What the republicans didn't want you to see

[Crepitus]

Here are some of the reasons the republicans were so desperate to suppress the fusionGPS testimony

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/01/09/what-didnt-republicans-want-you-to-see-in-the-fusion-gps-transcript/


First, it makes clear that Steele was engaged because of his expertise and contacts. He was not told to find anything in particular, but just to research the totality of Trump’s involvement in Russia.
Second, according to Simpson, Trump was doing business all over the former Soviet states of Georgia and Azerbaijan. Interestingly, Trump repeatedly denied having financial ties in Russia itself but never publicly denied operations in states in which Russians exercised substantial influence.
Third, in investigating Trump’s finances they found his properties were not as highly valued as he suggested and, in the case of several golf courses, weren’t making money.
Fourth, Steele took it upon himself to report his finding to the FBI because he believed there was a “crime in progress” and matter of national security. He later relayed to Simpson that the FBI already had information from a campaign source.
Fifth, Trump lied about not knowing who Felix Sater is. Simpson testified, “This was something he didn’t want to talk about and testified under oath he wouldn’t know Felix if he ran into him in the street. That was not true. He knew him well and, in fact, continued to associate with him long after he learned of Felix’s organized crime ties. So, you know, that tells you something about somebody.” We do not know if Sater was in fact tied to organized crime.
Sixth, Simpson called it a reasonable “interpretation” that the Trump Tower meeting was designed by Russian officials to reach out to and cooperate with the Trump team.
Seventh, far from interfering in the election to benefit Hillary Clinton, the FBI did not publicly disclose during the campaign the wealth of information it was learning about Trump and Russia.

[resister]

A blog, how devastating...:studying:

[Crepitus]

A blog, how devastating...:studying:

An opinion. Every bodies got one, even you.

[resister]

An opinion. Every bodies got one, even you.
Well, at least you see it for what it is. That is good.

[Crepitus]

Well, at least you see it for what it is. That is good.

The author you might note, is a conservative.

Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective. Follow @JRubinBlogger

[resister]

The author you might note, is a conservative.

Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective. Follow @JRubinBlogger
And? So are all the never trumpers.

[Crepitus]

And? So are all the never trumpers.

Of course they are.

[Mister D]

Of course they are.

Just stand there looking stupid. lol It should be routine by now.

[Mister D]

And? So are all the never trumpers.

Conservative Never Trumpers"!? Unheard of!

[Kalkin]

Another nothingburger thread. Will it ever end?

[Mister D]

Another nothingburger thread. Will it ever end?
Pathetic isn't it? Boring too. No wonder activity is down.

[Captdon]

The author you might note, is a conservative.

Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective. Follow @JRubinBlogger

What? Have you ever read her columns? She as conservative as you are.

[Crepitus]

What? Have you ever read her columns? She as conservative as you are.

You mean like deshowitz is a liberal?

[Captdon]

You mean like deshowitz is a liberal?

I meant what I said. I didn't try to deflect. I read her and she is a liberal hack.

[Bob the Slob]

Here are some of the reasons the republicans were so desperate to suppress the fusionGPS testimony

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/01/09/what-didnt-republicans-want-you-to-see-in-the-fusion-gps-transcript/

Those are really damning. No wonder Grassley and Graham committed Obstruction of Justice to hide it.


he British ex-spy who authored a dossier of allegations against then-presidential candidate Donald Trump was told the FBI had someone inside Trump’s network providing agents with information, according to a newly released transcript of a congressional interview.

Glenn R. Simpson, a founder of the research firm Fusion GPS, spoke to investigators with the Senate Judiciary Committee for 10 hours in August. As the partisan fight over Russian interference in the 2016 election has intensified, Simpson has urged that his testimony be released, and a copy of the transcript was made public Tuesday.It was released by the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California. 3:28



What you need to know about Fusion GPS, the Trump dossier and Russian interests










How is Fusion GPS connected to the Trump dossier, Donald Trump Jr.'s Trump Tower meeting and the 2016 election? The Fact Checker explains.(Video: Meg Kelly/Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)



You can understand why the Republicans were furiously trying to suppress the transcript, which contains no classified information.

First, it makes clear that Steele was engaged because of his expertise and contacts. He was not told to find anything in particular, but just to research the totality of Trump’s involvement in Russia.
Second, according to Simpson, Trump was doing business all over the former Soviet states of Georgia and Azerbaijan. Interestingly, Trump repeatedly denied (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/11/trump-denies-any-links-to-russia-no-loans-no-nothing.html) having financial ties in Russia itself but never publicly denied operations in states in which Russians exercised substantial influence.
Third, in investigating Trump’s finances they found his properties were not as highly valued as he suggested and, in the case of several golf courses, weren’t making money.
Fourth, Steele took it upon himself to report his finding to the FBI because he believed there was a “crime in progress” and matter of national security. He later relayed to Simpson that the FBI already had information from a campaign source.
Fifth, Trump lied about not knowing who Felix Sater (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/us/politics/trump-tower-putin-felix-sater.html) is. Simpson testified, “This was something he didn’t want to talk about and testified under oath he wouldn’t know Felix if he ran into him in the street. That was not true. He knew him well and, in fact, continued to associate with him long after he learned of Felix’s organized crime ties. So, you know, that tells you something about somebody.” We do not know if Sater was in fact tied to organized crime.
Sixth, Simpson called it a reasonable “interpretation” that the Trump Tower meeting (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/11/06/what-did-donald-trump-jr-ask-for-at-that-meeting-the-russian-lawyer-just-spoke-out/?utm_term=.a678e554a81a) was designed by Russian officials to reach out to and cooperate with the Trump team.
Seventh, far from interfering in the election to benefit Hillary Clinton, the FBI did not publicly disclose during the campaign the wealth of information it was learning about Trump and Russia.

[Bob the Slob]

What? Have you ever read her columns? She as conservative as you are.

She's as right wing as they get. Even has her conspiracy theories.


Political views and commentaries[edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)&action=edit&section=5&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro)]A proponent of American exceptionalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism),[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)#cite_note-callerInterview-15) Rubin believes that the United States is the "leader of the free world" and is accordingly compelled to act to prevent "unacceptable" conduct against the US or its allies, such as Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon). According to Rubin, "the Carter era and the Reagan presidency sealed the deal" with respect to her views "on the role of the U.S. in the world as a force for freedom."[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)#cite_note-callerInterview-15)
Rubin has supported the Likud (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likud) government and other conservative factions in Israel, and has been a critic of Hamas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas) and of the PLO (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLO) leadership.[16] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)#cite_note-16)
In November 2011, Rubin retweeted an anti-Hamas blog post that Post ombudsman Patrick Pexton called "reprehensible". Rubin later told Pexton that she endorsed and shared the views in the Post that "expressed an understandable desire for righteous vengeance against the kidnappers and human rights abusers of Gilad Shalit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilad_Shalit)". Pexton said, "in agreeing with the sentiment, and in spreading it to her 7,000 Twitter followers who know her as a Washington Post blogger, Rubin did damage to the Post and the credibility that keeps it afloat."[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)#cite_note-OmbudPost-17) Andrew Sullivan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Sullivan) wrote, "we have a blogger at the WaPo endorsing throwing Arab prisoners into the sea to meet righteous divine punishment."[18] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)#cite_note-Sullivan-18) Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt defended Rubin, saying, "As a general matter I think it isn't wise for me to comment on the work of the ombudsman, who is entitled to his views, and over whom I do not have editorial control. However, I will say this: I think Jennifer is an excellent journalist and a relentless reporter. I think because she has strong views, and because she is as willing to take on her home team, as it were, as the visitors, she comes under more scrutiny than many and is often the target of unjustified criticism. I think she brings enormous value to the Post."[19] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)#cite_note-19)
In 2011, Rubin wrote a blog post suggesting that the 2011 Norway attacks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks) were carried out by Islamic jihadists. Columnist James Fallows (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Fallows) of The Atlantic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Atlantic) criticized the piece as "rushed" and noted the subsequent discovery that the attack was carried out by Anders Behring Breivik (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik), a native Norwegian who was not a Muslim.[20] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)#cite_note-20) Another Atlantic columnist, Jeffrey Goldberg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Goldberg), responded that the criticism was unwarranted, noting that other publications such as Wired and even The Atlantic itself had printed similar speculation; Goldberg concluded: "It is not perverse or absurd for normal people to think of al Qaeda when they hear of acts of mass terrorism. It is logical, in fact, to suspect al Qaeda."[21] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)#cite_note-21) In a follow-up column, Rubin acknowledged that early suspicions of a jihadist attack had proven to be mistaken.[22] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)#cite_note-22)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)

[Crepitus]

I meant what I said. I didn't try to deflect. I read her and she is a liberal hack.

And I've read him and he's a conservative sock puppet. Still he claims to be liberal, and she claims the dubious mantle of conservatism.

[Crepitus]

She's as right wing as they get. Even has her conspiracy theories.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Rubin_(journalist)

Which is as we know the hallmark of the true conservative.

[Safety]

Hey Crepitus, has there been one post from the right on topic yet, including the ad homm about the author? How many joined the dogpile so far?

Another fine example for the open townhall...

[Mister D]

We hate Crepitus because he's black.

[MisterVeritis]

We hate Crepitus because he's black.
Is he black?

[Mister D]

Is he black?

No, but I'm just indulging our one trick pony Safety.

[MisterVeritis]

No, but I'm just indulging our one trick pony Safety.
LOL. Okay. You got me. Is he here due to a diversity visa?

[Crepitus]

Hey Crepitus, has there been one post from the right on topic yet, including the ad homm about the author? How many joined the dogpile so far?

Another fine example for the open townhall...

Not a single one. It's has been attacked because it's an opinion piece, the author has been ad hommed, I have been called stupid and "accused" of being black (which I don't consider an insult) and we've tried to deflect to the author's political beliefs.

But not one single poster tried to address the content of the post.

I think this would be an excellent thing to bring up in the townhall thread, please do. As an advisor, and one who's status is quite the sore spot with a decent chunk of our membership, I have tried to steer clear of the townhalls (except for peace keeping) so they can be more productive.

[Mister D]

Not a single one. It's has been attacked because it's and opinion piece, the author has been added hommed, I have been called stupid and "accused" of being black (which I don't consider an insult) and we've tried to deflect to the author's political beliefs.

But not one single poster tried to address the content of the post.

I think this would be an excellent thing to bring up in the townhall thread, please do. As an advisor, and one who's status is quite the sore spot with a decent chunk of our membership, I have tried to steer clear of the townhalls (except for piece keeping) so they can be more productive.

Seriously, are you retarded?

[Mister D]

lol Retard.

[Crepitus]

lol Retard.

You know this is an on the serious side thread right?

[Adelaide]

Mister D has been thread banned for numerous insults.

Everyone else: Discuss the topic or find another one that interests you; posting off-topic or insulting each other is unacceptable.

[Crepitus]

lol Retard.

I did see the post you deleted.

[resister]

Hey @Crepitus (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1345), has there been one post from the right on topic yet, including the ad homm about the author? How many joined the dogpile so far?

Another fine example for the open townhall...
The topic is a blog, lol.

[Safety]

Not a single one. It's has been attacked because it's an opinion piece, the author has been ad hommed, I have been called stupid and "accused" of being black (which I don't consider an insult) and we've tried to deflect to the author's political beliefs.

But not one single poster tried to address the content of the post.

I think this would be an excellent thing to bring up in the townhall thread, please do. As an advisor, and one who's status is quite the sore spot with a decent chunk of our membership, I have tried to steer clear of the townhalls (except for peace keeping) so they can be more productive.

It's not worth the hassle to bring it up actually. If the powers that be don't see for themselves, then I don't see the purpose.