COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
world

Trump on Russian election meddling: 'Nobody really knows for sure'

122 Comments
By KEN THOMAS and DARLENE SUPERVILLE

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.


122 Comments
Login to comment

Russia interferes in our election.

Trump is silent.

Republicans are silent.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

"Nobody really knows for sure," Trump said.

Pretty sure someone knows for sure. Namely the people who did it.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Trump on Russian election meddling: 'Nobody really knows for sure'

Except the FBI, CIA, and NSA, who briefed the President and his team extensively on it. And, of course, the Russians.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

"Nobody really knows for sure," Trump said.

Was it a "nobody really knows for sure so I will not rest until I find who is responsible for this hacking and bring them to justice"? Or was it more of a "nobody really knows for sure, so....oh well, let's just move on and put the whole things behind us" kind of thing?

Sabbath: Republicans are silent.

Republicans are on board with the Democrats in investigating and passing sanctions on Russia. They even helped to include language in the new sanctions that make it hard for Trump to roll back in the event he wants to do something nice for Putin. They do not trust him on this issue and Trump's behavior is the reason, and it goes beyond party lines.

Though Trump has made similar statements before, it was an extraordinary public expression of doubt about U.S. intelligence capabilities by a president while on foreign soil.

Just my 2 cents...

Trump wants to be the single source of information for Americans and he does not want to have any kind of oversight. I don't think he colluded with the Russians but I think he has a great deal of....what's the word....jealousy(?) for the level of control Putin has over his country, and I think Trump wants that in the US with himself in the position of power.

In order to bolster his own power, he has to chip away at the integrity of those who provide checks and balances. He's attacked the media and judicial branch to try to erode people's trust in them. He's also attacked the FBI, CIA, NSA, voting, and really any organization that might be able to exert a limit to his power. That leaves Trump as the only "credible" source of information to his followers, which means he can make them believe anything he wants, just like Putin.

I think he will shower Putin with praise after he meets him. He admires what he's built in Russia and wants that for himself here in the US. The hacking didn't hurt Trump, it hurt his political opponent, so I honestly believe his reaction is a shrug and "what's the problem?" He's not responding to it because he's just not interested, regardless of being put in a position to protect all Americans. He'd rather the whole thing just go away so he doesn't have to keep tap dancing around questions.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Trump on Russian election meddling: 'Nobody really knows for sure'

I feel pretty sure that Russia did. President Obama knew and could only muster a stern "cut it out" to Putin. Of course the US has meddled in the elections of other nations quite a bit over the years so what's the big deal? The Russians didn't change any votes - they only played the propaganda game - which is quite similar to the propaganda game the Leftist American media plays domestically.

Mitt Romney made a fool of Obama by correctly stating that Russia is a significant threat to America's interests ( though I personally believe China is the bigger threat to all free nations). Russia tried to mess with the French election but they somehow had no trouble combating Putin's influence. How Obama failed so miserably leading up to the 2016 election is a mystery to me. But in the end no harm was done. There remains little if any evidence for the ridiculous charge that Trump colluded with Russia to defeat Clinton.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

...could only muster a stern "cut it out" to Putin. 

Yeah, only that, plus expelling 25 diplomats, confiscating two properties likely used by Russian intelligence, and strengthening sanctions.

I think what Trump is trying to say is that Obama didn't publicly accuse Russia during the election. That is a valid point. (Obama has said he didn't want to appear meddling in the election.) But in the same breath, for Trump to say "nobody knows" is disingenuous.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

We can be sure, that all sides are capable of cyber warfare and industrial spying, hacking, spreading virus and malware. We can be sure they are doing it.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

How Obama failed so miserably leading up to the 2016 election is a mystery to me. But in the end no harm was done.

Obama failed so miserably, but no harm was done? That makes a lot of sense. ;)

There remains little if any evidence for the ridiculous charge that Trump colluded with Russia to defeat Clinton

Except for Flynn lying about his Russian connections. And Sessions. And Kushner. There's also the Manafort angle and others as well. Let's just let the investigation run and its course and see where it leads;)

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Was it a "nobody really knows for sure so I will not rest until I find who is responsible for this hacking and bring them to justice"? Or was it more of a "nobody really knows for sure, so....oh well, let's just move on and put the whole things behind us" kind of thing?

The left would never do if hundreds of agents and lawyers would testify that Trump had nothing to do with any of this, they would just find something else to pound him with. Just a fact. So if I were Trump, I would just ignore the media and do what I need to do and stop following the left down their rabbit holes.

They do not trust him on this issue and Trump's behavior is the reason, and it goes beyond party lines.

That depends, most Republicans just want this behind them, many of them were former attorneys and they know if there was a gold nugget, we would have heard about it a long time ago.

Trump wants to be the single source of information for Americans and he does not want to have any kind of oversight.

I really don't think so, I think he just wants the media to be fair and they haven't and everyone knows it whether you are a hater or supporter. Yes, some of what Trump says is self-inflicted, but overall, the MSM have been brutal from day one and will continue to be towards Trump or any conservative.

but I think he has a great deal of....what's the word....jealousy(?) for the level of control Putin has over his country, and I think Trump wants that in the US with himself in the position of power.

I don't he's jealous, we all know that Putin runs the country with an Iron fist and through fear and intimidation. I think if the left would tone down their hostility towards this president, I lot of the rhetoric that comes from him would equally resolve itself.

He's also attacked the FBI, CIA, NSA, voting, and really any organization that might be able to exert a limit to his power.

And with good reason, you have to be either on some serious drugs or a complete idiot to believe those 3 agencies on any issue after what we have seen with Comey and what the rest can do.

He'd rather the whole thing just go away so he doesn't have to keep tap dancing around questions.

He should, this was one of the worst rabbit hunts and mole chasing in recent memory.

-15 ( +1 / -16 )

He should, this was one of the worst rabbit hunts and mole chasing in recent memory.

Weird, just the other day you were saying there were some legitimate questions regarding Manafort and Flynn. Which is it?

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Smart answer by the President. He is not required to believe the 4 intelligence agencies about who did it. It seems he understands it happened but the who part it still in question to him. Nothing wrong with that.

Like he said the intelligence agencies have been wrong before and caused a war. Let's wait until the investigations are all done and see what proof they show us about who did it and how.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

Weird, just the other day you were saying there were some legitimate questions regarding Manafort and Flynn. Which is it?

Why weird? I meant what I said about them, haven't changed my positions about them. I was referring to the president.

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

I wonder if Put in will bring his dog to meeting.  The dog scared German Chancellor who was recovering dog bytes.

Or he will be in time.  Abe waited three hours.

The former KGB agents have all tricks.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

He'd rather the whole thing just go away so he doesn't have to keep tap dancing around questions.

He should, this was one of the worst rabbit hunts and mole chasing in recent memory

Why weird? I meant what I said about them, haven't changed my positions about them. I was referring to the president.

Then its obviously not a rabbit hunt. How did those people get access to Trump? Hell, why did 3 members of his cabinet lie about having met with Russian officials. Just a coincidence? Maybe, but I doubt it.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Trump knows perfectly well the Russians interfered in the election, but he doesn't want to face the awful truth that he owes his victory to Putin. Clear as day.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Trump knows perfectly well the Russians interfered in the election, but he doesn't want to face the awful truth that he owes his victory to Putin. Clear as day.

Honesty, that doesn't make sense to me. How is it that he can accept that a country interfered in the olympics, but he can't bring himself to say the country's name. Odd.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Yeah Putin voted- not 62 million Americans. Putin also wrote all of the Podesta emails and installed the server in Hillary's house and everything else that made her lose.

He knew just enough about the Electoral College system to make Trump win while actually getting less votes.

He was able to accurately consider any voter fraud that might happen and where, predict that Comey would let Hillary go and lead Trump to victory. Seriously?

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

Then its obviously not a rabbit hunt.

Anyone arrested? No. Anyone impeached? No.

How did those people get access to Trump? Hell, why did 3 members of his cabinet lie about having met with Russian officials. Just a coincidence? Maybe, but I doubt it.

Again, if there were something on that reel, it would have been brought out to the public.

Keep looking under the stores and the biggest thing that might be uncovered is either Blackbeard's lost treasure or dried up bugs.

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

Once again there were attempts at interference that were seen by intelligence. No one has proven it was successful and no one has proven any votes were changed. This is what should be investigated not witch hunts on individuals.

As the President, he can accept or refuse the intelligence opinion of who it was. He can choose to act or not act based on what he thinks is best. Powers of the president.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Like he said the intelligence agencies have been wrong before and caused a war.

If you're talking about Iraq, Bush & co. were advised by the intelligence agencies that the information was not that strong, but little Bush wanted to finish what big Bush started, and invaded Iraq anyways.

You can't blame that on the intelligence agencies. It's all on Bush & co.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Nobody really knows for sure

Translation: Yeah, there's definitely evidence of Russian intervention in our elections, but I won't say that because I've always said it's fake news, and I won fair and square, and there were millions of people at my inauguration, it was fantastic and beautiful by the way, believe me, and so that's why I like to play as if other countries could've hacked the election, not just Russia who I have business ties with, but of course that's also fake news because I won the majority votes not Hillary who Obama thought was going to win, and it's all his fault for hiding this information when he was still the President, like just before I won bigly which shows that whatever Obama didn't release to the public about Russiarr, it's all fake news anyways because such as now I'm the Precedent and the Dems are still mad that I won and the fake news media who I beat in a wrestling match won't stop covfefe it.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Anyone arrested? No. Anyone impeached? No.

Investigation completed? No.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Again, if there were something on that reel, it would have been brought out to the public.

Investigation completed? No.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

So, "Nobody really knows if Russia was involved" but in the next sentence he admonishes Obama for not stopping Russian meddling in the election?

Another senile, slurred speech by the king of stupidity and self-contradiction.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

so Trump takes the intelligence agencies at their word despite the fact that they obviously haven't proven to HIS satisfaction that it was Russia. Despite the fact that no actual vote changes happened. Despite his FBI not having seen the DNC server.

so he confronts Putin harshly , ruins any potential collaboration on things like Syria and puts us closer to all out war. Then we find out from the ongoing investigations that it wasn't really Russia after all. Will you be blaming intelligence agencies? Nope you will blame Trump just like Bush was blamed.

we elected Trump for president so it's his decision, we didn't elect any intelligence agencies.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

we elected Trump for president

No, the electoral college did. The people were for Hillary.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

@smithinjapan Because Obana himself said he knew it was Russia, after the election. so if he believed that he should have acted. trump however is not convinced it was Russia and only Russia.

investigation not finished as you guys like to say. Prove it and he has to believe it.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

This election meddling / hacking thing is getting more and more weird. No hard evidence presented, only grim-faced statesmen with speeches and long documents full of "we are positively sure", "we definitely presume" and "we absolutely believe" as selling points. And then deafening choir of the press and ordinary zealots - "yeahh, Russians did it! Anybody who does not believe in it is a traitor to the cause!!!"

Sorry, but you want to make sober and sane people to believe in all that vague CIA stuff? Seriously, after Colin Powell performance at UN with "100-percent proof of Saddam's nukes"?? I remember it, the hysteria was the same - "Those French scoundrels do not believe us, let's punish them, let's rename French fries into Freedom fries".

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

@smithinjapan Because Obana himself said he knew it was Russia, after the election. so if he believed that he should have acted.

He did act. https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/12/29/politics/russia-sanctions-announced-by-white-house/index.html

trump however is not convinced it was Russia and only Russia.

And I wonder what expertise he has in the field? Seems no intelligence heads seem to agree with him.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

So it's a positive thing to call out the leader of a country and accuse him personally of election meddling when it's unproven still? Do you think he will react well to that and want to be friends and work together on common issues?

When trump calls out Merkel for legit things you guys talk how mean he is and how it is non productive. But putin? To suit the media narrative just accuse him of anything and everything with no thought of consequences

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

The FBI investigation isn't concluded yet.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

When trump calls out Merkel for legit things you guys talk how mean he is and how it is non productive. But putin? To suit the media narrative just accuse him of anything and everything with no thought of consequences

And how many of Merkel's opponents have been murdered and/or met with mysterious deaths? How many German journalists have lost their lives because of their reporting on Merkel?

6 ( +8 / -2 )

@black l Do you think he will react well to that and want to be friends and work together on common issues?

By even asking this question you're admitting he's too thin skinned to handle the heat in the kitchen. The US President, as opposed to a company president - or a leader of a totalitarian regime, MUST work in adversarial situations. At all times.

@asakaz This election meddling / hacking thing is getting more and more weird.

I agree. It's strange that so many want to criticize those who think that a foreign government might have tried to 'meddle' (Trump's choice of word) with the US election and shut down the investigation before findings are made. I'm sure in Russia things would be handled differently.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

I think if the left would tone down their hostility towards this president, I lot of the rhetoric that comes from him would equally resolve itself.

And there it is. It's not Trump's fault; the blame lies with the people. Oh yes.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Yeah Putin voted- not 62 million Americans. Putin also wrote all of the Podesta emails and installed the server in Hillary's house and everything else that made her lose.

No, he selectively leaked the Podesta emails because they damaged Hillary, and did not leak anything that would have damaged Trump. As if you were not able to work that out for yourself.

He knew just enough about the Electoral College system to make Trump win while actually getting less votes.

He was able to accurately consider any voter fraud that might happen and where, predict that Comey would let Hillary go and lead Trump to victory. Seriously?

Nobody ever claimed anything like that.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Sorry, Podesta's emails only damaged Hillary because (a) he stupidly wrote them and (b) they were true. Putin had nothing to do with either of those things.

the investigation into Russian interference in the election is ongoing as you guys live to say. So proof that is actually WAS Russia or not will be part of that.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Podesta's emails only damaged Hillary because (a) he stupidly wrote them and (b) they were true.

Ahh, so you'd agree that Comey's released notes only damaged Trump because Trump stupidly said the things Comey released, and because it was true, correct? Since you seem to be back to the idea that the leaks of the emails were ok because the content was relevant to the people. Same as with Comey's releases.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Ahh, so you'd agree that Comey's released notes only damaged Trump because Trump stupidly said the things Comey released, and because it was true, correct? Since you seem to be back to the idea that the leaks of the emails were ok because the content was relevant to the people. Same as with Comey's releases.

Nice try on an apples to oranges/strawman type thing. Comey's leaks are simply his perception without any context of what happened. Trump is disputing some of the things he said as incorrect, remember? There is no evidence Trump said those things outside of Comey himself writing it down in a self serving way.

Emails, different story. The person who sent it cant say they didnt say it, plus I get to read it in context with the replies to determine what it means.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

The media (and some of you) just cant wait until Trump admits that Russia meddled in the election.

You will ignore the fact that no votes were changed and no one has proven the meddling was a success.

The media wants to say:

Trump admits Russia meddled= Trump knew= Trump asked them to do it= Trump only won because of it= Trump is illegetimate= must be impeached for something= he knew! thats proof of collusion= impeachment

Yet the guy who actually DID know is just:

Obama admits Russia meddled= Obama knew= ah well, thats ok he's a good guy must have had a good reason to not tell us= continued luxury vacations

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

There is no evidence Trump said those things outside of Comey himself writing it down in a self serving way.

Ah but there are tapes. Oh no, wait - that was another Trump lie.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Nice try on an apples to oranges/strawman type thing.

Nope. You are arguing that the leaks of the emails are justified because the content is relevant to the people. Therefore Comey "leaking" his own documents is justified because the content was relevant to the people.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

I just cant understand how in spite the investigation not being done and despite no released evidence to confirm any of it, all of you seem to think that:

Russia certainly meddled in the election

This meddling somehow elected Trump despite no votes being changed

Trump personally colluded with Russia

Trump obstructed justice

Russia has Trump emails as bad as Hillary's but chose to not release them

All parts of the Russia dossier are true

Everything that James Comey says is true, except the parts where he said Hillary committed crimes or the part where he said Loretta Lynch obstructed justice.

There is no way that any illegal votes were cast, despite people in jail for election/registration fraud.

CNN has rarely, if ever, reported news with bias, incorrect news or fake news specifically with the purpose to screw Trump.

Mika and Joe have never unfairly attacked Trump over policy or personal issues, to include appearance.

Did I miss any?

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Did I miss any?

Yes; online Trump supporters being paid by the Kremlin. I posted 3 links but apparently frowned on?

Have 2, then.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/06/troll-armies-social-media-trump-russian

http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-internet-trolls-and-donald-trump-2016-7

4 ( +5 / -1 )

because the content was relevant to the people.

yes, it is. Once it is confirmed as accurate and true like the emails already were.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

That depends, most Republicans just want this behind them, many of them were former attorneys and they know if there was a gold nugget, we would have heard about it a long time ago

More incorrect trash. Lawyers understand that complex issues take time to resolve; that's their job.

Do you want leaks so you can get information from the multiple investigations, or do you detest leaks? Oh, wait, your one of those "it's vile when it dies t support my position, but completely acceptable when it does" people.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Yes; online Trump supporters being paid by the Kremlin.

Oh yeah that could have had some impact on voter decisions, if true. If they actually believed what was written in the articles and on social media. But it still didnt change any actual votes to Trump from Hillary within the voting systems. It seems there was also enough confirmed real stuff within Podesta and Wikileaks things to also hurt Hillary, so I dont know how we can measure the impact of these troll/bot armies on the election.

More importantly, we should be looking into ways to stop that method from working next time as part of this overall Russia investigation. As I keep saying, deal with technology and systems to prevent this from happening again instead of witch hunting individuals. The systems and their security are the key to attempted hacking/influence not becoming actual hacking/influence.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

I think if the left would tone down their hostility towards this president, I lot of the rhetoric that comes from him would equally resolve itself.

Sure, because he only started spewing repugnant comments after he threw his hat in the political ring.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@BlackL I just cant understand how in spite the investigation not being done and despite no released evidence to confirm any of it, all of you seem to think that:

All? Bifurcate much? But then I've read in totalitarian systems people are taught to think only in us - them terms.

Russia certainly meddled in the election

I think there's enough evidence for me to believe that.

This meddling somehow elected Trump despite no votes being changed

One form of meddling, the sockpuppets posting on social media and online forums, probably affected many Trump supporters.

Trump personally colluded with Russia

I think Trump has business dealings with different Russian oligarchs.

Trump obstructed justice

That's for the investigations and courts to determine.

Russia has Trump emails as bad as Hillary's but chose to not release them

Who knows if they do and how 'bad' they were. I do wonder if Russians somewhere do have pictures of the golden shower scenes, though.

All parts of the Russia dossier are true

I'll wait until the investigations conclude.

Everything that James Comey says is true, except the parts where he said Hillary committed crimes or the part where he said Loretta Lynch obstructed justice.

I'll wait until the investigations conclude.

There is no way that any illegal votes were cast, despite people in jail for election/registration fraud.

There was voter fraud, like there is every election. What I question are the numbers Trump and his people claim.

CNN has rarely, if ever, reported news with bias, incorrect news or fake news specifically with the purpose to screw Trump.

CNN has shown bias. But that's a reality of a free press. The good part of having a free press in the US is that people have choices where they get their news and have the ability to decide for themselves what to believe unlike counties with state controlled media like in Russia, North Korea, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others.

Mika and Joe have never unfairly attacked Trump over policy or personal issues, to include appearance.

They're working for a private for profit business. They can 'attack' all they want, as long as they don't break laws and their sponsors continue to pay up.

Did I miss any?

Why won't he release his actual tax info, not the sanitized leak Maddow used?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Like he said the intelligence agencies have been wrong before and caused a war. Let's wait until the investigations are all done and see what proof they show us about who did it and how.

This is a demonstrably false statement. The intelligence agencies were not incorrect on Iraq, a republican administration cherry-picked intelligence to support its desire to go to war. Good thing facts last longer than some people's memories.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Anyone arrested? No. Anyone impeached? No

Not yet. But, to your clear chagrin, the investigations have't been concluded.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Again, if there were something on that reel, it would have been brought out to the public.

Again, nope.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

As the President, he can accept or refuse the intelligence opinion of who it was. He can choose to act or not act based on what he thinks is best. Powers of the president.

So it's okay for Trump to ignore the interference, but Obama's actions regarding the interference were unacceptable light? Got it.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Investigation completed? No

I hope and pray they continue, so that we can get this behind us, shut the left up and move forward.

CNN has shown bias. But that's a reality of a free press.

True, but NOT to do a purposely orchestrated daily hit jobs, that's not being part of a FREE press, that being a political partisan hack.

The good part of having a free press in the US is that people have choices where they get their news and have the ability to decide for themselves what to believe unlike counties with state controlled media like in Russia, North Korea, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others.

...and with the help of the MSM the US as well.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

The media (and some of you) just cant wait until Trump admits that Russia meddled in the election.

Trump has already admitted it. Then, like most other things, he changed his mind.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I hope and pray they continue, so that we can get this behind us, shut the left up and move forward.

One party, one state, one voice, eh?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

True, but NOT to do a purposely orchestrated daily hit jobs, that's not being part of a FREE press, that being a political partisan hack.

Fox "News" did this for Obama's entire eight years. You didn't have a problem with that. Since you were ok with it then, you have no place to be against it now. Live by the sword...

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I hope and pray they continue, so that we can get this behind us, shut the left up and move forward.

Assuming Trump is cleared, etc. If your side doesn't "win," we'll get to hear whinging about how the investigators were biased, etc. The right has already begun by attempting to impugn Mueller and his deputies.

True, but NOT to do a purposely orchestrated daily hit jobs, that's not being part of a FREE press, that being a political partisan hack.

So you agree Fox and Breitbart are full of partisan political hacks?

Wait, you allegedly are a journalist with a respected news outlet. How is your alleged employer not MSM?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

True, but NOT to do a purposely orchestrated daily hit jobs, that's not being part of a FREE press

Yes, it is. As long as they don't cross the line into slander or libel, they have every right to air or print opinions.

I think news outlets shouldn't sink to the level of the president of the US but if there's a market for it, do it.

Keep playing that tiny violin and wake us up when CNN descends into something as disgusting as birtherism.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Blacklabel: "So it's a positive thing to call out the leader of a country and accuse him personally of election meddling when it's unproven still?"

This from a guy who supports a man who perpetually lies about wiretapping and what not with ZERO proof and then later DEMANDS you no longer as questions about what he said? hahaha.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

One party, one state, one voice, eh?

Hmmm, so you want the right to have an equal say and equality between the two parties? You don't thing think anyone believes that, do you?

Assuming Trump is cleared, etc. If your side doesn't "win," we'll get to hear whinging about how the investigators were biased, etc. The right has already begun by attempting to impugn Mueller and his deputies.

And with good reason, once you closely examine the players in this.

So you agree Fox and Breitbart are full of partisan political hacks?

But the difference is, the individuals that ARE don't deny it. Hannity never would hide the fact that he is a conservative or a Trump supporter, nothing wrong with that, now on the other hand, Morning Joe tries to pass himself off as a conservative when he clearly isn't, not even close and again, nothing wrong with it, but at least he should own up to it. I don't have a problem with a person being a partisan, but I do have a problem with people pretending or leading people to believe they are not.

Wait, you allegedly are a journalist with a respected news outlet. How is your alleged employer not MSM?

How about this, my private life and the details of it are my business only.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

So it's okay for Trump to ignore the interference, but Obama's actions regarding the interference were unacceptable light? Got it.

It has not been proven to his satisfaction based on the evidence presented to him. Obama on the other hand, confirmed that he was satisfied with the evidence, yet did nothing. Two different things.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Trump has already admitted it. Then, like most other things, he changed his mind.

its trademark Trump, position himself on all sides of an issue admit, sort of admit, deny it... allows his supporters to point to any of his statements that comport with their view at the time. Pick one. Time after time same modus operandi. Makes reducing cognitive dissonance easy. The ultimate dishonest politician.

And who's he kidding he knows darn well the Russians meddled. Muddying the waters at this point.. impeach the...

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The right has already begun by attempting to impugn Mueller and his deputies.

Mueller did that to himself by hiring every Clinton lawyer he could find. He could have at least made an attempt to not look partisan in who he selected. But I still have hope that the investigation will be fair and get to the bottom of it.

This from a guy who supports a man who perpetually lies about wiretapping and what not with ZERO proof and then later DEMANDS you no longer as questions about what he said? hahaha.

yet there is proof that his phone calls and those of his team were being monitored and transcripts being leaked. We didnt know that before Trump brought up wiretapping. So it served its purpose to say it and Im sure Susan Rice will be asked more when she finally testifies.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Hmmm, so you want the right to have an equal say and equality between the two parties? You don't thing think anyone believes that, do you?

The right have equal say every day. The right are the majority and control destinies. But they have to be challenged. Just like the "left" have been challenged. But the American "left" are an odd kettle of fish when you compare them to other countries. Hardly "left" at all.

But wanting them silenced is disturbing, to say the least. That's why Trump and the Polish leader get on so well. He's trying to control the media in Poland.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

And who's he kidding he knows darn well the Russians meddled. Muddying the waters at this point.. impeach the...

Exactly what Im getting at. How does Russians meddling in the election= Trump himself must be impeached? 62 million people VOTED for him, dont they get any say in who is their President?

Thats why he wont clearly say either way, cause people try to use it against him like that.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

@PTown The good part of having a free press in the US is that people have choices where they get their news and have the ability to decide for themselves what to believe, unlike counties with state controlled media like Russia, North Korea, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others.

@bass ...and with the help of the MSM the US as well.

Are you arguing for the MSM (whatever that means) to push for US media to become state controlled? I think that's what Bannon, Trump etal want, that's why they bash it daily. They definitely want to undermine it. Trump already has FOX 'news' among other outlets under his control, so he's clearly made a start.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

yet there is proof that his phone calls and those of his team were being monitored

There has never been anything that showed Trump Tower was being wiretapped, which was Dear Leader's claim. Anything else is a strawman.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

How about this, my private life and the details of it are my business only.

Finally he gets it!

Excuse momentary off topic observation but I am shocked at the amount of personal info people give away online.

However, if one is President; it's all up for discussion. Esp when one's private life and beliefs can affect the nation and its well being.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

There has never been anything that showed Trump Tower was being wiretapped, which was Dear Leader's claim. Anything else is a strawman.

So for whatever reason, he knew people had information they shouldnt have about his and his teams phone communications. So he reasonably considered it must be that Trump Tower was wiretapped. However, it appears that his communications WERE being monitored, just not in the location and by the method he thought. Its not like he wasnt being monitored at all and transcripts being sent throughout the government. The end resylt was correct, he just got location and method wrong.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Trump claimed that Obama wiretapped him, which was total made-up nonsense, or to be more accurate, a lie. Anybody saying anything different on this topic is also telling a lie. Defending lies with lies is not a very effective tactic - take a look at Sean Spicer, for example.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

take a look at Sean Spicer, for example.

Do I have to? Seriously; where is Sean these days?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

So for whatever reason, he knew people had information they shouldnt have about his and his teams phone communications.

Nope. Trump got his 'information' from a Breitbart article, which turned out to be fake news.

As much as you would like to believe there was some basis in reality for his claims, there weren't.

it appears that his communications WERE being monitored

His communications were not being monitored.

The end resylt was correct, he just got location and method wrong.

The end result, location, and method were all wrong.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

So for whatever reason, he knew people had information they shouldnt have about his and his teams phone communications. So he reasonably considered it must be that Trump Tower was wiretapped. However, it appears that his communications WERE being monitored, just not in the location and by the method he thought. Its not like he wasnt being monitored at all and transcripts being sent throughout the government. The end resylt was correct, he just got location and method wrong.

It sounds like you are saying Trump's claim was utter trash.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

His communications were not being monitored.

His and his team's . If they werent, where did the leaked transcripts of Michael Flynn's phone calls come from?

It sounds like you are saying Trump's claim was utter trash.

No it sounds like I am saying Obama and his buddies were listening in to his and team's calls for political purposes. Investigation into that is ongoing.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

His and his team's

Nope. Maybe some on his team, but not the whole team, and not his.

And regardless of that, this was not information he had when he made the claim. His claims were based off the fake news Breitbart posted.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Nope. Maybe some on his team, but not the whole team, and not his.

Thats convenient. Only the ones who I can prove were being monitored actually were, but no others.

And regardless of that, this was not information he had when he made the claim. 

Im quite sure that a person knows when they hear things repeated in the media that the media would have no way to know, that someone is monitoring his conversations. Details of a phone call between himself and a trusted person, as an example. He knows he didnt tell the media and the trusted person didnt, so how else is what they spoke about the basis of a NY Times article?

But its ok, to try to prove Trump collusion they will have to also admit to wiretapping/illegal surveillance/unmasking as the methods to get the information they have.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Exactly what Im getting at. How does Russians meddling in the election= Trump himself must be impeached?

Really simple. It's part of his job description to protect and defend our country and institutions against foreign attacks. If he can't do the job (as in not be clear and not respond to such attacks - because ego narcissistic issues) then yeah, impeach or article 25. That simple.

For the record, I've never claimed the Russians actually succeeded in swinging the election or that Trump was guilty of colluding (just being stupid about how he handled it).

62 million people VOTED for him, dont they get any say in who is their President?

They did. He is president. His actions are making it clearer day by day that he is unfit to stay president. Nixon was elected. Would've been impeached.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Thats convenient.

The truth and convenience are unrelated. The truth is the truth.

You keep trying to rewrite the truth so that Dear Leader doesn't look like he was stupid enough to not only believe fake news, but to also tweet about it. But he did, whether you like it or not.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The right have equal say every day. The right are the majority and control destinies.

Here is the difference, the left control the media and the print media overwhelmingly 5 to 1, so I really wouldn't call that balanced at all.

But they have to be challenged. Just like the "left" have been challenged. But the American "left" are an odd kettle of fish when you compare them to other countries. Hardly "left" at all.

You are joking, right???!

But wanting them silenced is disturbing, to say the least.

No one wants the left silenced, I don't, I just want them to act like responsible adults and do their job WITHOUT interjecting their personal feelings into politics unless they are paid to express their opinion, if not, just deliver the news and shut up about your personal beliefs.

That's why Trump and the Polish leader get on so well. He's trying to control the media in Poland.

If Trump has THAT kind of power to control thousands of people, then he is without a doubt "ein Übermensch"

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Yeah I watched CNN last night and they went out of their way to talk about how much Poland loves 'US Presidents' and that their warm welcome had nothing at all to do with Donald Trump. This was being said while people were chanting DONALD TRUMP! DONALD TRUMP! in the background lol

Everyone have a good weekend, and enjoy whatever combination of beach/beer/bikinis/family time suits you.

We all have some of that in common at least.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

people were chanting DONALD TRUMP! DONALD TRUMP! in the background

people bussed in for a fee. the cheering crowds were promised by the Polish government as a condition for Trump's visit - like the 'rider' for music performers who demand a Rolls-Royce, champagne backstage etc.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@bass if not, just deliver the news and shut up about your personal beliefs.

I don't think extreme rightists and people from countries with state controlled media understand how a free press works. Nor the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution. The US has laws to protect people from slander and libel. In a market economy, media businesses are affected by the market.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

It has not been proven to his satisfaction based on the evidence presented to him

Two birth certificate from the State of Hawaii weren't enough for Trump . . . This argument is weak.

Mueller did that to himself by hiring every Clinton lawyer he could find

Keep repeating the Fox talking points. By your logic, no lawyer or judge that doesn't agree with your politics had any credibility.

yet there is proof that his phone calls and those of his team were being monitored and transcripts being leaked

Some members of his team was being monitored because they were speaking with foreign agents, namely Russians.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Everyone have a good weekend, and enjoy whatever combination of beach/beer/bikinis/family time suits you.

You too. Until next time, eh.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

You just added weight to my point.

Not that point.

Then don't try to add credibility to your arguments by citing your private life.

I'm not adding or trying anything personal not my style. I'm just mentioned what I do.

I don't think extreme rightists and people from countries with state controlled media understand how a free press works.

That's like saying, I don't think leftists understand how democracy works, seriously.

Nor the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution. The US has laws to protect people from slander and libel. In a market economy, media businesses are affected by the market.

Do the left know about this???

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

No one wants the left silenced, I don't, I just want them to act like responsible adults and do their job WITHOUT interjecting their personal feelings into politics unless they are paid to express their opinion, if not, just deliver the news and shut up about your personal beliefs.

Do what I say, not what I do. Seems legit.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@bass Do the left know about this???

Extreme rightists and those from states that control their media (and their people) are the ones I find constantly complaining about a free press and for profit media.

They don't seem to understand the notion of choice, they don't seem to understand that people can choose where they get their information and reason for themselves. They want their leader to tell them how to think and what to believe.

No true conservative would argue for limiting what the media print and how they report it, assuming what's printed is not illegal.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Nor the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution. The US has laws to protect people from slander and libel. In a market economy, media businesses are affected by the market.

There are those who think the previous president could have sued Trump and the other purveyors of rancid trash and filth for defamation.

I hope the MSM don't sink that low and end up in court. So far they haven't. I'd say that's a point to be praised, but when you consider that you are praising someone for not sinking to the level of the current occupant of the whitehouse, that isn't really a mark of virtue.

Reporting on the Russia issue is a newsworthy. Just don't go so far into the sewer you meet people at the level of the president of the United States.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

You just added weight to my point.

Not that point.

Yes, that point. I said if Trump's people aren't clear or collusion is found, we'll hear you all start impugning the investigators. You promptly replied by claiming the investigators lacked credibility.

I'm [sic] just mentioned what I do.

In an attempt to bolster your argument that the media is "out to get Trump."

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Let's clear some things up here.

The FBI, CIA and NSA have all concluded that it was Russia. They've even gone on record to explain how they did it.

Trump has even said he agrees. In a press conference in January he said, "As far as hacking, I think it was Russia."

So we're not waiting for the investigation to finish, it's already done, and they've already made their conclusions. Trump danced around the issue during the election but clearly came out and said he believe Russia was involved. What he's doing now is saying it could be Russia and "others", and we just don't know (about the others).

By discrediting the intelligence agencies he can convince his followers that the agencies can't be trusted, and he even throws in Iraq for good measure. All of that is being done to justify a softer response (or no response at all) to Russia.

This also goes to the heart of the issue when I said, "Trump wants to be the single source of information for Americans" above. We can see it here:

blacklabel: Smart answer by the President. He is not required to believe the 4 intelligence agencies about who did it. It seems he understands it happened but the who part it still in question to him. Nothing wrong with that.

You can read more about the issue here: http://www.factcheck.org/2017/07/trump-misleads-russia-hacking/

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Anyway, he gave a great speech in Warsaw, the first attacked, the center of resistance to the Nazis and Stalin's Soviet Union, until it was brutally crushed and then enslaved for a half century:

That’s trouble. That’s tough.

Inspiring. I'd never considered the war from that angle. No doubt that will be listed by historians alongside Kennedy's "Ich bin ein Berliner" or Reagan's "Tear down that wall!"

The rest of his speech was more forward-looking, concerning how Western civilization must betray the very values that has made it so successful in order to save itself. Finally, a rallying point: Trumpism - destroy the village to save it.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Extreme rightists and those from states that control their media (and their people) are the ones I find constantly complaining about a free press and for profit media. 

For example?

They don't seem to understand the notion of choice, they don't seem to understand that people can choose where they get their information and reason for themselves.

Gosh, I wish the left would live by that same creed.

They want their leader to tell them how to think and what to believe. 

I felt the last 8 years was exactly like that.

No true conservative would argue for limiting what the media print and how they report it, assuming what's printed is not illegal.

The only thing that I know for a fact are liberals that think the progressive and socialist is the ONLY way and the RIGHT way to go.

Yes, that point.

Actually, it's not the point at all.

I said if Trump's people aren't clear or collusion is found, we'll hear you all start impugning the investigators. You promptly replied by claiming the investigators lacked credibility.

Some of them, yes. To coheres someone or to plant evidence is not something that is a possible far stretch. Remember, they are human after all.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

If Trump has THAT kind of power to control thousands of people, then he is without a doubt "ein Übermensch"

OK then, he is "ein Übermensch". He controls not thousands, but millions. Do yourself proud. He is a now a bona fide big man (little man) that makes other big men (little men) feel great again. Put it on a hat, t-shirt, bumper sticker, tweet, whatever. As someone who lost relatives to so-called "übermenschen", I am appalled by your flippancy in regard to this term.

Maybe you ought to read a little history while you're at it. We've gone through millions of years of evolution to arrive at this idiotic Trump moment. Is this your utopian resolution? As you must have learned in school, some of the more important duties of journalists are to frame issues in social and historic contexts, to reflect on the implications of rhetoric, to give voice to those without a voice (and not to vilify them), and to leave open to the public the possibility of something better.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Some of them, yes. To coheres someone or to plant evidence is not something that is a possible far stretch. Remember, they are human after all.

You sure are doing your best to discredit the investigators. Somehow you think the investigators would go to the lengths of planting evidence merely because they supported democrats, but you don't think anyone on Trump's team could possibly have colluded with Russia.

The logical inference is that republicans are above suspicion but democrats are inherently corrupt. This is the exact same thing the Russian posters were spewing in social media during the campaign. But you know this already, comrade.

The only thing that I know for a fact are liberals that think the progressive and socialist is the ONLY way and the RIGHT way to go.

Your "fact" is an opinion, unless you have some evidence to back it up. I'm not holding my breath given your track record of making naked assertions without any supporting evidence and then bouncing on to the next topic when challenged, the hallmark of a good journalist.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

OK then, he is "ein Übermensch". He controls not thousands, but millions. Do yourself proud.

I try, but yeah, I am proud of my country for the first time in a long time.

He is a now a bona fide big man (little man) that makes other big men (little men) feel great again. Put it on a hat, t-shirt, bumper sticker, tweet, whatever. As someone who lost relatives to so-called "übermenschen", I am appalled by your flippancy in regard to this term.

i know full well what it means, thank you.

Maybe you ought to read a little history while you're at it. We've gone through millions of years of evolution to arrive at this idiotic Trump moment. Is this your utopian resolution?

All that evolution and all the division, it's all so sad, but a huge relief to that disaster we had over the last 8 years, I just hope that the left will calm down and realize that moaning and crying won't help at all and nothing will change No matter how they try and try.

As you must have learned in school, some of the more important duties of journalists are to frame issues in social and historic contexts, to reflect on the implications of rhetoric, to give voice to those without a voice (and not to vilify them), and to leave open to the public the possibility of something better.

Yes, sadly, the journalistic standards of what we learned back in the day is behind us, we now live in a day where you don't need a single verifiable source to be believed. Now you can say anything and it's just considered "fact."

You sure are doing your best to discredit the investigators. Somehow you think the investigators would go to the lengths of planting evidence merely because they supported democrats, but you don't think anyone on Trump's team could possibly have colluded with Russia.

Yes, I do believe that, can I prove it, of course not, but I think it's just so strange that Mueller hires this dream team of lawyers and 5 of them are huge Democrat donors.....you may think nothing is wrong with it, but I smell blood in the water. I can see a mile away what this thing is morphing into.

The logical inference is that republicans are above suspicion but democrats are inherently corrupt.

Not true, but Dems do think they are smarter, slicker and more calculating than conservatives.

This is the exact same thing the Russian posters were spewing in social media during the campaign. But you know this already, comrade.

Who are these Russian posters you keep referring to and do you have any verifiable proof of this?

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

The you may think nothing is wrong with it, but I smell blood in the water

Funny how you are so omniscient when it comes to things that support your opinion.

Who are these Russian posters you keep referring to and do you have any verifiable proof of this?

You, for one. And:

https://www.google.co.jp/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/russian-trolls-hilary-clinton-fake-news-election-democrat-mark-warner-intelligence-committee-a7657641.html%3Famp

https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/russia-internet-trolls-and-donald-trump-2016-7

4 ( +4 / -0 )

All that evolution and all the division, it's all so sad, but a huge relief to that disaster we had over the last 8 years, I just hope that the left will calm down and realize that moaning and crying won't help at all and nothing will change No matter how they try and try.

Socratic dialog, begone, I will have no more of thee!

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Dems do think they are smarter, slicker and more calculating than conservatives.

Then prove it's not true, and stop with the whining. You're a journalist. Wield your mighty pen/keyboard.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Trump continually acts and says ridiculous things. I, and others in the world, hope he does not do the stupid thing and lead the world into war, but if it's financially a gain for him and his rich cronies, he'll go there, Russian intervention be damned, I mean ignored. What a dangerous, egotistical and crass idiot he is, prioritizing the Russian intervention for friendship with Putin over wanting to find the truth. He wants to be a fascist, like Putin, but he's too dumb to realize it, as he puts down the CIA and all the agencies he should be respecting, but such an infant, decides they are incompetent because they don't kiss his butt. The worry is, he'll kiss Putin's.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Now you can say anything and it's just considered "fact."

Only by very stupid or very partisan people. There are still reputable outlets such as the Washington Post that you wouldn't trust completely, but would trust over trash right and trash left outlets. The journalists of this paper tend to be extremely bright and literate, presenting arguments in a logical and often educational way. I particularly like the financial section which helps people who are semi-literate on economics like myself. Their coverage of the Russia issue has been very refreshing in its balance.

It depends who is coming out with 'facts'. For example, I can't imagine Washington Post journalists making fake claims about non-existent sex tapes, Muslims celebrating 9/11 in New York or the existence of non-partisan historians writing that the Bush years were a success,

I think the likes of Twitter, Punch and Judy media and the internet itself have increased the proliferation of stupid trash and lies, but I still have faith in those with a respect for truth.

I'm sure you'd agree.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Funny how you are so omniscient when it comes to things that support your opinion.

No, I just don't see things through rose-colored glasses.

You, for one.

Prove it.

Then prove it's not true, and stop with the whining. You're a journalist. Wield your mighty pen/keyboard.

I don't whine, but I will say this, Dems the party of know it all believe in everything for the reality that they are a party lost in the wilderness, all the smarts and all the education, and vegan lifestyle still couldn't help them win elections.

Only by very stupid or very partisan people.

Calling the Democratic party stupid is an understatement.

I think the likes of Twitter, Punch and Judy media and the internet itself have increased the proliferation of stupid trash and lies, but I still have faith in those with a respect for truth. 

I'm sure you'd agree.

I am glad we get along! Kudos!

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

I find it hilarious the insane lefties defending the neo-liberal corporate MSM warmongering. I'm guessing the Russiapologists have Silicone Sally to talk to.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

I am glad we get along! Kudos!

Great. Now let's shout down stupid trash on Twitter such as fake sex tapes, Muslims celebrating on 9/11, and shout down those people who claim the existence of non-partisan historians writing favorably about Bush.

Then we can both say "Kudos!"

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I find it hilarious the right-wingers who are so hellbent on trying to say all the news is fake simply because they don't like the content of it.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

all the smarts and all the education, and vegan lifestyle still couldn't help them win elections.

Ouch. Clever.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Nobody really knows for sure -- can the same thing be said about US "voter fraud??" THAT bothers you, yet Russian intervention doesn't -- hmm.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Great. Now let's shout down stupid trash on Twitter such as fake sex tapes, Muslims celebrating on 9/11,

No, I believe in democracy and freedom of speech even if the person utters something idiotic and there's No shortlist of that.

Then we can both say "Kudos!"

We can say that now, we have all the reason to!

I find it hilarious the right-wingers who are so hellbent on trying to say all the news is fake simply because they don't like the content of it.

No, but when you have 98% of the media thinking one way and especially when it involves someone they despise, you can most definitely call it fake, seen more than enough of it, but libs should be happy they control the media, now if only they can translate that power into winning elections, they might be taken as credible....might.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Those trying to defend Obama's failure to protect against Russian meddling in the 2016 election keep pretending that he did act but can only offer up actions taken after the election was over and Hillary lost. By then Putin already had Podesta's emails and was waging a propaganda campaign utilizing American media platforms. Any minor actions to close down a few compounds and expell diplomats was too little and way too late. America needs a special counsel to investigate the Obama Administrations failures leading up to the November election.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

IM sure the NSA is recording all of this, So, the NSA knows. Anyone who believes the corporate news is just a fool.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

No, I believe in democracy and freedom of speech even if the person utters something idiotic and there's No shortlist of that.

I'm not saying they should be shut down. I'm saying they should be criticised for coming out with such trash.

Do you think people who put out lies like non-partisan historians writing that the Bush years were a success should be criticised?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Let's just face it, the election was rigged. Trump called it. He already knew. Hopefully he doesn't destroy the world in the next four years and that Americans will get their heads out of their asses and not re-elect this con man again.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Gotta hand it to Dishonest Donald, he knows how to muddy an issue and sow confusion.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/donald-trump-present-reasonable-doubt/532779/

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I'm not saying they should be shut down. I'm saying they should be criticised for coming out with such trash.

As long as it is done fairly, you should scrutinize the president, but every president or leader spews trash to a certain extent, Trump tells it like it is and if other countries don't like it, that's too bad because the man is not going to change and that was one of the reasons he was chosen for being direct, sticking an eye into the corrupt system and to call out both parties and tell the Washington elite what they needed to hear for a very long time as well as the Europeans and that makes me feel good.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Police officer: "Sir, do you have any idea how fast you were going?"

Driver: "Nobody really knows for sure."

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Trump tells it like it is

Trump says it like he feels it, and most of it is juvenile, delusional, and offensive trash.

one of the reasons he was chosen for being direct, sticking an eye into the corrupt system

Besides using Twitter to demean anyone who bruises his ego or disagrees with him, what specifically has he done to 'stick an eye' into the corrupt system? You mean like not hiring family members or billionaires? You mean like not making money off the presidency?

and to call out both parties and tell the Washington elite what they needed to hear for a very long time as well as the Europeans and that makes me feel good.

I know. Because you've got a lot of grievances, especially against those who make you feel emasculated. That's the only reason Trump is in the WH.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

The integrity of seeing the same "people" with the same reasoning and the same "scores" is disgusting, of course, but still an integrity... Wish this U.S.A. circus would not wind up on the side, though.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Odd.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

but every president or leader spews trash to a certain extent,

Trump has spewed more trash in the last year than any other president has spewed in a lifetime. He's in a trash class of his own.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

US government officials issued an urgent warning to power plant companies, including nuclear plants, around the country in response to evidence that hackers, suspected to be from Russia, have been attacking power plant computer network systems since May. The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI issued the warning to American power plant companies on June 28.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

During a news conference before his speech praising Poland for overcoming adversity, Trump again questioned the reliability of U.S. intelligence on the election issue and argued that Russia wasn't the only country that might be guilty of interfering.

"Nobody really knows for sure," Trump said.

No? Well, here's an interesting thing - quoth UN Ambassador Nikki Haley:

“You had two men walk into the room. You had two men who knew the exact same thing, which is Russia did meddle in the elections,” she added.

“I think President Trump wanted to make sure that President Putin was aware that he was acknowledging it, that he knew it. I think President Putin did what we all expected him to do, which was deny it. 

“And I think that is what it is. President Trump still knows that they meddled. President Putin knows that they meddled, but he is never going to admit to it. And that's all that happened.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/nikki-haley-everybody-knows-russia-vladimir-putin-donald-trump-cut-it-out-hamburg-a7831381.html

So Trump "tells it like it is", does he?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Trump tells it like it is and if other countries don't like it, that's too bad

Trump tells it like it isn't, you mean.

And it is too bad for America as it continues to slide into further isolation and internal division.

How utterly sad to see the US become a pariah. A rogue nation. Putin must be delighted with the outcome.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It is not only amazing how the media are still repeating this stupid "Russia" claim without even having defined what "Russia" is supposed to have done, it is also amazing that there is a whole group of commentators here who actually repeat this nonsense. CNN clearly has a loyal customer base here, who happily stay within their low-information bubble.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites