OMG please make it stop.
‘Trump told Russians their ‘bad’ meddling is the same as ‘good’ US meddling – WaPo’s fresh Russiagate resurrection attempt’, RT.com, 28 Sep, 2019
“With the US president facing a Ukraine-linked impeachment probe, the Washington Post has delivered a fresh ‘bombshell.’ Not only does Trump think nothing of Russian interference in 2016, he even said as much to the Russians!
The newspaper of record found a new way to flog the dead horse of collusion, treating (<WaPo link) its readers to outrageous details about a “now-infamous” meeting that Donald Trump had with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador to the US in May 2017. Trump told the Russian officials that he didn’t care much about alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election “because the United States did the same in other countries.” However, the White House allegedly tried to cover up his comments.
The WaPo’s ‘story’ handily includes this video:
“Customarily helpful unnamed former officials told the WaPo how “distressed” they were by the remarks, in which Trump apparently forgave “Russia for an attack that had been designed to help elect him” and conflated “Russia’s interference in the US elections with US efforts to promote democracy and good governance abroad.”
“He thought the whole interference thing was ridiculous. He never bought into it,” one of the sources told the newspaper.
This insight into the current administration is no big surprise to pretty much anybody who cared to pay attention. Trump never made it a secret that he saw the entire narrative that Russia somehow conducted an attack worse than Pearl Harbor and 9/11 against the US as bogus and a political ploy by his Democratic opponents to undermine his presidency.
And, of course, the well-documented American record of meddling in other nations goes far beyond the promotion of democracy and good governance, both in the past and now. People who subscribe to this notion say ‘Well, it’s for a good cause.’ But Trump’s “streak of moral equivalency,” as another former official called it, is seen as an abomination.
It's well, well worth watching all of this exchange between Laura Ingraham and former CIA director James Woolsey. Woolsey acknowledges that the US has meddled in other countries' elections in the past and is doing so now, and both he and Ingraham find this laudable and funny. pic.twitter.com/TR3X7VM7Np
— Jon Schwarz (@schwarz) February 17, 2018
Robert Muller’s failure to find actual collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia was a major disappointment for the Russiagate crowd. But now, with the Democrats trying to get Trump over an alleged attempt to pressure Ukraine into producing dirt on Joe Biden, it seems the time has come to try and milk that cow again.”
@PalmerReport Donald Trump’s night so far:
– He told Russia that he didn’t mind election interference
– His people buried the evidence on the secret server
– Everything’s coming out now
– Kurt Volker resigns
– Bill Barr runs and hides
– Trump is going to prison
– It’s still only 9:45pm
7:45 PM – Sep 27, 2019
@MSNBC
WaPo: President Trump told Russian officials in 2017 he was unconcerned about Moscow’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election
7:23 PM – Sep 27, 2019
And in case you have any doubts that this story’s gaining traction, all one needs to do is check in with emptywheel, even though Marcy’s been on a road trip for a while now:
‘Hidden until Now: Trump Admitted 2016 Russian Interference in Lavrov-Kislyak Meeting’, September 27, 2019, emptywheel.net, Rayne Today
““President Trump told two senior Russian officials in a 2017 Oval Office meeting that he was unconcerned about Moscow’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election because the United States did the same in other countries, an assertion that prompted alarmed White House officials to limit access to the remarks to an unusually small number of people, according to three former officials with knowledge of the matter.
The comments, which have not been previously reported, were part of a now-infamous meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, in which Trump revealed highly classified information that exposed a source of intelligence on the Islamic State. He also said during the meeting that firing FBI Director James B. Comey the previous day had relieved “great pressure” on him.”
(Miz Wheeler weighs in by Tweet, nonetheless; recent posts on the right side-bar)
WaPo: President Trump told Russian officials in 2017 he was unconcerned about Moscow's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. https://t.co/eQMPCeirzB
— MSNBC (@MSNBC) September 28, 2019
(cross-posted from Café Babylon)
Comments
"secret Server"
Is this condemnation of an executive branch secure server an attempt to justiry HRC's insecure private server?
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
my apologies,
but i have no frame of reference for your secret server' Q. is it from one of the videos, or on the WaPo piece (i'd never finished).
I think the secret server
reference is to a system for code word classification which this phone call transcript would not be normally housed in as it isn't code word level.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
i apprciate your explanation,
amiga, but still i'm blind as to where it may have been referenced as per voice's Q.
and as i remember it, meaning don't take it the bank, Herself's servers were by way of crowdstrike, and that comey (?) had never ordered Herself to surrender her hard drives to check what had already been scrubbed from them. apparently save for smashing hard drive to pieces, data can still be reconstituted by forensic technologists, or so i've been told.
but given my memory, it made the Mad Magazine cover even funnier. did the gowdy boys hop into their little green roadster and zoooooom away? or were those the trixie belden mysteries? ; )
Here's the quote
Pelosi & company (THE Company?) claim the existence of this server is in itself an impeachable offense, so I gather HRC's way was the proper way to store diplomatic correspondence.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
i keep tellin' folks
that one day i'm a gonna learn to read, most especially what i copy/paste in. i had a hella time getting those things to format. thank you very much!
now i'm agnostic about your last sentence in my ignorance.
Susan Rice from the Obama administration admitted that
he put certain files on to a secret server. So once again Trump is being accused of doing something that happened during Obama's presidency too. But Rice qualified her statement with, "when we did that it was for different reasons." Or something. But the point that the people who think Trump did something wrong just don't get is that people who talk to the president about anything don't want it blabbed all over the world. Why is this such a hard concept for them?
BTW..about Hillary's emails. The justice department is looking at lots of them and changing their classification. This has been going on for 18 months. Not sure if other administrations did that too or not?
now i'd consider this
major news, given i hadn't known it at all. from her hard drives she'd allegedly scrubbed?
I'm not sure which emails they are looking at
There are two stories about when she deleted the 30,000. NBC said she did in 2014, but most people believe she did it after congress subpoenaed them. But every single one of them were found on Weiner's laptop that the NY FBI got when he was arrested for sexting. Every damn one of them going back to 2006. This was why Comey sent the letter to congress 11 days before the election. The NY office wanted to go public with the information, but Lynch threatened them. If they did then she would prosecute the cop that killed Eric Garner.
That NBC article also said that Comey found that she was just naughty using her private email server, but failed to mention that he first decided that she had been grossly negligent and Strzok changed the wording of his report.
fuck me; another i can't breathe
moment, as per the competing stories. dayum you know all this stuff from your memory files. wish i could rent some space there. 'just naughty' tells the tale, but oy veh, i'd totally forgotten that anthony's weiner was in the mix.
please forgive my total memory fail in advance, but after my post-surgical brain memory depletion, i mainly see images now, and i see one of lynch and obomba meeting on the tarmac of some airport or other and 'only discussing their kids', of course. i'm embarrassed to ask if this image is relevant whatsover, or it's a whole different tarmac meeting i've gotten wrong.
lame-brain-assedly yours,
wd
It was Bill and Lynch who met on the tarmac
to just discuss their grand kids don't you know.. sure nothing wrong with the husband of the woman under investigation talking to the person in charge of it. Nope..move along..
And yes Obama was skittish of sending weapons to Ukraine cz of how Russia might react. That many people aren't questioning why Ukraine should get them is boggling.. oh well. We're putting missiles in countries all over Europe so why not poke the bear harder?
oooof; thank you;
i'll try to photoshop the image in my head, erase O, add bubba 'i feel your pain'.
it's the Red Menace, man; people love to be terrified of russia, and in particular: putin. thus: novichok, the downing of flight MH 17, russia stole crimea, and the beat goes on. good for the war budget, as well. i had meant to say on the other thread that i was disturbed that bernie had dutifully voted for the 'defense of nato' act (thus africom as well) based on a psyop by the NYT that 'anonymous generals and intelligence officers' were whispering that boss Tweet really did want to leave that organization. riiiiiiight. he'd just wanted the members to pony up their 2.5% of gdp or whatever it is.
the ukraine kept being 'lent' money to comply, but the gummint pissed it all away, which was kinda/sorta why the atlantic council had recommended zelezkiy to begin with, that and his alleged rage at The Red Menace. he'd promised to end the corruption; guess we'll see, but iirc, ukraine is still considered 'under nato's umbrella'.
ping! all that yappin' i'd done about chex mix made me hugry for it, so i had some for lunch. one of the things in it i'd forgotten was Goldfish! at least the original ones seem to be melt-in-your-mouth. roasted and spiced up & yeasted they might work for you...
Here is the story on the state department
looking into Hillary's email. I don't know if this is standard procedure or if something else is a foot.
On the chex mix it has to be able to melt at the soggy point or it can be stuck in my throat and that is painful. Been there many times and have numerous t shirts.
thanks; given
it's length, i'll have to read it more closely later, but that the investigation was dropped, begun anew under DT, and the WaPo's carefully concealed bias (except glaringly: trump gave high security info to kushner), they reviewed 3.1 million emails?
i loved this:
Burns and Sullivan declined to comment. Other officials spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the matter and concern for retaliation.
and the wapo authors seem to have read some of the emails and found nothing of interest?
but no, i'd just meant i'd thought the goldfish would turn soft was all; not the chex.
Susan Rice said Obama put meetings on that secret server.
https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/28/susan-rice-obama-put-call-transcrip...
fascinating addition,
but check me out: here's the claim from 'the palmer report' (whoever that may be):
but holy canole, what a trip to see susan rice surface again! i'm flashing rice, sam power, and genocidaire paul kagame arm in arm walking down hallways, seated together with john kerry at some meetings or other. boy, howdy, does this nation love to resurrect genocidaires.
Ahh..didn't see your comment
My bad..
Who gets to decide on whether it's legitimate or not? Every person except Trump? I read that it wasn't his decision to do that, but the WH lawyer's decision. lol.
Ok. From now on, all Presidential conversations are unclassified
The CIA will simply monitor and leak all White House communications and nobody gets fired or prosecuted for it, anymore.
See, something good may come out of all this, after all. ;0)
LO-bleeping-L!
plus this freaky deaky fukkery: ‘They got caught!’ Trump reacts to report that whistleblowers exempted from need to have firsthand info as part of ‘RECENT’ , sept 29, RT.com
awesome CIA jocularity!
The Secret Server.
Do they really think we won't remember whose server it was?
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
lord luv a duck;
hilarious find! crowdstrike, Inc., no? thanks, gorilla man.
The idiocry just burns
Duh! What foreign leader wants their phone transcripts with the president leaked to the press by the CIA? What if the person here was Merkel or Macroon? What if the gossipblower had leaked their conversations about some sensitive discussions to the press? Would people think that was okay? Of course not.
Good lord!
As usual.....
Why aren't people talking about how Obama too decided that he didn't want to release certain weapons to Ukraine because of how Russia might react to that? And even if they didn't know, why is it a good idea to arm Ukraine after the violent coup that has seen the same type of Nazis that supported Hitler playing in the government and doing some very nasty shit to Russians who live in Ukraine? JeBUS!!!
and it's been OKed
now that 'whistleblowers' can leak third-hand 'reports' of what the conversations were really about'.
but hell, yeah, that means you know Evil Putin has something to hide! else: he wouldn't be hiding, would he?
wasn't obomba allegedly against
sending 'lethal' weapons to ukraine? but hell yeah to fight the Red Menace in the donbass it's 'kill zem all, sort it out later!' almost unanimous vote in both house and senate. nazis'll take care of them Reds!
i do remember at one point the NYT finally had to take note of the fact that Yats, maybe Porky as well, had a neo-nazi problem.
Hey wait a minute
weren't the democrats up in arms about that meeting because they said that Trump met the Russians alone in the Oval Office and they wanted to get the transcripts of what happened? I believe so. So how can the WaPoo have information on what was said during the meeting? Did the translator spill the beans?
The newspaper of record found a new way to flog the dead horse of collusion
Indeed! That horse is not only dead, but it has been stripped of its flesh and is decaying beyond recognition. But sure keep flogging it.
Then there's this:
Hillary- "Can't we drone him?"
DiFi' "Can't we drop a bomb on him?"
Others- "Lots of threats of violence."
Who were they talking about? Julian Assange of course. SMDH!
yeah, well...
boss tweet dd have to open his tweet rhetoric on the alleged whistleblower (and schiff, iirc), just as night follows day. i dinnae ken where the 'sign the petition' stuff came from. but boy, howdy, gurl, do you know how to milk the twittersphere!
oh, and was the msnbc video at the end rachel madcow? i never did get it to play, but she had it on twitter, the darlin' Big D woman.
also:
always remember, and don't ever forget: the Wapo and NYT know what they know. period. great psyop video from the WaPo, eh wot?
One thing that is not usually taken into account
is the fact that Trump cannot maintain a coherent set of thoughts for very long. He has a certain type of cunning but his memory is lousy and he cannot deal with intellectual complexity. So, for example, his comments on Crowdstrike and the server that is supposedly in Ukraine, may refer to the server that the people that spearfished Podesta supposedly used (i.e. the spearfished info was transferred to a server in Ukraine [possibly spoofed]), although I am not sure what one could learn at this point, it it still exists, or it may be just a confused conflation of snippets of information he heard on Fox News (e.g. conflation of the fact that the DNC server was never examined by the FBI and Crowdstrike never even sent the FBI an unredacted version of their findings and Crowdstrike lying about Russia hacking Ukrainian security software. Likewise, with respect to Biden, it is not clear what sort of information Ukraine could obtain about Joe and Hunter Biden. That Joe had bullied the previous government of Ukraine to fire the Prosecutor General, threatening to withhold a billion dollars in loan guarantees? That was already part of the public record in his comments at a forum hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations (conveniently on YouTube). That Hunter Biden got paid $50,000/month for nothing--also part of the public record. That the fired Prosecutor General testified under oath that he believed he was fired because he was leading an investigation into Burisma Holdings? Also part of the public record. I doubt that Hunter Biden was directly part of any corruption. It would not make sense for him to be directly involved in corruption. Burisma had enough people that were good at corruption. Hunter Biden and others were paid to put their names on the Board to prevent investigation of the company and it worked well.
ping!
that was it, thanks for refreshing my memory with this, amigo:
yes, all part of the public record, but demonstrated the D v. R hypocrisy level, imo. dunno that i can agree with this though:
$55 grand a month and another salary whose source i've forgotten, but your theory is that not only did he nothing about the bidness, he really hadn't participated in it? it's not related, but you've reminded me that bill gates monsanto owner was accused of helping fund the original putsch in ukraine, along with omidyar (centre UA) and george soros.
but it's impossible to argue that DT is incoherent on his best days, and has zero impulse control on most days, as evidenced by his raging tweets when he's obviously dyspeptic and in dire need of a psyllium seed flush followed by a high enema. ; )
thanks for the comment; it bears considering, roy blakely.
My argument
is that his mere presence on the board was insurance against being investigated. He did not have to get his hands dirty to be useful to the crooks that ran Burisma. Most of the alleged corruption predated Hunter Biden's appointment to the board. But!!! if you were a crook that had made many, many millions illegally, paying a few million dollars to the US VP's son might be seen as a good investment. They also appointed a friend of John Kerry. So they say, "Hunter this corrupt prosecutor is going after us. Ask your father if the US government is happy with a corrupt prosecutor harassing honest businessmen like us." No paper trail, hardly any way of investigating, no evidence of any criminal wrongdoing by the Bidens but corrupt as hell.
i hear you now, amigo;
kinda bidness as usual for amerika, really. burisma protecting their a$$ets.
Susan Rice didn't want to upset Ukraine's democracy
Oh pew! How can you have a democracy when you first violently overthrew the president? And I'm sure that installing neo Nazis gives that government legitimacy.
Look at her body language. It just screams arrogance IMO..
bless your ♥
and fuck me; i'd breezed completely by the video, just looked at her cursed photo. thanks so much on the cliff's notes. i remember folks laughing at what a lame-ass she was 'negotiating' start II or whatever it was called. she really had tried to seem like 'a grown-up' at some point during her tenure in the O administration.
but then, she, power (married to cass sunstein), and kagame, too. ay, yi, yi.
time for me to shut down,
and while i'd usually bring on some music to suit a diary, this video was just too hard to pass up. while having heard her name before (was she on 'the view'?), i'd never seen joy reid before, so i was kinda surprised she was a black woman w/ high fashion sense, and an awesome hairdo!
Courtesy of RT.com 'Bolton’s WH-bashing private debut met with elated applause by impeachment-hungry #Resistance media, 30 Sep, 2019
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIgb7dMqhqw]
thanks to all of you for adding bits and bobs, and g'night.
"Moral equivalency"
is now what we call holding the gander to the same standards as the goose.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
and when we don't
hold them to the same standard, we should call it bullshit! ; ) nice to see you.
My general response to this topic:
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
i had no idea such a
graphic existed, but it makes perfect sense, and indeed epitomizes this OP. thanks, miz signal.