thanks Jeff. I was right, you are a troll.

#139 | POSTED BY JOE

Not at all. You just don't like my answers. Too much nuance, I guess.

#143 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:24 PM | Reply

From everything I've read (including in a book called "The President's Club") Carter acted on his own and it caused a big rift between the two because it countered Clinton's policy toward N Korea. It was pressure from his own party that caused him to go along with it.

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 01:22 PM | REPLY

Oh lovely a BOOK told you that. HAHAHAHA

#144 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 01:27 PM | Reply

What policy of Trump's makes him insist on siding with Putin's denials about Russian interfernce in the election over the findings of the American IC, and the Senate and House (GOP-led) Intelligence committees findings?
#141 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

2, actually. For some reason Trump seems to think it's in his best interest to curry favor with Putin.

Secondly, because Trump is so fixated on the Mueller investigation he seems to feel that if he calls out Putin for Russia's meddling it legitimizes the Mueller investigation and de-legitimizes Trump's election victory (he's wrong about this - he can call out Putin without harming himself, but this is Trump we are talking about). Quite honestly, this is probably the bigger motivation.

#145 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:28 PM | Reply

- You're delusional if you believe that.

You're delusional if you don't. Obama standing up there and accepting Putin's word over US Intel? Obama conceding that the Crimea is a done deal and and NATO sucks anyway? Obama sucking up to Putin in every way possible?

Dems would be outraged, even as some leading Repubicans are... but I guess you alt right converts are now right of people like John McCain, eh?

#146 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:29 PM | Reply

#144

How do you get your information, Laura? Clairvoyance? Osmosis? The rest of us get it by reading. You should try it sometime.

#147 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:29 PM | Reply

- Too much nuance, I guess.

Too much Trump/party over country.

#148 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:30 PM | Reply

You just don't like my answers. Too much nuance, I guess.

If ignoring the language in a statute that you demanded we apply constitutes "nuance," then yeah, you're super nuanced Jeff.

#149 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 01:30 PM | Reply

#146

I'm sure some Dems would be outraged, that's why I equated it with how members of the GOP have responded. McCain isn't alone in his assessment. But you made it seem as if the party would unite and would demand he resign. We both know that would never have happened; that it would take a lot more than this for the Dems to call for Obama to resign.

#150 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:31 PM | Reply

I'm sure some Dems would be outraged, that's why I equated it with how members of the GOP have responded. McCain isn't alone in his assessment. But you made it seem as if the party would unite and would demand he resign. We both know that would never have happened; that it would take a lot more than this for the Dems to call for Obama to resign.

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2018-07-17 01:31 PM | REPLY

Obama never committed treason. OOPSIE DAISY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#151 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-07-17 01:33 PM | Reply

#145 Unless Trump actually is a traitor, in which case the reasons he gives or you assign to his policies may be bogus excuses for the real truth. Even in Trump in not a traitor per se, his "policy" could lead to treasonous results if, for example, Trump is so fixated on the Mueller investigation because people in his campaign did collude with Russians and/or if the Russians have something they are using to bribe or blackmail him.

#152 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 01:34 PM | Reply

-Had that been Obama with Putin yesterday saying what Trump did, Dems would be calling for him to resign....

I was referring to folks like you when I said it's politics and nothing more, not prominent dems in DC. Maybe you're right about the dems. I could agree to that.

#153 | Posted by eberly at 2018-07-17 01:34 PM | Reply

Trump has decided that playing nice with Putin is in the best interests of Trump.

You hit the nail on the head Corky, Trump is a classic narcissist and at the end of the day, he is never wrong and it is all about him. This (and the fact that he is, at his core, a stereotypical NYC Real Estate Developer) has always been my biggest problem with him.

#154 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-07-17 01:35 PM | Reply

If ignoring the language in a statute that you demanded we apply constitutes "nuance," then yeah, you're super nuanced Jeff.

#149 | POSTED BY JOE

That statute doesn't exist in a vacuum, Joe. That's why I used the Iran deal as an example. That deal provided all sorts of material support (Trump made a complete ass of himself but he didn't actually give Putin anything (yet?)) to an actual enemy of this country, yet there was nothing treasonous about it.

We travel a dangerous path if we are going to try and criminalize policy differences.

#155 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:35 PM | Reply

Obama never committed treason. OOPSIE DAISY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#151 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

Oopsie daisy what?

I agree that Obama never committed treason. Corky was speaking hypothetically.

#156 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:36 PM | Reply

- We both know that would never have happened;

Had Obama done after his election everything Trump has done with foreign policy, he wouldn't be President.

Trump is putting his interests ahead of his country's interests, and as Brennan said, in this case that is treasonous.

#157 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:36 PM | Reply

It's too applies and oranges of a comparison...Obama vs Trump in same situation.

My belief is that Obama wouldn't have had such a meeting and if he had chosen to......my guess he would have consulted with his party more and not created the --------- this whole thing has. IOW, it wouldn't have escalated to the point where serious folks would be calling for a resignation. Obama would have simply handled it better.

#158 | Posted by eberly at 2018-07-17 01:38 PM | Reply

That statute doesn't exist in a vacuum, Joe.

Except you're the one who said

'Treason' has a very precise meaning and Trump's words, as disgraceful as they were, don't fit.
If you want to talk about extraneous factors go right ahead, but don't pretend you aren't the one who sought to be "precise" with the "meaning" of the word "treason" and whether Trump's words "fit" that definition.

#159 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 01:38 PM | Reply

if, for example, Trump is so fixated on the Mueller investigation because people in his campaign did collude with Russians and/or if the Russians have something they are using to bribe or blackmail him.

#152 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Now we are moving into speculation. Mueller has yet to indict, much less convict, anyone for collusion.

#160 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:38 PM | Reply

he didn't actually give Putin anything

Political legitimacy for Putin and embarrassment to the United States are "things." Just because he didn't "give Putin Alaska" doesn't mean he hasn't conferred a benefit upon him.

#161 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 01:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"I'd like to know if Snoofy thinks Bay of Pigs was treasonous and if so who committed treason."

Definition of treasonous - involving or guilty of the crime of betraying one's country.

^
How does Bay of Pigs do that?
I'll take "not treasonous" for $200, Alex.

#162 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-07-17 01:40 PM | Reply

"For whatever reason Trump has decided that playing nice with Putin is in the best interests of the US. "

IOW, we need to find out what that reason is in order to determine if he is truly acting in what he believes is in the best interests of the US or if he is acting on what he believes is in his own best interests and just using the "it's in the best interest of the country" as he cover.

PS "For whatever reason" is not a policy position.

#163 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 01:41 PM | Reply

Obama would have simply handled it better.

#158 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Agreed.

If you want to talk about extraneous factors go right ahead, but don't pretend you aren't the one who sought to be "precise" with the "meaning" of the word "treason" and whether Trump's words "fit" that definition.
#159 | POSTED BY JOE

You are correct. I did do that. I was looking at it narrowly, at first. When I began thinking about it in terms of the powers given to POTUS to conduct foreign policy, my tack changed. I should have articulated that - apologies about that. I appreciate that you are discussing this rationally and in good faith. I would have saved us both some time and keystrokes had I just admitted that it was incomplete to narrowly focus on the definition itself when it's more than just that.

#164 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:43 PM | Reply

"Handing our nuclear codes to Putin would be a treasonous act."

Do handing conventional weapons to the Ayatollah next.

I dare you.

#165 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-07-17 01:43 PM | Reply

IOW, we need to find out what that reason is in order to determine if he is truly acting in what he believes is in the best interests of the US or if he is acting on what he believes is in his own best interests and just using the "it's in the best interest of the country" as he cover....

#163 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY A

Yes, agreed.

#166 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:44 PM | Reply

I appreciate that you are discussing this rationally and in good faith. I would have saved us both some time and keystrokes had I just admitted that it was incomplete to narrowly focus on the definition itself when it's more than just that.

#164 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

You leave me.....

Breathless.

#167 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-07-17 01:45 PM | Reply

Now we are moving into speculation. Mueller has yet to indict, much less convict, anyone for collusion."

True, but after saying "for whatever reason" you moved into speculation of your own as to Trump's motives and put forth a reason that is in Trump's own best interests and has nothing to do with what is in the best interests in the US:

"Secondly, because Trump is so fixated on the Mueller investigation he seems to feel that if he calls out Putin for Russia's meddling it legitimizes the Mueller investigation and de-legitimizes Trump's election victory (he's wrong about this - he can call out Putin without harming himself, but this is Trump we are talking about). Quite honestly, this is probably the bigger motivation."

Denying that the Russians interfered in the election is decidedly NOT in the best interests of the US. BTW, I agree with you that Russian interference is a separate issue, and could be acknowledged, without admitting to collusion.

#168 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 01:46 PM | Reply

Gal,

I am really hoping that Mueller completes his investigation very soon.

Put it all out there and let the chips fall where they may whether it implicates or exonerates (more likely somewhere in between will be the result) Trump.

#169 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 01:51 PM | Reply

"We travel a dangerous path if we are going to try and criminalize policy differences."

Sweden has a Pirate Party; intellectual property piracy is criminal here.

We travel on the dangerous path already, it seems. I agree.

#170 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-07-17 01:51 PM | Reply

Yesterday was a self-inflicted wound on Trump's part. I don't agree with Trey Gowdy on much, but I agree with him on this:

"When you are innocent ... act like it," Gowdy said on "Fox News Sunday" when asked about Trump's repeated Twitter attacks on Mueller, whose probe has become increasingly perilous to the president and his inner circle.

"If you've done nothing wrong, you should want the investigation to be as fulsome and thorough as possible."

Gowdy's comments came a day after Trump's attorney John Dowd called for Mueller's investigation to be shut down. Gowdy issued the same exhortation to Dowd: "If you have an innocent client, Mr. Dowd, act like it."

politicaldig.com

#171 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 01:54 PM | Reply

I guess I should feel sorry for people who feel like they have to defend the pos they and their party elected Pres.... but somehow I don't.

Trump is a stain on the nation than won't easily or soon be washed away, much like Nixon and GW... only in this case it is personal gain over country at issue.

For ----- sake, he was courting his banker yesterday. Banks in Moscow are the only ones who would loan him money, and he still owes them 100's of millions of dollars.

see #59

So when people continue to defend him, and make absurd Whataboutisms about other leaders, they just sound like hacks.

#172 | Posted by Corky at 2018-07-17 01:54 PM | Reply

Fair enough, Jeff. No worries.

#173 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 01:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#171

Gowdy pretty much nailed it with that one, Gal.

#174 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 02:00 PM | Reply

The very first sentence from your link:
Treason is defined as working against the interests of your nation.
How does this help your claim?

#104 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2018-07-17 12:34 PM | FLAG:

If anything he isn't working against the interest of your nation he is working against some Obama intelligence agency senior members that have done everything in it's powers and beyond to delegitimize his election victory and dragged down Russian relations with it. If Trump had said to Putin on a public stage "hey, it has been reported that some of your people have been meddeling in our elections, tell them to stop it." Would that have satisfied you haters? Hell no, you people live and breath that everyday you will wake up and Trump will be gone and everyday it slips further and further away. News flash! He ain't going away.

#175 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-07-17 02:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"Obviously a lot of people had reason to believe the Bay of Pigs constituted treason on the part of our president."

How so?

#176 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-07-17 02:50 PM | Reply

Ben Rhodes @brhodes

What happens if the US President is acting on behalf of a hostile power? Congress could hold hearings, subpoena documents, and pass laws. The fact that they don't means Republicans are fully responsible for everything Trump does.

Steven Beschloss @StevenBeschloss

Steven Beschloss Retweeted Ben Rhodes
This is the right question and response to a grave danger that demands an urgent response. Republicans were responsible for Trump before Helsinki, but now their failure to act confirms their complicity.

#177 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 02:53 PM | Reply

Question:

Rep. Jim Jordan @Jim_Jordan

Russia meddled in the election and we can't trust them. BUT can we trust Clapper, Comey, McCabe, and Strzok?

Answer:

More than we can trust you and most GOP House and Senate members.

#178 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-07-17 03:14 PM | Reply

#175

Donald Trump is going to prison.

#179 | Posted by Zed at 2018-07-17 08:53 PM | Reply

Trump's Helsinki performance was treasonous on it's face. I wonder about the judgment of some people.

#180 | Posted by Zed at 2018-07-17 08:56 PM | Reply

Trump's Helsinki performance was treasonous on it's face. I wonder about the judgmt of some people.

#181 | Posted by Zed at 2018-07-17 08:57 PM | Reply

"As for the Clinton Foundation, do you find it strange that the donations have largely dried up once she lost the election? "

Not at all; she lost the election. You still couldn't find one single credible problem with the Clinton Foundation and more to the point, neither could the Nuneses, Gowdys, Chaffetzes, and McCarthys of the world, and decided Benghazi! was their best shot at her.

Meanwhile, your silence while the Trump family is credibly charged with abusing charitable donations left and right is deafening.

#182 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-07-17 09:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I've asked Russian hackers to attack. They never do.

#183 | Posted by moder8 at 2018-07-17 09:56 PM | Reply

Meanwhile, your silence while the Trump family is credibly charged with abusing charitable donations left and right is deafening.

#182 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

When was this reported? I follow the news closely but I've spent most of July on vacation 'up north'. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest of the Trump organization was grafting. Graft was one of the many reasons I didn't vote for Trump in spite of being a registered Republican.

#184 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-07-17 10:05 PM | Reply

#184

www.nytimes.com

#185 | Posted by JOE at 2018-07-17 10:14 PM | Reply

"If anything he isn't working against the interest of your nation he is working against some Obama intelligence agency senior members"

Do you even listen to yourself? The intelligence community has full consensus on this point.

#186 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2018-07-18 12:08 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