Elections Trump says he’d ‘want to hear’ foreign dirt on 2020 rivals

[Beaver Brownlee]

You can read this https://www.emptywheel.net/2019/05/17/chuck-ross-gets-pissy-about-disinformation/
Not Dan Boingo Boingo

Great article, it points out what a cluster fuck Steele's dossier is and how all of it is in question.
It failed to point out the illegal FISA warrants but did point out unvetted information is all the dossier is.

 

[Beaver Brownlee]

You are in a Fox-Hole
Reporters info - https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...ump-leak-times-journalist-press-freedom-obama
Spying - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politi...suggests-ag-william-barr-found-illegal-spying
- At this point there is ZERO evidence Obama admin was instructed to spy on Trump...ZERO
Volume II of the Mueller report in where Trump commits obstruction of justice many times, read some of it.

Ali was investigated due to being in a relationship with a Senate aide that was charged. No other reason.

And we're finding out more about how far back the spying started which will mean he knew weather he ordered it or not.

 

[Fluffernutter]

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Wednesday that if a foreign power offered dirt on his 2020 opponent, he'd be open to accepting it and that he'd have no obligation to call in the FBI.

"I think I'd want to hear it," Trump said in an interview with ABC News, adding, "There's nothing wrong with listening."

The role of Trump's eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., in organizing a 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer offering negative information on Hillary Clinton was a focus of special counsel Robert Mueller's probe of Russian meddling in the last presidential campaign.

Mueller painstakingly documented Russian efforts to boost Trump's campaign and undermine that of his Democratic rival. But while Mueller's investigation didn't establish a criminal conspiracy between Russia and Trump's campaign, Trump repeatedly praised WikiLeaks in 2016 and celebrated information exposed by Russian hackers.

One of Trump's possible opponents in the 2020 race, Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, tweeted: "The #MuellerReport made it clear: A foreign government attacked our 2016 elections to support Trump, Trump welcomed that help, and Trump obstructed the investigation. Now, he said he'd do it all over again. It's time to impeach Donald Trump."

Trump's comments came just a month after he pledged not to use information stolen by foreign adversaries in his 2020 re-election campaign, even as he wrongly insisted he hadn't used such information to his benefit in 2016.

During a question-and-answer session with reporters in the Oval Office in May, Trump said he "would certainly agree to" that commitment.

"I don't need it," he said as he met with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. "All I need is the opponents that I'm looking at."

Trump also insisted erroneously that he "never did use, as you probably know," such information, adding: "That's what the Mueller report was all about. They said no collusion."

FBI Director Christopher Wray told lawmakers that Donald Trump Jr. should have called his agency to report the offer.

But Trump, who nominated Wray to the role in 2017, told ABC News that he disagrees. "The FBI director is wrong," the president said. He added, "Life doesn't work like that."

Asked whether his advisers should accept information on an opponent from Russia, China or another nation or call the FBI this time, Trump said, "I think maybe you do both," expressing openness to reviewing the information.

"I think you might want to listen," he said. "There's nothing wrong with listening. If somebody called, from a country — Norway — we have information on your opponent. Oh, I think I'd want to hear it."

So, if Norway had dirt on a political candidate, the president would want to know.

Got it.

I assume information from the Five Eyes would be A-OK as well. After all, they are foreign countries.

I too think Trump is a goofball, but this story seems a bit blown out of proportion. Policy makers in Washington DC use information given to them by foreign countries all the time.

 

[zebby23]

You mean like Obama weaponizing the IRS and violating the right of reporters and spying on a political opponent?

Name laws Trump has broken numerous times.

And go.

Haha

Obstruction
Tax evasion - you know he’s guilty
Campaign finance violations (unindicted co conspirator

But he could kill someone and you would ask the same question. Also, nice barometer for a President. “What laws has be broken numerous times” lol

 

[Teppodama]

Regardless of how you view the statement politically, I will say its a refreshingly honest answer for Trump. I'm realistic enough, as well as cynical enough, to believe EVERY politician would be equally interested but certainly never consider admitting so. It's very naive to believe otherwise. As for legality, guess that would be for the courts to decide as public opinion is fickle about notions of what should or shouldn't be legal.

 

[Beaver Brownlee]

Haha

Obstruction
Tax evasion - you know he’s guilty
Campaign finance violations (unindicted co conspirator

But he could kill someone and you would ask the same question. Also, nice barometer for a President. “What laws has be broken numerous times” lol

Mueller found no obstruction and made no recommendation for impeachment as Ken Star did.

I was told he broke the law numerous times so I asked for the numerous times.
Sorry I had to clarify such a simple thing for you as it shines a light on your level of understanding.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Mueller found no obstruction...

lie.

and made no recommendation for impeachment as Ken Star did.

...

Correct as Mueller understood that he is not the one who should conclude that, Congress is.

If you cannot charge what is the point is saying 'I think he did it'?

If you cannot impeach what is the point of saying "I think he did impeachable things'?

You would just be tarnishing someone with no way for them to clear themselves.

Imagine Mueller says 'I think the President did crimes but I cannot charge, I also think he did impeachable things but I cannot impeach' so lets all just move on.

All through the next election and following Trump thru his life his enemies would post Mueller's quotes and say 'look, Mueller thinks Trump was guilty of crimes and should have been impeached'.

Again very unfair to do if you cannot act.

Instead you give the evidence to those who cannot act and if they choose to say 'Trump committed crimes', "Trump did Impeachable things' they can move forward with indictments and Trump can then fight it and win and clear his name.

 

[Beaver Brownlee]

lie.

Correct as Mueller understood that he is not the one who should conclude that, Congress is.

If you cannot charge what is the point is saying 'I think he did it'?

If you cannot impeach what is the point of saying "I think he did impeachable things'?

You would just be tarnishing someone with no way for them to clear themselves.

Imagine Mueller says 'I think the President did crimes but I cannot charge, I also think he did impeachable things but I cannot impeach' so lets all just move on.

All through the next election and following Trump thru his life his enemies would post Mueller's quotes and say 'look, Mueller thinks Trump was guilty of crimes and should have been impeached'.

Again very unfair to do if you cannot act.

Instead you give the evidence to those who cannot act and if they choose to say 'Trump committed crimes', "Trump did Impeachable things' they can move forward with indictments and Trump can then fight it and win and clear his name.

When asked if he would charge Trump with any crimes at all outside of OLC rules Mueller told Barr he would not.
By contrast Ken Star laid out the evidence against Clinton and recommend impeachment and Mueller could have done the same if only he had any evidence to present. He didn't. None has been presented.

 

[MikeMcMann]

When asked if he would charge Trump with any crimes at all outside of OLC rules Mueller told Barr he would not.
By contrast Ken Star laid out the evidence against Clinton and recommend impeachment and Mueller could have done the same if only he had any evidence to present. He didn't. None has been presented.

Barr is a proven liar. Do not waste your time quoting Barr to me stating what he said Mueller said when he was caught in a bold faced lie prior.

Mueller could do the same. That is a meaningless statement. He was NEVER going to do so based on his view of fairness and the rules. You can state he COULD ignore the rules as he perceived him all you want but he was not going to do that when he felt the POTUS would not then be able to defend himself since Mueller could not indict.

 

[zebby23]

Mueller found no obstruction and made no recommendation for impeachment as Ken Star did.

I was told he broke the law numerous times so I asked for the numerous times.
Sorry I had to clarify such a simple thing for you as it shines a light on your level of understanding.

Like I said... trump could kill someone and you would spit the same low iq nonsense. “What crime did he commit”?? You are blinded by a liar and criminal and would follow him off a cliff.

You cool that his son met with Russians?
You cool that he is defying all subpoenas?
You cool with Trump tearing our institutions apart?
You cool with him saying Christopher Wray was wrong about going to the FBI when another government gets involved in our elections?
You cool with Trump lying about all things big and small?
You cool that he doesn’t read?

Face it. You support him because he is most like you and the rest of his supporters. You see yourself in him.

I look forward to a Democratic President doing all this same shit and I look forward to you condoning it.

 

[Caudillo]

Haha

Obstruction
Tax evasion - you know he’s guilty
Campaign finance violations (unindicted co conspirator

But he could kill someone and you would ask the same question. Also, nice barometer for a President. “What laws has be broken numerous times” lol

like i said before. he has no choice but to break the law in order to prevent conservatives and the right wing from being persecuted and to save America. Because the law is often corrupt and judged by corrupt.

Like I said... trump could kill someone and you would spit the same low iq nonsense. “What crime did he commit”?? You are blinded by a liar and criminal and would follow him off a cliff.

You cool that his son met with Russians?
You cool that he is defying all subpoenas?
You cool with Trump tearing our institutions apart?
You cool with him saying Christopher Wray was wrong about going to the FBI when another government gets involved in our elections?
You cool with Trump lying about all things big and small?
You cool that he doesn’t read?

Face it. You support him because he is most like you and the rest of his supporters. You see yourself in him.

I look forward to a Democratic President doing all this same shit and I look forward to you condoning it.

Trump will set up a dynasty and save America there wont be a democrat president ever again! after Trump america is fundamentally changed.

 

[MilesAbove]

like i said before. he has no choice but to break the law in order to prevent conservatives and the right wing from being persecuted and to save America. Because the law is often corrupt and judged by corrupt.

You sound so stupid right now.

 

[hillelslovak87]

like i said before. he has no choice but to break the law in order to prevent conservatives and the right wing from being persecuted and to save America. Because the law is often corrupt and judged by corrupt.


Trump will set up a dynasty and save America there wont be a democrat president ever again! after Trump america is fundamentally changed.

Is there some crazy saturday morning cartoon about America that all Brazilian adult males watch dutifully? Maybe that would explain your comic lack of knowledge pertaining anything and everything North American.

 

[Beaver Brownlee]

Barr is a proven liar. Do not waste your time quoting Barr to me stating what he said Mueller said when he was caught in a bold faced lie prior.

Mueller could do the same. That is a meaningless statement. He was NEVER going to do so based on his view of fairness and the rules. You can state he COULD ignore the rules as he perceived him all you want but he was not going to do that when he felt the POTUS would not then be able to defend himself since Mueller could not indict.

What proven lie?
About Mueller supporting his summary?
Because that's a bunch of horseshit and you know it.

Again it was Mueller's job to come to a conclusion and make a recommendation based on facts he could lay out. He had no facts base a conclusion on, only a bunch of false information that started the whole shit show.

 

[Beaver Brownlee]

Like I said... trump could kill someone and you would spit the same low iq nonsense. “What crime did he commit”?? You are blinded by a liar and criminal and would follow him off a cliff.

You cool that his son met with Russians?
You cool that he is defying all subpoenas?
You cool with Trump tearing our institutions apart?
You cool with him saying Christopher Wray was wrong about going to the FBI when another government gets involved in our elections?
You cool with Trump lying about all things big and small?
You cool that he doesn’t read?

Face it. You support him because he is most like you and the rest of his supporters. You see yourself in him.

I look forward to a Democratic President doing all this same shit and I look forward to you condoning it.

Yeah, the Russians were working for Hillary and the meeting was staged by Fusion GPS so I'm ok with that. I'm also ok with that being investigated.

The President has not been subpoenaed so there's that.

You're confusing foreign national providing dirt on opponents and conspiracy. Simpletons do that.

Nonsense. But I know, I know. 1/3 isn't the same as 30%, lied bigly, Impeach!!

And more nonsense.

Yes, I don't stand for no backstabbing conniving bullshit either and call people right the fuck out on it. It's unacceptable.

It's going to be a long wait.

 

[hillelslovak87]

What proven lie?
About Mueller supporting his summary?
Because that's a bunch of horseshit and you know it.

Again it was Mueller's job to come to a conclusion and make a recommendation based on facts he could lay out. He had no facts base a conclusion on, only a bunch of false information that started the whole shit show.

What false information, exactly?

 

[Beaver Brownlee]

What false information, exactly?

The Steele dossier, none of it was vetted and most all of it was false or misleading.
Cohen never went to Prague, there is no Russian Consulate in Miami, the Russians Trump met are US counter intelligence agents who were working for Hillary indirectly through Fusion GPS.

 

[MikeMcMann]

What proven lie?
About Mueller supporting his summary?
Because that's a bunch of horseshit and you know it.

Again it was Mueller's job to come to a conclusion and make a recommendation based on facts he could lay out. He had no facts base a conclusion on, only a bunch of false information that started the whole shit show.

Yes, Barr lied to Congress when asked if anyone on the Mueller team had given any indication that they were not happy with how he was presenting his summaries. There is not even a debate over that lie anymore so you can take your horseshit claim elsewhere.

And no where in Mueller's mandate was it stated it was within his job to come to conclusions he could do nothing with. But if you think there was please quote it as his mandate is easily found with google. You are full of shit on that as well.

 

[Beaver Brownlee]

Yes, Barr lied to Congress when asked if anyone on the Mueller team had given any indication that they were not happy with how he was presenting his summaries. There is not even a debate over that lie anymore so you can take your horseshit claim elsewhere.

And no where in Mueller's mandate was it stated it was within his job to come to conclusions he could do nothing with. But if you think there was please quote it as his mandate is easily found with google. You are full of shit on that as well.

The testimony states Mueller questioned and says absolutely nothing about him being unhappy with it.

And that's exactly what his job was, in fact that's all his job was.

 

[MikeMcMann]

The testimony states Mueller questioned and says absolutely nothing about him being unhappy with it.

And that's exactly what his job was, in fact that's all his job was.

Barr already had the letter from the Mueller team. Sorry. Busted.

And quote it then. Its not hard to find his mandate. Lets you and i take it to the bet thread. I bet you cannot find that in his mandate at all. You pick the terms of the bet.

Edit : I'll even help you as here is the actual text of the mandate. Quote what you say is in there or shut up.