The Washington Post has shocking news tonight.
ADDED: Why are the "people familiar with the matter" talking about it now? I'll just note the correlation with this story (CBS):
House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, R-California, announced Tuesday that his committee, along with the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, would investigate a 2010 uranium deal struck with Russia amid allegations that the FBI had gathered evidence about Russian attempts to influence Hillary and Bill Clinton through donations to the Clinton Family Foundation.And from 2 days ago "Hopes Dim for Congressional Russia Inquiries as Parties Clash" (NYT):
"One of the things we are concerned about is whether or not there was an FBI investigation, was there a DOJ investigation and if so, why was Congress not informed of this matter," Nunes told reporters at the Capitol Tuesday. The Hill reported last week that before the Obama administration approved the deal, the FBI had evidence that Russian nuclear officials had engaged in activities like bribery and extortion in their pursuit of uranium for Russia...
All three committees looking into Russian interference — one in the House, two in the Senate — have run into problems... The Senate Judiciary Committee’s inquiry has barely started, delayed in part by negotiations over the scope of the investigation. Leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee, while maintaining bipartisan comity, have sought to tamp down expectations about what they might find. Nine months into the Trump administration, any notion that Capitol Hill would provide a comprehensive, authoritative and bipartisan accounting of the extraordinary efforts of a hostile power to disrupt American democracy appears to be dwindling....
Posts
243 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 243 of 243@grackle - I think that the Podesta Group is just too blatant to ignore. Ignoring the Uranium One deal and Fusion GPS Dossier, the Podesta Group was the only real Russian collaboration that has just been sitting there out in the public eye. My memory (a bit foggy at my age, of course) is that they recently, very belatedly, registered as foreign agents. After repeated questions in conservative media about them not having registered, and why they weren't being prosecuted for it. In any case, low hanging fruit. Crooked Hillary's campaign chair, Leon Podesta, could claim that it was really his brother, Tony, since he was busy losing to the Trump, and, thus, she isn't completely implicated. Don't really expect any jail time here (no process crimes for important Democrats) just some fines, which will I suspect be reimbursed somewhat under the table. Something like that.
Which is, maybe to say that the timing here looks a bit problematic - possibly done as a distraction. But maybe not. The problem is that this came out of the Mueller investigation, which is Deep State, while the rest of the stuff being pushed out seem to being pushed by the Obama and maybe Clinton people. I think that they have separate agendas, and don't really coordinate that much. Maybe.
In short, until today, many on and off the record people swore what we now know is true was not. So, forgive me if I'm skeptical of theories that help the narrative the liars pushed two days ago. We're at the point of warrants and subpoenas now that we know people are lying to people.
"Extensive" is one of those great words, too. It doesn't really mean anything, does it? Kind of like "many people"
But sorry ARM, the big deal coming out of this is going to be Uranium One.
I am still wondering why John Podesta was given millions of dollars worth of stock to sit on the board of a company that collapsed amost immediately after Hillary lost the election.
ARM least curious.
There may still be an anti Trump pony at the end of this. But, if we defang the corrupt elements of the bureaucracy and jail corrupt members of the last administration, I imagine the left will wonder if it was worth it. I'll trade Trump for all that and exposing greater than Tea Pot Dome level corruption.
What we have been seeing since the election is that Trump is systematically eliminating or neutralizing his opposition. Sooner or later every foe is brought low.
McConnell and Ryan chose poorly at the outset of the Trump administration in that they would allow Trump no legislative victories, apparently forgetting that they are both tied to the same issues. Obama proved that a President could be handily elected while the party of that President loses big.
It may be too late but if McConnell and Ryan are smart they will do an about face and pass some Trump initiatives instead of “slow-going” the congressional legislative process by using “rules” (which can be changed at will) as an excuse.
Let me reiterate - the waiving of confidentiality by the Clinton/DNC attorney was voluntary. Sure, that portion of the NDA could be, and presumably would ultimately be, overridden by a Congressional subpoena. But that could be weeks, if not months from now, and the disclosure buried by the MSM, as is often their want, in inconvenient Congressional hearings. Instead, they were able to confirm yesterday that both the DNC and the Crooked Hillary campaign paid them for the dossier. Which suggests very strongly to me that the timing was deliberate, and that the reason for it was to distract from the much bigger scandal, the sale of uranium to the Russians, despite all sorts of intelligence that it was being orchestrated by the Russian govt. Everyone at the top of the Obama Administration (except maybe Obama himself) knew where it was going, but agreed to the sale anyway. And, yes, they illegally hid it from Congress too.
Really hoping Clinton or her cronies end up behind bars for this, or at least are forced out of public life
I'd rather see them twist in the wind for years, figuratively and literally from a gibbet.
"My take: Flake and Corker are living examples of Emerson’s historical dictum: When you strike at a king, you must kill him. "
It was Machiavelli who said "Never strike a Prince i=unless you kill him."
Pretty good column by Ben Domenech on Flake.
Flake missed the whole shift last year. He was OK in the House. Domenech also suggests Martha McSally might get in. Sh is my Congress woman and I like her a lot. I hope this doesn't get into fratricide.
Maybe McSally should wait for McCain's seat.
Everyone at the top of the Obama Administration (except maybe Obama himself) knew where it was going, but agreed to the sale anyway.
I'm wondering how the other officials were paid off--or maybe Hillary was the only one who demanded it. The others were just standard issue anti-American Obama appointees.
What saddens me, is that I don't trust whatsoever the present FBI, CIA, and all of the other government agency letters. Some of them are just as deeply involved in this mess as what we think of about the Podestas and Clintons participations.
This is a rotten mess. A dumpster fire.
This whole think reeks like a replay of the Drefus Affair. J'accuse!
Agree with AllenS, the biggest issue for me is the use of the government against Trump.
That is worse than Nixon.
Nixon thought about it, it happened under Obama.
Chuck: "Of my Top 100 Reasons to Loathe Donald Trump, I don't think anything to do with Russia is even on the list."
Yeah, well not now.
Which suggests very strongly to me that the timing was deliberate, and that the reason for it was to distract from the much bigger scandal, the sale of uranium to the Russians,
Maybe so, but on the timing what leapt out at me was the speedy statement by the DNC absolving their current leadership of any involvement. I wondered if they twisted some arms to get this out and get ahead of it before the subpoenas brought it out.
@grackle - I think that the Podesta Group is just too blatant to ignore.
Yes, but that’s my point. Mueller couldn’t ignore what at least two congressional committees are about to investigate. So he had to make an announcement, but for appearance’s sake only.
But when Mueller was head of the FBI he was probably knee-deep in the cover up of the Podesta Uranium One bribery scheme. To expect Mueller to investigate himself is naïve.
It was Machiavelli who said "Never strike a Prince unless you kill him."
I’ve looked but cannot find this quote attributed to Machiavelli. My quote is sourced from the links below. I’ll use URLs since easyhyperlinks is off-line now.
https://tinyurl.com/ycq5m2pj
https://tinyurl.com/y9h6dyzf
https://tinyurl.com/ydaxr53l
https://tinyurl.com/y6vlpu2s
On the Fox Morning Show this morning Rand Paul was asked if he knew who the Republican was who funded the dossier, and he responded, "Not me." So he didn't exactly answer the question. I'm waiting for someone to ask Jeb...
Also, isn't it looking like the DNC is what ties all of this together...including Wasserman Schultz and the Awan IT scandal?
I think Jeb has been asked and has denied it, but I remember seeing suspicions raised that it was a super PAC that supported him and. I don't recall whether they have also denied it.
What seems suspicious to me is that these papers keep reporting it is "a wealthy Republican donor". That sounds like a Clintonian parsing, and could be technically accurate if it is a big time wealthy Democrat supporter who happened to have, at any point in time, givien a donation to a Republican.
This story is sort of old. Meaning, "it's out there", but had no legs.
Why is the uranium deal important? Look at the time table. At the time, Obama was secretly in talks with the Mullahs in Iran over a nuclear deal. Russia was signing contracts with Iran to build their nuclear plants. The Russian uranium deal, only discovered because one person discovered in while reviewing Canadian financial records.
I remember thinking at the time, not only is Obama going to allow Iran to build a bomb to destroy Israel, but he's going to give them American cash and uranium to make sure it happens.
If Jeb! Bush paid for the dossier, is it really accurate to suggest Republican involvement?
Seems a stretch.
What's new about the story is the FBI cover-up of the Russian spy ring.
This was DECIDEDLY NOT a Friday afternoon story leaked to the press. This was dumped on a Tuesday evening.
This alone reveals something coming that is not yet known.
A sure sign that these stories (Uranium One and the DNC/HRC funding of the dossier) have legs: multiple articles are beginning to appear with "Here's What You Need To Know About..." headlines.
Here's What You Need To Know About..." headlines.
Which is just a way to say ignore all of the inconvenient stuff.
Tim in vermont:
That is battlefield preparation.
Yes that was my point...the reason for those stories is transparent. "Here's what you need to know" actually means "Here's what we want you to know, and not get curious about this other stuff we're not going to mention."
Battlefield preparation only makes sense when further fights are expected.
The Tuesday night news dump is self-evidently an act of self-defense.
So what? I don’t care who paid for the opposition Research, whether it be a Republican or a Democrat candidate or the DNC. I recall when there were many here who were praising Russia and WIKI leaks for doing “oppo research” on Clinton. Whoeve4 paid for the research means very little. What is is the Dossier is far more important and no one has proven that it’s a fake. If the FBI eventually paid for the research, oh well they pay spies all the time, now don’t they? You people going ape shit over this story is funny and sad.
Eaglebeak
The thing is, the Democrats need the whole party gone. Not sure how they will accomplish this.
Also, it's hard lines on the Never Trumpers because as all of this and Uranium One and the whole hideous mess comes out, Trump will look better and better, and won't be under quite so much insane pressure from the press and the Dems screaming at the sky about him.
Does any newscaster want to hurl invective at him now for saying the FBI surveilled him?
Finally--interesting note--Bill Browder, who testified that Fusion GPS worked for Putin too, finds he can't get into the U.S. all of a sudden! (He's a British citizen.)
“Finally--interesting note--Bill Browder, who testified that Fusion GPS worked for Putin too, finds he can't get into the U.S. all of a sudden! (He's a British citizen.)”
Yes, this is interesting and doesn’t look good for Trump. Why would Browder be prevented from traveling to the US? It’s Russia who hates him.
"Whoeve4 paid for the research means very little."
Oh, come on Inga. What matters is Clinton, the DNC, and the FBI were paying the Russians!. Your Russian fantasies are crumbling. Not only are the months of democrat efforts coming up a dry hole, they are backfiring.
Original Mike,
And don't forget that the FBI likely used the dossier - full of lies made up for political partisans - to surveil Trump and his associates. The FBI was weaponized for partisan political purposes and more than likely (institutionally, at least) lied to a federal judge to get unwarranted warrants.
UnknownInga64 probably has a daughter who did wet work for a foreign intelligence service so she has absolute moral authority to explain why this is totes legit.
"Chuck @ 10.24.17 7:44pm" states the following:
"And I don't think you'll find any "collusion" exposees at National Review or the Weekly Standard or the Wall Street Journal. The people whom I admire and trust in political writing haven't said much of anything about the Russia investigation, and what they have said is that they are underwhelmed."
LOL! Chuck you are either ignorant or a propagandists! The reason you don't see these crappy writers from "National Review.......", et.al. state such, is because if they did, President Trump would further solidigy his past claims. These crappy so-called "Neo-Cons" would lose their leverage of criticizer if they agreed with this narrative.
"
Yes, this is interesting and doesn’t look good for Trump. Why would Browder be prevented from traveling to the US? It’s Russia who hates him. "
Straightened up the same day, Russia had gotten him onto an Interpol wanted list. Facts are nothing to Unknown.
Unknown screams at the sky.
Does no one remember Teapot Dome?
"What is is the Dossier is far more important and no one has proven that it’s a fake."
-- Actually, one of the reasons it was ignored initially is that several simple to check facts (such as statements about so-and-so being in such-and-such a place on this date) were factually wrong. On multiple accounts.
There is no reason to believe it is true. The burden is on the people who believe it is true to prove it -- especially as it is mortally wounded since it: Is a document purpose driven to find flaws, paid for by people who wanted to find flaws, and is factually wrong on multiple cases.
"Telling that Inga has abandoned the field of rhetorical battle this evening."
She's outside screaming at the sky.
When it settles down, she'll be here to repeat each and every distraction already thrown out.
Old news. Republican primary person really behind it all.
Still doesn't change the fact the Russians hacked the election.
It's all so tedious, predictable and dishonest.
In other words, typical.
Get back to me when the bodies hit the floor.
Comey making like a curtain makes more and more sense over time.
Post a Comment