Heartbreak: The Russian fantasy is just that.

LooseGoose wrote:

DWags wrote:I like in the dossier that Trump tells Comey, "No Russian hookers"... or somethhing to that effect. YOu know that means there was wide spread belief/knowledge that something like that was happening or could easily happen when Trump was over there.

You need a cup of tea. Let me recommend this Earl Gray I've been drinking.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

tGreenWay wrote:The Federalist, eh? Isn't that the same rag that gave us this brilliant piece:
https://thefederalist.com/2017/05/09/pets-instead-kids-considered-psychiatric-disorder/

No that was a different site greenway

steveschneider wrote:

"There should be no fuzz on this whatsoever. The Russians interfered in our election during the 2016 cycle," he said. "They did it with purpose, they did it with sophistication, they did it with overwhelming technical efforts and it was an active measures campaign driven from the top of that government. There should be no fuzz on that."

Comey added, "It is judgment of the entire intelligence community … it's not a close call. That happened. That's about as unfake as you can possibly get."

DWags wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

"There should be no fuzz on this whatsoever. The Russians interfered in our election during the 2016 cycle," he said. "They did it with purpose, they did it with sophistication, they did it with overwhelming technical efforts and it was an active measures campaign driven from the top of that government. There should be no fuzz on that."

Comey added, "It is judgment of the entire intelligence community … it's not a close call. That happened. That's about as unfake as you can possibly get."

And if you're a Reagan conservative you're outraged. If you're just a convenient conservative who is phony as hell you don't give a shit

The danger President Trump faces from the various investigations into the Trump-Russia matter has changed dramatically in recent weeks. If you're a Republican and you still believe the critical question is whether Trump or his associates colluded with Russians to influence the 2016 election -- if you still think that, you're behind the times. So now, a few notes on where the Trump affair is today:

LooseGoose wrote:I'm all for impeachment.

It'll make Pence president which is a big step up.

It'll light the base on fire which will mean the R's keep the Senate to approve SC justices.

Win, win, win, win.

LooseGoose wrote:I'm all for impeachment.

It'll make Pence president which is a big step up.

It'll light the base on fire which will mean the R's keep the Senate to approve SC justices.

Win, win, win, win.

Here’s where we stand:

1. Not only is there no evidence that Trump personally colluded with Russians or ordered anyone to collude with Russians, there’s now evidence that he hasn’t been under personal investigation by the FBI.

2. There is absolutely zero available evidence that Jeff Sessions colluded with the Russians.

3. Similarly, there is so far no evidence that even Trump’s more unsavory aides – men like Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn — colluded to influence the election

4. To the extent that there is evidence of wrongdoing connected with a foreign power, it deals not with the election itself but rather with Flynn’s alleged failures to disclose foreign payments and contacts.

Millions of American believe the worst about their current president, claims every bit as toxic in their own way as “truther” smears against George Bush or “birther” smears against Barack Obama. The Trump collusion narrative has gotten a far wider and more respectable hearing than either of the two conspiracy theories that plagued the Bush and Obama administrations. Truth is truth, and it’s important for responsible people to not just understand and respond to actual evidence — no matter where it leads — but also acknowledge its absence. And so far the absence of evidence points to Trump’s innocence of some of the worst allegations ever leveled against an American president or his senior team.

LooseGoose wrote:Hope you boys enjoyed your that's all you're getting.

Here’s where we stand:

1. Not only is there no evidence that Trump personally colluded with Russians or ordered anyone to collude with Russians, there’s now evidence that he hasn’t been under personal investigation by the FBI.

2. There is absolutely zero available evidence that Jeff Sessions colluded with the Russians.

3. Similarly, there is so far no evidence that even Trump’s more unsavory aides – men like Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn — colluded to influence the election

4. To the extent that there is evidence of wrongdoing connected with a foreign power, it deals not with the election itself but rather with Flynn’s alleged failures to disclose foreign payments and contacts.

Millions of American believe the worst about their current president, claims every bit as toxic in their own way as “truther” smears against George Bush or “birther” smears against Barack Obama. The Trump collusion narrative has gotten a far wider and more respectable hearing than either of the two conspiracy theories that plagued the Bush and Obama administrations. Truth is truth, and it’s important for responsible people to not just understand and respond to actual evidence — no matter where it leads — but also acknowledge its absence. And so far the absence of evidence points to Trump’s innocence of some of the worst allegations ever leveled against an American president or his senior team.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

LooseGoose wrote:Hope you boys enjoyed your that's all you're getting.

Here’s where we stand:

1. Not only is there no evidence that Trump personally colluded with Russians or ordered anyone to collude with Russians, there’s now evidence that he hasn’t been under personal investigation by the FBI.

2. There is absolutely zero available evidence that Jeff Sessions colluded with the Russians.

3. Similarly, there is so far no evidence that even Trump’s more unsavory aides – men like Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn — colluded to influence the election

4. To the extent that there is evidence of wrongdoing connected with a foreign power, it deals not with the election itself but rather with Flynn’s alleged failures to disclose foreign payments and contacts.  

Millions of American believe the worst about their current president, claims every bit as toxic in their own way as “truther” smears against George Bush or “birther” smears against Barack Obama. The Trump collusion narrative has gotten a far wider and more respectable hearing than either of the two conspiracy theories that plagued the Bush and Obama administrations. Truth is truth, and it’s important for responsible people to not just understand and respond to actual evidence — no matter where it leads — but also acknowledge its absence. And so far the absence of evidence points to Trump’s innocence of some of the worst allegations ever leveled against an American president or his senior team.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

What is the company hiding? Fusion GPS describes itself as a “research and strategic intelligence firm” founded by “three former Wall Street Journal investigative reporters.” But congressional sources says it’s actually an opposition-research group for Democrats, and the founders, who are more political activists than journalists, have a pro-Hillary, anti-Trump agenda.

“These weren’t mercenaries or hired guns,” a congressional source familiar with the dossier probe said. “These guys had a vested personal and ideological interest in smearing Trump and boosting Hillary’s chances of winning the White House.”

Fusion GPS was on the payroll of an unidentified Democratic ally of Clinton when it hired a long-retired British spy to dig up dirt on Trump. In 2012, Democrats hired Fusion GPS to uncover dirt on GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. And in 2015, Democrat ally Planned Parenthood retained Fusion GPS to investigate pro-life activists protesting the abortion group.

More, federal records show a key co-founder and partner in the firm was a Hillary Clinton donor and supporter of her presidential campaign.

In September 2016, while Fusion GPS was quietly shopping the dirty dossier on Trump around Washington, its co-founder and partner Peter R. Fritsch contributed at least $1,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund and the Hillary For America campaign, Federal Election Commission data show. His wife also donated money to Hillary’s campaign.

Property records show that in June 2016, as Clinton allies bankrolled Fusion GPS, Fritsch bought a six-bedroom, five-bathroom home in Bethesda, Md., for $2.3 million.

Fritsch did not respond to requests for comment. A lawyer for Fusion GPS said the firm’s work is confidential.

House Democrats are continuing to block testimony from about a dozen witnesses who sought to appear before the intelligence oversight panel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Congressional officials said one of the key witnesses, former informal adviser to the Trump campaign Carter Page, was scheduled to testify at a closed hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

But Democrats on the committee blocked the testimony, asserting they needed more time to prepare.

"He's the guy that many Democrats have been pointing to as the supposed mastermind and you would think they were interested hearing his story," said one Capitol Hill official.

Rep. Adam Schiff (Calif.), the committee's Democratic leader, did not respond to emails seeking comment on the blocked testimony.

DON SURBER:

Barack Obama’s administration made up the Russian-Trump lie to justify spying on Team Trump.

Hillary bitterly clung to the story to stave off angry donors who invested a billion bucks and all they got was a I’m With Her shirt.

The Resistance Media hung on to it in the hopes of bringing down President Trump

But last week’s Toss Off Ossoff election — and Comey’s admission under oath that there was nothing to this — forced Democrats to abandon their big, fat, stupid lie.

Today, CNN ordered its staff to back off on Russia.

CNN is imposing strict new publishing restrictions for online articles involving Russia after the network deleted a story and then issued a retraction late Friday, according to an internal email obtained by BuzzFeed News.

The email went out at 11:21 a.m. on Saturday from Rich Barbieri, the CNNMoney executive editor, saying "No one should publish any content involving Russia without coming to me and Jason," a CNN vice president.

"This applied to social, video, editorial, and MoneyStream. No exceptions," the email added. "I will lay out a workflow Monday."

The new restrictions also apply to other areas of the network — not just CNNMoney, which wasn't involved with the article that was deleted and retracted.

NigelUno wrote:The Democrats alone can stop witnesses from testifying?

Wow. That must be a powerful group.

Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley's accusation that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer lied about President Trump and the Russia investigation — that Schumer said the president was under investigation after he, Schumer, had been specifically told by the FBI that Trump was not — is shedding new light on the events that led to the president's rising frustration over the Russia probe, the FBI, and Democrats who sought to make political hay out of Trump's troubles.

Start in January. As Inauguration Day approached, the Trump-Russia affair dominated media talk. The central question, then as now, was whether Trump or his associates colluded with the Russians to try to influence the 2016 election. And the root of the president's frustration was the same: he had been assured, by the highest levels of law enforcement, that he was not under investigation, while at the same time the impression grew — fed by officials who knew otherwise — that he was under investigation.

Mr. Comey didn't just tell the president, Sen. Feinstein, and me that the president was not under investigation. He also had told the Gang of Eight. Of course, the Gang of Eight includes the Senate Minority Leader, Sen. Schumer. But even after Mr. Comey told the Gang of Eight that the president was not under investigation, the minority leader told the media he was. That helped feed the media hysteria. The minority leader even tried to say that the Senate shouldn't vote on the Supreme Court nomination because the president was under investigation. And the whole time, he knew it wasn't true.

Those were pretty strong words between senators.

Now, Grassley said, there is still baseless speculation about the Russia case. Grassley called for it to stop. Of course, it won't. But even if it somehow did stop, a lot of damage has already been done.

LooseGoose wrote:

NigelUno wrote:The Democrats alone can stop witnesses from testifying?

Wow. That must be a powerful group.

Good to see you learning something. Another 50 years and you'll be marginally informed.

LooseGoose wrote:It's going to be wonderful when the american people get the final message that the Dems have been knowingly lying about this all along.....that always goes over well with people.

Byron York: On Russia, a senator's deception and a timeline of Trump frustration

Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley's accusation that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer lied about President Trump and the Russia investigation — that Schumer said the president was under investigation after he, Schumer, had been specifically told by the FBI that Trump was not — is shedding new light on the events that led to the president's rising frustration over the Russia probe, the FBI, and Democrats who sought to make political hay out of Trump's troubles.

Start in January. As Inauguration Day approached, the Trump-Russia affair dominated media talk. The central question, then as now, was whether Trump or his associates colluded with the Russians to try to influence the 2016 election. And the root of the president's frustration was the same: he had been assured, by the highest levels of law enforcement, that he was not under investigation, while at the same time the impression grew — fed by officials who knew otherwise — that he was under investigation.

Mr. Comey didn't just tell the president, Sen. Feinstein, and me that the president was not under investigation. He also had told the Gang of Eight. Of course, the Gang of Eight includes the Senate Minority Leader, Sen. Schumer. But even after Mr. Comey told the Gang of Eight that the president was not under investigation, the minority leader told the media he was. That helped feed the media hysteria. The minority leader even tried to say that the Senate shouldn't vote on the Supreme Court nomination because the president was under investigation. And the whole time, he knew it wasn't true.

Those were pretty strong words between senators.

Now, Grassley said, there is still baseless speculation about the Russia case. Grassley called for it to stop. Of course, it won't. But even if it somehow did stop, a lot of damage has already been done.

NigelUno wrote:Is this that old trick where Goose posts something, says something, gets asked a few questions...and then disappears?

I just want to make sure.

Turtleneck wrote:

NigelUno wrote:Is this that old trick where Goose posts something, says something, gets asked a few questions...and then disappears?

I just want to make sure.

He can't answer your questions until he is told how to respond. Does Hannity still have a daily radio show? If so, you will get your answers afterward.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

He can't answer your questions until he is told how to respond. Does Hannity still have a daily radio show? If so, you will get your answers afterward.

lol, you know more about Hannity than I do. Such an impressive intellect you display with your canned lib sound bites.

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

lol, you know more about Hannity than I do. Such an impressive intellect you display with your canned lib sound bites.

You do not worship at the alter of Hannity just like you did not vote for Trump. Ok, Loose...

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

You do not worship at the alter of Hannity just like you did not vote for Trump. Ok, Loose...

I appreciate each time you libs call me a liar. I know it's very hard for you to accept that anyone can actually be outside the hive minds on one side or the other. You enjoy your marching in lockstep, doesn't mean I do it.

DWags wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

I appreciate each time you libs call me a liar. I know it's very hard for you to accept that anyone can actually be outside the hive minds on one side or the other. You enjoy your marching in lockstep, doesn't mean I do it.

From the cut and paste king of message boards. You can't make this up. You've mentally left us here

Robert J Sakimano wrote:hey Goose - I need some clarification..

by "Russian fantasy" are you referring to the sexual predator and his desire for little girls?

LooseGoose wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:hey Goose - I need some clarification..

by "Russian fantasy" are you referring to the sexual predator and his desire for little girls?

Ted Kennedy is dead, let him RIP.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:


Ted Kennedy is dead, let him RIP.

I don't ever recall Ted Kennedy seeing a little girl and saying "I'm going to be dating her in 10 years"..

that was your sexual predator president.

LooseGoose wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
I don't ever recall Ted Kennedy seeing a little girl and saying "I'm going to be dating her in 10 years"..

that was your sexual predator president.

Sorta hard to date them after you leave them to drown.

BUT CNN IS hardly alone when it comes to embarrassing retractions regarding Russia. Over and over, major U.S. media outlets have published claims about the Russia Threat that turned out to be completely false — always in the direction of exaggerating the threat and/or inventing incriminating links between Moscow and the Trump circle. In virtually all cases, those stories involved evidence-free assertions from anonymous sources that these media outlets uncritically treated as fact, only for it to be revealed that they were entirely false.

Several of the most humiliating of these episodes have come from the Washington Post. On December 30, the paper published a blockbuster, frightening scoop that immediately and predictably went viral and generated massive traffic. Russian hackers, the paper claimed based on anonymous sources, had hacked into the “U.S. electricity grid” through a Vermont utility.

LooseGoose wrote:Be prepared for the next time "Russia" pops into your head.

CNN Journalists Resign: Latest Example of Media Recklessness on the Russia Threat

BUT CNN IS hardly alone when it comes to embarrassing retractions regarding Russia. Over and over, major U.S. media outlets have published claims about the Russia Threat that turned out to be completely false — always in the direction of exaggerating the threat and/or inventing incriminating links between Moscow and the Trump circle. In virtually all cases, those stories involved evidence-free assertions from anonymous sources that these media outlets uncritically treated as fact, only for it to be revealed that they were entirely false.

Several of the most humiliating of these episodes have come from the Washington Post. On December 30, the paper published a blockbuster, frightening scoop that immediately and predictably went viral and generated massive traffic. Russian hackers, the paper claimed based on anonymous sources, had hacked into the “U.S. electricity grid” through a Vermont utility.

LooseGoose wrote:Be prepared for the next time "Russia" pops into your head...