Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, April 21, 2019

Rudy Giuliani, who as President Donald Trump's attorney has stoutly defended his client's actions throughout every twist and turn as Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign was investigated, insisted on Sunday "there's nothing wrong" with a White House candidate accepting help from Russia.

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.

Then why all the lying?

#1 | Posted by bored at 2019-04-22 04:36 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

Russia gives nothing for free you lying piece of crap. Giuliani has lost any claim to decency he ever had, what a pile of human excrement.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2019-04-22 07:07 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

I'm glad that pile is on your side Trumpers, be proud! The stench though is overwhelming.

#3 | Posted by danni at 2019-04-22 07:08 AM | Reply

Roody is out there doing his job as human excrement spreader. He had zero claim to decency to start with.

#4 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-04-22 07:57 AM | Reply

Remember when that pile of filth sold himself as "America's Mayor?" Now he's more like "Russia's Mayor."

#5 | Posted by danni at 2019-04-22 08:44 AM | Reply

The Steele Dossier was all Russian sourced.

The Clinton campaign got its oppo dirt from Russian sources.

#6 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-04-22 10:02 AM | Reply

Obstruction is a slam dunk, but times out if the orange sloth is reelected. Collusion doesn't pass the beyond a reasonable doubt test.

One question for those certain of the orange sloth's collusion. Name one thing that the Trump campaign learned from Russia that was not already widely known?

#7 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-04-22 10:07 AM | Reply

Viking,

Obstruction?

Mueller's investigation was unimpeded.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-04-22 10:15 AM | Reply

Rudy Giuliani, the perfect in-house attorney for ------

#9 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-04-22 10:46 AM | Reply

Obstruction?

Mueller's investigation was unimpeded.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019

But not for want of Trump trying to impede it.

Do better, JEFF.

#10 | Posted by Zed at 2019-04-22 10:54 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Name one thing that the Trump campaign learned from Russia that was not already widely known?

#7 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-04-22 10:07 AMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

How about name one thing the Trump campaign gave Russia that they didn't know?

#11 | Posted by Zed at 2019-04-22 10:56 AM | Reply

#7 | Posted by bayviking

I agree and It's not that there is any evidence they learned anything. But there are things like the Wikileaks release of emails from the DNC and Podesta and apparent awareness before the fact and even calling for it from Trump himself that damaged Hillary's campaign. (Podesta is a POS before anyone claims I am a fanboi of him or something.) Then there was the Russians funneling money into the NRA for work in favor of Trump and other Rs.

There was just all the meetings with the Russians - but who knows what they actually learned from them.

What was actually illegal that Trump can be tied directly too? Apparently none of it. It is just a whole slew of coincidences that everyone touching the campaign jumped at Every Single Opportunity to work with the Russians. I guess that would be "circumstantial" evidence and that will never fly for an actual impeachment.

The truly damning things are all in the area of obstruction.

#12 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-04-22 11:15 AM | Reply


Mr Giuliani may be correct that there is nothing legally wrong. I'm still not convinced of that, but for now, let's go with it.

However, I hold the opinion that there is something very ethically and morally wrong in accepting "dirt" from a foreign enemy.

Indeed, Mr Giuliani, in his Sunday morning show tour, has effectively given a green light to Russia and any other foreign power that wants to influence our elections and democratic processes.

Mr Giuliani has effectively given the OK signal for foreign countries to meddle in our elections.

Given Pres Trump's coziness with Pres Putin, I'm not surprised.

I have to wonder now if Russia has already been working towards helping Pres Trump for 2020, now that Mr Giuliani has said there is nothing wrong with doing so.

#13 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-04-22 11:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The Steele Dossier was all Russian sourced.

The Clinton campaign got its oppo dirt from Russian sources.

#6 | Posted by JeffJ

Pathetic false equivalence as always.

Trump got help from the russians. So the russians had influence/control over trump.

Hillary got it from the british. SO who did she owe favors or control to?

#14 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-04-22 11:42 AM | Reply


@#6 ... The Steele Dossier was all Russian sourced. ...

The Fusion GPS research into candidate Trump was originally funded by a GOP client of Fusion GPS during the Trump campaign.

In April 2016, the Clinton campaign lawyer, Marc Elias, retained Fusion GPS for research purposes.

Fusion GPS then hired Christopher Steele (former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community)

The Clinton campaign funded Fusion GPS through October 2016.

Fusion GPS gave the Steele reports to Elias.

To say the Steele report was Russian sourced is not a correct statement.

#15 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-04-22 12:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3


Probably worth a repeat at this point:

The Steele Dossier: A Retrospective
www.lawfareblog.com

...Our interest in revisiting the compilation that has come to be called the "Steele Dossier" concerns neither of those topics, at least not directly. Rather, we returned to the document because we wondered whether information made public as a result of the Mueller investigation -- and the passage of two years -- has tended to buttress or diminish the crux of Steele's original reporting.

The dossier is actually a series of reports -- 16 in all -- that total 35 pages. Written in 2016, the dossier is a collection of raw intelligence. Steele neither evaluated nor synthesized the intelligence. He neither made nor rendered bottom-line judgments. The dossier is, quite simply and by design, raw reporting, not a finished intelligence product.

In that sense, the dossier is similar to an FBI 302 form or a DEA 6 form. Both of those forms are used by special agents of the FBI and DEA, respectively, to record what they are told by witnesses during investigations. The substance of these memoranda can be true or false, but the recording of information is (or should be) accurate. In that sense, notes taken by a special agent have much in common with the notes that a journalist might take while covering a story -- the substance of those notes could be true or false, depending on what the source tells the journalist, but the transcription should be accurate.

With that in mind, we thought it would be worthwhile to look back at the dossier and to assess, to the extent possible, how the substance of Steele's reporting holds up over time. In this effort, we considered only information in the public domain from trustworthy and official government sources, including documents released by Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office in connection with the criminal cases brought against Paul Manafort, the 12 Russian intelligence officers, the Internet Research Agency trolling operation and associated entities, Michael Cohen, Michael Flynn and George Papadopoulos. We also considered the draft statement of offense released by author Jerome Corsi, a memorandum released by House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Ranking Member Adam Schiff related to the Carter Page FISA applications and admissions directly from certain speakers....


#16 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-04-22 12:23 PM | Reply

#6 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Whether that's true or not, does that make okay for others to use the same behavior?

#17 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-04-22 03:07 PM | Reply


@#17 ... does that make okay for others to use the same behavior ...

I remember from when I was a child. I got away with the excuse "but everyone else is doing it" exactly once. With a warning that the excuse is not a valid rationale for my misbehavior.

I guess Mr Giuliani's parents accepted that excuse from him, and he still appears to think it is a valid one.


But I do have to note... if that is the best he can come up with ...

#18 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-04-22 03:22 PM | Reply

The Steele Dossier was all Russian sourced.
The Clinton campaign got its oppo dirt from Russian sources.

#6 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

You are correct JeffJ. The Clinton campaign colluded with Steele.

Will you also agree that on the other side the Trump campaign colluded with Russia?

Now... "collusion" is not a crime. But it implies a "conspiracy". Though, conspiracy in itself is not a crime.

But, if you are in a "conspiracy" with other actors, and one of those actors commits a crime, then everyone in the "conspiracy" are an accessory to that crime.

Russia broke the laws of the US by hacking the DNC. And they did it for the benefit of Trump, and he was happy to aid them however he could (whether or not he actually KNEW what they were doing). That is why what Trump did is wrong.

You are the one trying to draw equivalencies. Now it is your turn. You have already shown that Hillary is tied to Steele. Please list the US crimes that he committed for her benefit to show us that what she did was also wrong.

#19 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-04-22 05:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Obstruction?
Mueller's investigation was unimpeded.

Since Jeff is barfing this idiocy in every thread, i'll repeat the easy refutation:

18 USCA 1512(c): Whoever corruptly...obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
.Mueller didn't indict Trump for obstruction because he respected certain DOJ conventions. But he clearly believes that many of Trump's acts met every element of the statutory definition of obstruction of justice, and that Congress can and should impeach him for it. And they won't, because of good little cucks like Jeff.

#20 | Posted by JOE at 2019-04-22 06:51 PM | Reply

The progression

It never happened fake news!!
It happened but there were no russians. Nobody has ever talked to Russians
There were russians but we only talked about adoption
We talked about other stuff too but Not Dirt on Hillary.
It was dirt on Hillary but it wasnt illegal
Russia didnt influence the election. We did using their supplied intel
Using Russian intel against other Americans isnt illegal

#21 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-04-22 07:55 PM | Reply

As a legal commentator pointed out following Giuliani's remarks, any help from Russia is an 'in-kind' contribution. Failing to report that is a federal crime. What is the going rate for Russian GRU officer hackers?

In-kind contributions. An in-kind contribution is a non-monetary contribution. Goods or services offered free or at less than the usual charge result in an in-kind contribution. Similarly, when a person or entity pays for services on the committee's behalf, the payment is an in-kind contribution.

#22 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-04-23 02:21 AM | Reply

Obstruction?

Mueller's investigation was unimpeded.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019

If only your brain was unimpeded.

10 instances of obstruction or attempted obstruction.

Delaying the investigation is obstruction

Public statements about witnesses (witness tampering) obstructed justice.

Refusing to answer questions. Obstruction. Lying about the facts. Still ongoing obstruction.

if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

#23 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-04-23 09:41 AM | Reply

Republican black and white world view again. The only options are felony conviction and exoneration. Unindicted guilty as FARK co-conspirator equals innocent in their worldview. I defer to Congress to do their job instead of doing it for them is innocent in their worldview

#24 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-04-23 10:58 AM | Reply

Being the unbiased, middle of the road, straight shooter that I am, I am going to reserve judgement on little donnie dollhands until we see the report..

* Sees report *

It's Hillary Clinton's fault!

#6 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Fixed.

#25 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-04-23 08:40 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 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort