Althouse: "Was it some rigging of facts? Was it some forgery of facts?... Any false information planted? No. It wasn't."

July 17, 2018

"Was it some rigging of facts? Was it some forgery of facts?... Any false information planted? No. It wasn't."

"They hacked a certain email account and there was information about manipulations conducted within the Democratic Party to incline the process in favor of one candidate. And as far as I know, the entire party leadership resigned. That manipulation is where public opinion should stop, and an apology should be made to the public at large instead of looking for the responsible – the party at fault."

Said Vladimir Putin (in an interview with Chris Wallace).

ADDED: The whole interview:

86 comments:

rhhardin said...: Russia's advantage here is that they don't have soap opera women driving the news by being the eyeballs sold to advertisers.; 7/17/18, 7:46 AM
rhhardin said...: Putin handles Russian's soap opera women by taking his shirt off and wrestling bears.; 7/17/18, 7:47 AM
rhhardin said...: Potato in every pot.; 7/17/18, 7:48 AM
Matt Sablan said...: Did anyone think Putin's answer would be different?; 7/17/18, 7:58 AM
Michael K said...: He one small advantage. The facts are on his side about the "hacking."

Of course, that does not matter to the US left.; 7/17/18, 7:59 AM
chickelit said...: Chris Wallace looks ridiculous, demanding that Putin examine foreign language document on his terms. Wallace treats report like smoking gun. Putin sees through ruse.; 7/17/18, 8:00 AM
Ralph L said...: Are they pushing us to war with Russia because they're pissed the Clinton DNC schemes were exposed? No one puts Pantsuit in a corner. Or is it all a club to beat Trump with?; 7/17/18, 8:03 AM
chickelit said...: I get same vibe from Putin at moment of document handoff that Bush II gave when Al Gore hovered in his face. Wallace was being imperious.; 7/17/18, 8:03 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: I cannot stand to look at or listen to Chris Wallace. The smug just oozes out of him and contaminates my television. He is rude. Interrupts and does NOT listen to his interviewee because he is too focused on himself and scoring points. Smug and much too full of himself. He is a hack. An untalented hack. It is never an interview with him where you might learn something from and about the interviewee. It is a grilling.

Chris Wallace is an ass.

Other than that Putin handled him like a boss.; 7/17/18, 8:15 AM
pacwest said...: Wallace handing him the documents and telling him to peruse them was pure theater. It was a Wallace 'look at me, I'm doing the job of the American people that our President won't do I'm such a great newsman'. Like Putin was going to look them over and comment on them. Transparently pathetic.; 7/17/18, 8:15 AM
DanTheMan said...: Russian joke:
Q: What one potato say to other potato?
A: Ridiculous! Nobody have two potato!; 7/17/18, 8:16 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: What ever happened to the Debbie Wasserman Shcultz IT guy Imran Awan scandal? Story removed from the public like John Edwards.; 7/17/18, 8:19 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: American media is all about the "gottcha" - no intellectual curiosity at all.

Hacks, all.; 7/17/18, 8:20 AM
Levi Starks said...: I would recommend that Chris re listen to Obama’s 5 minute anti Trump tirade on the eve of the election where he lectures the certain to lose Trump on how for over 200 years the loser gracefully accepts defeat, and the nation moves on.
If Putin wanted to really troll the US media he’d talk about how much he respects Hilary, and how he really looked forward to working with her.; 7/17/18, 8:21 AM
mccullough said...: Putin is funny. He points out this wasn’t a disinformation effort. The implication is that Russia, like the US, is about disinformation and that you can hardly blame Russia for putting out truthful information.; 7/17/18, 8:23 AM
MadisonMan said...: Wallace was being imperious

What about Dingell-Norwood?

Would've been great if Putin had said that.; 7/17/18, 8:23 AM
M Jordan said...: Dang it’s hard not to like Putin. He totally owned the angry chipmunk known as Chris Wallace throughout the interview but when he rejected the IMPORTANT: MUELLER INDICTMENT docs, I laughed out loud. That was special.; 7/17/18, 8:25 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: What were the embarrassing e-mails that tricked us into disliking wonderful Hillary?; 7/17/18, 8:26 AM
Michael K said...: So much for the myth of the secret meeting with Trump.

Obviously translators and staff were there. Probably quite limited because of the number of leakers around DC>; 7/17/18, 8:27 AM
Koot Katmandu said...: He said a lot more than that. Of course that does not justify the hacking. But like it or not that was a true statement. I find it Ironic that the left idolize Snowden and Manning leaking out secrets yet despise Russia. One would think our Bernie brothers would be pretty pissed at Hillary and DNC for rigging the Primary.

Wallace came across as much of lying hack as Putin. Indictment are charges yet he acted like its proof, the UN said this..who believes the UN anymore. Crowdstrike was started by a former FBI employee. I have seen enough recently to change my view on the FBI. I use to think they were professional and did good work. Now I have zero faith in them. Hillary was not charged totally political, the IC investigation into Trump looks real political. The continued stonewalling of documents. The timed releases, like the indictments on Russians just before the Summit.

I really pains me to say it, but Putin seems just as reliable as our FBI, DOJ. Look at shrill tweets from former Obama admin officials this morning. They are the ones that started the investigation and did not look at the server. Putin may be a bad guy but it sure looks like we have a lot of black hats on our side too.; 7/17/18, 8:28 AM
Sebastian said...: "you can hardly blame Russia for putting out truthful information."

He's humorously calling BS on the Dem theory: that the Russians "interfered" by telling the truth, and that the truth hurt Hill.

"Russia meddled by exposing who we really are. No fair!"

Both here and in the press conference, Putin shows himself to be an utterly rational actor. Ruthless and nasty, of course, but with a definite purpose and all the requisite skills.

Wallace should have asked him about the Malaysian airliner shot down with a Russian missile.; 7/17/18, 8:28 AM
Balfegor said...: I'm sure the Russians aren't above forging documents -- the Communists were famous for it, after all. They just didn't need to this time. Frankly, if the Democrats who got hacked were just brazen enough to lie about it, it's not like the truth would ever have come out. Brazille tried, but couldn't come right out and lie that her emails had been forged. And no one else, whose emails had been compromised, was willing to come out and claim that their emails had been forged.

On a related note, regarding the fabled piss-tape, I don't find the allegations credible . . . but I'm absolutely certain someone has created a version of it today. If the Russian government needed to "authenticate" a fake piss-tape for blackmail purposes, they could just have the hotel manager verify it, and find a couple prostitutes willing to say it was real. It would be really cheap, and I don't think they'd encounter much skepticism in the US.

On a third note, the most recent Russian indictment seems -- unlike the meaningless indictments of a bunch of foreign government hackers for being good at their jobs -- actually seems like the kind of thing that should be public. Good chilling effect on foreign civilians who want to participate actively in American politics.; 7/17/18, 8:29 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: I will care about what I hear from our own DOJ and intelligence depts only after someone from the Democrat Deep State goes to jail for breaking our laws.

I.E. Hillary, Strzok, Anwan brothers, Lisa Page, Comey, McCabe, Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, Lois Lerner, Clinton Founadtion, etc. Need I go on.; 7/17/18, 8:30 AM
wwww said...: Splitting the USA from the Western Alliance to own the libs.

Gunnar Wiegland @WiegandEU

It’s done! The largest bilateral free trade area ever, the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) and the Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA) have just been signed at Tokyo summit. Our relations enter new era, have never been stronger between likeminded EU and Japan.; 7/17/18, 8:33 AM
Balfegor said...: Re: Koot Katmandu:

I really pains me to say it, but Putin seems just as reliable as our FBI, DOJ. Look at shrill tweets from former Obama admin officials this morning. They are the ones that started the investigation and did not look at the server. Putin may be a bad guy but it sure looks like we have a lot of black hats on our side too.

I, uh, I hope we have. It would be absurd if we weren't at least competitive with the Russians and other foreign security services when it comes to interfering in foreign political systems. There's a lot of public instances of our interfering in the domestic politics of foreign countries (note that the Wikipedia author seems to be biased against the US -- the characterisation of our involvement in South Korea in particular is slanted heavily to the Left). But a lot of that is expensive and violent stuff. One would hope that we have the skills to influence foreign public opinion in more subtle, peaceable ways.; 7/17/18, 8:35 AM
Darkisland said...: $400 million from Russia via a Brit of questionable background (Browder) to Crooked Hillary.

Crickets.

John Henry; 7/17/18, 8:36 AM
Oso Negro said...: @Balfegor - I have always hoped the piss tape was real. It shows such panache in perversity.; 7/17/18, 8:43 AM
exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...: What all this comes down to is an absolute refusal on the part of the Left to admit that half the country looked at Hillary and the Dem agenda, didn't like what they saw and made an entirely rational decision to reject them and take a chance with Trump. They went into shock and then into permanent tantrum mode after the election.

The very thought that some Russian FB ads flipped the election is absurd, given Hillary's weakness as a candidate.

While I enjoy watching the wails of pussy-hatted protesters as much as anybody, the determination of the DC swamp to bring down Trump is truly frightening. The ones screaming "treason!" the loudest are the ones working hardest to destroy, not only Trump, but anybody associated with him - and damn the consequences to the country.; 7/17/18, 8:47 AM
chickelit said...: What irks me as a lifelong midwestern rube is the way the coastal politicians and press put on their shocked face, demanding knee jerk condemnation of anything Russian. This gets to the observation above of how the Left are acting like Birchers now. Why is that?

Van Jones did a stunning interview of a family practically the day after the 2016 election. The Trump support shocked him. One obvious way to get political support from a class of people who felt abandoned is to play be old rules (like the Russian card). This was supposed to work, dammit. The Folk are supposed to rally around the son of thee Mike Wallace when he speaks truth to power. Meade was right when he said the ‘50’s called and want their Cold War policy back.; 7/17/18, 8:49 AM
Balfegor said...: RE: wwww:

It’s done! The largest bilateral free trade area ever, the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) and the Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA) have just been signed at Tokyo summit. Our relations enter new era, have never been stronger between likeminded EU and Japan.

A positive development. The EU has been more protectionist than Trump on products like agriculture and automobiles, so their agreeing to drop tariffs externally is actually quite a big shift in direction. The Korea-EU FTA a few years ago was also significant in reversing European protectionism, although obviously Korea is a much smaller economy than Japan. I guess the Europeans were ultimately okay with how the Korea FTA turned out.; 7/17/18, 8:49 AM
chickelit said...: Wwww wrote: “ Our relations enter new era, have never been stronger between likeminded EU and Japan.”

What fresh Axis of hell is this?; 7/17/18, 8:53 AM
Wince said...: Why are these same people not similarly outraged over China’s theft of millions of OPM personnel records, etc?

But the private email of a political hack like John Podesta is sacrosanct?; 7/17/18, 8:54 AM
wwww said...: A positive development.

Agreed. Positive for the western & liberal alliance and free trade. 1/3 of world economy.

But does not include the USA. :(; 7/17/18, 8:56 AM
grackle said...: The Federalist: He had an opportunity to punch back at a bully and he didn’t take it.

No. A failed metaphor. Punching “back” isn’t possible if you weren’t punched in the first place.

What Trump did was defend Putin. That is what is unforgivable (to some). Putin is the Great Devil, and like America by the mullahs in Iran, must only be denounced if spoken about at all. The fact that America has alliances and friendly relationships all over the world with unsavory regimes (mainly out of necessity, I would contend) is conveniently ignored.

Trump’s understandable (to me) frustration about the obvious lawlessness by Hillary and her Deep State protectors’ apparent ability to make the relevant material evidence to vanish, or perhaps be hidden within the confines of the Deep State or (my guess) to be destroyed, was openly displayed - another hysteria igniter. Hillary must be protected because Obama. And Trump must be deposed at all cost because Obama.

I remember when Trump was roundly condemned for claiming Obama spied on his campaign. Since then we’ve learned of at least two spies, George Papadopoulos and Stefan Halper.

Assorted nitwits, nincompoops and posers in Congress will weigh in. Paul Ryan, always happy to do so when the opportunity presents itself, leads the moist panties parade.

Let me be clear. I do not trust the CIA, FBI or the DoJ in regards to anything that even remotely concerns Trump. In my viewpoint Trump has good reason to doubt them.; 7/17/18, 9:01 AM
Paul said...: Actually everything the exposed about Hillary was true. Sure it might have come from Russia but it was true.

And that is what pisses off Hillary and the DNC most.; 7/17/18, 9:04 AM
Dude1394 said...: Who is more likely to illegally do me and now my country harm, Russia or the fbi/Doj? Hint, it’s not Russia.; 7/17/18, 9:20 AM
Ralph L said...: If Obama had said the same things as Trump, the media would have praised his subtle public diplomacy and firmness in private.; 7/17/18, 9:20 AM
Balfegor said...: Re: wwww:

No, I think it's quite positive for the US as well. One of the things Trump is reacting against is, in fact, unprincipled European protectionism (e.g. the 10% tariff on automobiles), so to the extent European industries (or more to the point -- European workers) become comfortable facing international competition, that's ultimately going to work to our benefit, since the US, by and large, doesn't have significant tariffs.

There's a handful of weird exceptions, like the truck tariffs of 25%, which were imposed in retaliation against European tariffs on US chicken. I think the people tasked with promoting trade agreements in the US (e.g. TPP, or the Korea-US FTA), repeatedly fail to point out that we're usually giving up a lot less than the other side is, since we didn't have significant tariffs in the first place. E.g. in the KORUS FTA, we had 2.5% on automobiles, and Korea had 8%. It's not really symmetrical. But the people promoting these agreements may be calculating that if people really understood how low/nonexistent our tariffs are, there would be a popular reaction against all FTAs and in favour of increasing tariffs instead.

Nowadays, the President is trying to use "national security" tariffs to create leverage in trade negotiations. He's obviously not a committed free trader, but a big part of what seems to set him off (apart from the trade deficits themselves) is the asymmetry, where the US has low barriers and our trading partners have high barriers. Obviously, those barriers lowering for Japan and not the US is better for Japan than for us, but if it signals continuing weakening in EU protectionism, then long-term, that's good for the US too.

All that said, I'm looking forward to seeing what happens to the cheese and wine selections in Japan. I don't buy a lot, but I have noticed it's generally more expensive than in the US, presumeably due to Japanese tariffs on those imports.; 7/17/18, 9:20 AM
narciso said...: There was Greenberg as well, the long time bratva moneyman, I suspect he is mogilich (the big boss, aluded to in mcmafia) dangle to get rid of the competition.; 7/17/18, 9:27 AM
Fernandinande said...: De facto doppelgänger Vladimir Putin's sotto voce cri de cœur vis-à-vis the vox populi - cui bono?; 7/17/18, 9:34 AM
Chuck said...: Russian intelligence, as "investigative reporters." So comforting.

I really, really like Chris Wallace. He's one of the handful of people whom I really like at FNC. (Brett Baier, Brit Hume, among several others.)

But I really thought this Putin interview was overrated. Why would Chris Wallace expect Putin, a Russian national with rudimentary English skills, be able to read, comprehend and respond to the details of 37-page indictment in the midst of a short interview? Maybe, Chris had a list of dandy questions if Putin did take it; names of specific individuals, etc.

But I thought that the stunt mostly failed.; 7/17/18, 9:35 AM
Big Mike said...: Putin missed a lovely opportunity to tell Chris Wallace that the candidate they did have dirt on was Hillary Clinton, that she illegally accepted vast amounts of Russian campaign contributions, and he’s pissed because he has nothing to show for it. Now that would have set the cat among the chicken(shit)s. Folks like Mueller, Brennan, and Clapper are clearly doing work these days that must delight Vlad Putin. It makes me wonder whether this is a new thing, or does it predate their respective retirements from the intelligence community?

FWIW I understand that attempts were made to penetrate the RNC, but were easily swatted aside.; 7/17/18, 9:35 AM
Chuck said...: Michael K said...
So much for the myth of the secret meeting with Trump.

Obviously translators and staff were there. Probably quite limited because of the number of leakers around DC>

It wasn't a "secret" meeting at all. And all along, I thought it was expected and a given that translators would be present.

A straight question; Why does anyone think that "staff were [also] there"?; 7/17/18, 9:38 AM
tcrosse said...: De facto doppelgänger Vladimir Putin's sotto voce cri de cœur vis-à-vis the vox populi - cui bono?

¿Quién sabe?; 7/17/18, 9:46 AM
exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...: "What irks me as a lifelong midwestern rube is the way the coastal politicians and press put on their shocked face, demanding knee jerk condemnation of anything Russian. This gets to the observation above of how the Left are acting like Birchers now. Why is that?"

Similiarly, in the '60's, leftists were free speech advocates. It turns out they wanted free speech only for themselves. They also championed the white blue collar class, the people they hate and despise today.

The left argues for whatever benefits them at a particular moment. Being anti-Russian, pro-Russian, pro-blue collar "little guy," pro-identity politics - there is no there there. Whatever increases their power is what they believe in at the moment. The only thing that matters in the end is the expansion of the state. Trump threatens their power and therefore they want to destroy him.; 7/17/18, 9:47 AM
Michael K said...: Why does anyone think that "staff were [also] there"?

Because it's normal ?

I made the point that there were probably only a few since leaking is the DC daily news.; 7/17/18, 9:49 AM
Martin said...: Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that everything Mueller alleges in the two indictments of Russians for hacking and election interference is true.

There is no substantial allegation of anything remotely like "collusion" or conspiracy to commit a crime on the part of the Trump campaign.

But there should be massive questions about why the Obama Administration, from the President on down, ignored and denied and made light of all this information of which they were aware at the time. The Democratic Party and the government were aware of Russian hacking and penetration of DCCC and DNC computer systems by the summer of 2016, but chose to do nothing except try to entrap Trump campaign people, even as the DNC did not make its compromised systems available to the FBI for forensic analysis. THAT should be the scandal.; 7/17/18, 10:01 AM
narciso said...: Also graduates of bala shita (their versionof the farm) are very good at statecraft, why would they need bitcoin Kremlin is short of walking around money, it would be routed through the dark web.; 7/17/18, 10:04 AM
Martin said...: I will also note that the Democrats horror at Russia will not have any impact because too many of us were alive in the period 1972-2016 and saw that the national Democratic Party (with a few exceptions who were winnowed out as time passed) didn't give a rat's ass about national security when it came to the USSR or, post 1991, Russia. Obama's hot mike comment to Medvedev and his put-down of Romney in 2012 were typical. Hell, Ted Kennedy tried to do a deal with Andropov to bias the 1984 election in return for him helping the USSR sell itself to Americans. But that just goes down the memory hole.

And now I am supposed to believe that the Democrats are outraged over Russia threatening our national security? Really? After 40+ years of the contrary?; 7/17/18, 10:08 AM
tommyesq said...: Foreign government-connected meddling from Christopher Steele using made-up stuff - wonderful! Foreign non-government-connected meddling from Russian hackers using actual e-mails from DNC - off with their heads!!; 7/17/18, 10:09 AM
JHapp said...: I would like to know if Putin is an investor in CrowdStrike.; 7/17/18, 10:10 AM
Chuck said...: Michael K said...
"Why does anyone think that 'staff were [also] there'?"

Because it's normal ?

I made the point that there were probably only a few since leaking is the DC daily news.

Yes; both points I addressed yesterday. It would be "normal" to have some staff there, even for a private, informal meeting. It would be "abnormal" almost beyond belief, if there had been no one there apart from two translators. It would be "abnormal" in a particularly acute way since the CIA actually has some rules as I understand it against our agents ever having any meetings with Russian counterparts unless we have two agents present.

And yes, Trump might well be concerned about leaks in his remarkably leaky White House operation which of course is running like a fine-tuned machine. But if Trump doesn't have a couple of staff he can trust enough to do a private meeting with Putin, that is pretty sick.

My question is simple and straightforward. It is not rhetorical; I do not know the answer. Did Putin and Trump meet alone with only a translator or two present?

Yesterday, I presumed that that was what was happening because that is what was reported to be planned. Now, after the fact, we should be able to know. Is that what happened?; 7/17/18, 10:13 AM
grackle said...: A viewpoint similar to mine but much better written:

Suppose Trump had done the opposite, exactly what these people demanded -- verbally and viciously assaulted Putin for all his totalitarian tropes from annexing the Crimea to humiliating John Podesta for being so dumb as to fall for a phishing attack (all right -- I'll be fair. For invading the computers of Democratic Party operatives, allegedly to elect Trump) and so forth?

What would that have accomplished? The obvious answer is zilch. Again the opposite would most likely have occurred. Things, already bad, would have been set back further. It's human nature. You don't have to be a personal acquaintance of Vladimir Putin to know that. You only have to be breathing.

But... but... then Trump shouldn't have held the summit in the first place.

Oh, really? Although Russia -- the largest nation on the planet -- is in many ways a failing state with an economy barely the size of Texas, it still has a huge percentage of the world's nuclear weapons, about equal with ours, and the capacity to deliver them (and to pass them along to unreliable non-state actors). It behooves us to have a relationship with them for our survival and everybody else's, to keep our friends close and our enemies closer, as the Godfather would put it. The obvious goal in this is to limit nuclear proliferation and even to reduce, or at least stabilize, the nuclear arsenals as agreements come up for renewal.

Flashbacks are a bitch. Here's a couple where Putin hopes Obama will win re-election in 2012 and Obama praises Putin. Every administration has tried to improve relationships with Russia but it becomes treason when it’s done by Trump.; 7/17/18, 10:21 AM
Bill, Republic of Texas said...: Didn't Reagan and Gorbachev go off alone to discuss nuclear arms reductions. Something like a walk by the lake.

I'm not sure why I remember that.

Googling. . .; 7/17/18, 10:34 AM
Michael K said...: But if Trump doesn't have a couple of staff he can trust enough to do a private meeting with Putin, that is pretty sick.

Yes, with enemies like you, he probably has few he can trust right now, other than those doing other critical jobs.; 7/17/18, 10:36 AM
Bill, Republic of Texas said...: It would be "abnormal" almost beyond belief, if there had been no one there apart from two translators.

Wrong.

Politico:

For the first time in six years, on this day in 1985, the leaders of the United States and the Soviet Union held a summit conference, which took place in Geneva. President Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, the general secretary of the Soviet Communist Party, began their talks with an hourlong exchange of views at Fleur d'Eau, a lakeside chateau owned by the Aga Khan.

After the official photographers had left the room, the two leaders, who had never met, sat in cream-colored leather armchairs before a roaring fireplace; their interpreters were the only other persons present.; 7/17/18, 10:37 AM
Bill, Republic of Texas said...: LA Times:

GENEVA — President Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev today convened the first superpower summit in six years but cut short the formal talks, instead opting for private discussions during a surprise walk along Lake Geneva and inside a lakeside pool house.; 7/17/18, 10:40 AM
Chuck said...: Bill, Republic of Texas said...
It would be "abnormal" almost beyond belief, if there had been no one there apart from two translators.

Wrong.

Politico:

For the first time in six years, on this day in 1985, the leaders of the United States and the Soviet Union held a summit conference, which took place in Geneva. President Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, the general secretary of the Soviet Communist Party, began their talks with an hourlong exchange of views at Fleur d'Eau, a lakeside chateau owned by the Aga Khan.

After the official photographers had left the room, the two leaders, who had never met, sat in cream-colored leather armchairs before a roaring fireplace; their interpreters were the only other persons present.

Alright; so -- bad news for Michael K too I suppose -- it is "normal" to meet alone. Of course, Trump and Putin had already met. So this really wasn't any sort of get-to-know-each-other event. With Reagan and Gorbachev, we do sort of know what the gist of the conversation was. Reagan was a guy who, for instance, was willing to release his tax returns. There was no chance, that Reagan might have gotten a half-billion dollars in loans from Russian oligarchs to fund golf course developments in Scotland.

I still don't know if what Trump and Putin did, was to meet with just translators present. I started this with a straightforward question on what actually happened.; 7/17/18, 10:50 AM
Quayle said...: Putin isn’t the problem. The age-old warning isn’t to beware of wolves in wolves clothing. Christ presumed we would be able to handle that one. I’m worried about the ones around us who are appearing or attempting to appear to be gentle lambs, that absolutely aren’t.; 7/17/18, 10:59 AM
MikeR said...: Usual suspects are furious. Usual suspects meaning, the In-group among both Republicans and Democrats. Obviously they favor the current establishment, which includes the intelligence community. They are furious because Mr. Trump views that establishment and that community as a center of resistance and rebellion against him, and says so.
Well, I have news for them. A whole lot of us ordinary Americans doesn't trust them any more either. They have done little to inspire trust recently.
Deal with it.; 7/17/18, 11:07 AM
bagoh20 said...: The Russians mostly want to sow discourse and distrust in our political system to weaken us as a unified competitor. A lot of people are helping them greatly to do that. You could say they are "colluding". Trump hate is exactly what the Russians want and they are getting a buffet from the media and the Democrats. Trump can't do anything about that, becuase everything he does makes them hate more - even things that are good for the country, which makes them hate the most.

Imagine if Trump did what the critics are demanding. Would that have made the future with Russia better or worse. Answer: they don't care. The hysterical critics are serving Putin's interests far more than Trump is. Very little advanced or sophisticated thinking is being employed, except by Trump and Putin. Unfortunately, only Putin has his country on his side.; 7/17/18, 11:09 AM
PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...: Blogger Martin said...

Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that everything Mueller alleges in the two indictments of Russians for hacking and election interference is true.

You mean like the Concord group (Name? the ones previously indicted) actually putting 3 terabytes of RUSSIAN LANGUAGE posts on social media?

Yeah, let's say they did that. And so?

Do you think they did it to influence Americans? They would have to be pretty stupid to think Americans would read and understand it.

Do you think any Americans ever saw it? If any did, even fewer, pretty close to zero, Americans would have had any idea what it was. Just Russian language spam.

And how does Mueller even know that the 3TB of postings was harmful? As he said, in court, they have not translated it and do not know what it says.

John Henry; 7/17/18, 11:10 AM
PM said...: When he fought with Kim, it was 'Move up the Doomsday Clock! When he made nice, it was He wants a Peace Prize. Guy can't win. I suppose he could've grandstanded with Vlad. That would've been cool. Maybe Angela said Hey, don't fuck up my natural gas deliveries.; 7/17/18, 11:12 AM
Michael K said...: chuck is upset that Trump got LOANS from Russians.

Hillary got fees. Know the difference chuck?

Loans are paid back.; 7/17/18, 11:12 AM
tcrosse said...: Loans are paid back.

I suggest that the fees entailed some sort of payback, as well.; 7/17/18, 11:14 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Chuck:
I think Trump agreed to send $1.4 Billion cash on pallets to Putin in exchange for not a f-ing thing. You know like Obama did for Iran mullahs and like Sen. Corker facilitated with his non-treaty treaty crap.; 7/17/18, 11:41 AM
Balfegor said...: Re: Teller:

When he fought with Kim, it was 'Move up the Doomsday Clock! When he made nice, it was He wants a Peace Prize. Guy can't win. I suppose he could've grandstanded with Vlad.

The hilarious thing is how ex-Obama admin bureaucrats are contorting themselves into knots to present a whiny "cut it out!" as though it were the neplusultra of pushback against Russian cyber aggression. I was in an Uber the other day and the driver was listening to some program where an ex-Ambassador literally sounded hysterical talking about Helsinki, like his voice was going to crack. But of course, there were measures being developed, and for reasons that still remain obscure to me, the Obama administration decided not to pursue any of them. Counter-hacking Russian institutions would seem to me to be a lot more meaningful than ginning up a handful of mostly symbolic indictments, but well, I suppose that's why I'm not a diplomat or a counter-intelligence specialist at the FBI.; 7/17/18, 11:42 AM
Balfegor said...: Re: Michael K:

Loans are paid back.

Well, not always. I've seen situations where "loans" are basically just payoffs that remain outstanding indefinitely, but are accounted for as loans for various reasons. That said, I don't think there's actually any evidence for the speculation about Russian loans to Trump. It seems like it's mostly free-association wishful thinking by reporters, amplified by people who hate and fear Trump.; 7/17/18, 11:47 AM
Chuck said...: Michael K said...
chuck is upset that Trump got LOANS from Russians.

Hillary got fees. Know the difference chuck?

Loans are paid back.

Lotsa loans to Donald J. Trump never get paid back; we know that.

No matter what; Trump has said that he's not gotten any loans from Russia, and Eric seems to have stepped on his dick when he told James Dodson that the Trump organization no longer uses American banks but instead gets all the funding that they need from Russian banks. Dodson quoted him, and then Eric quickly denied it.

So even legal loans from Russians and Russian banks are a problem for Trump. Because he said he's never gotten them.; 7/17/18, 11:51 AM
Michael K said...: I don't much care about Trump's business before 2015. There is no way Putin saw him as anything other than a businessman and Russia was interested in business.

Hillary, on the other hand, had something to sell and it was not business.; 7/17/18, 11:51 AM
Michael K said...: chuck is like the guy hanging out at the whorehouse, hoping he'll get a freebie some day.

chuck, I don't think you will ever find that magic button that will make Trump go away,; 7/17/18, 11:53 AM
Balfegor said...: Re: Chuck:

No matter what; Trump has said that he's not gotten any loans from Russia, and Eric seems to have stepped on his dick when he told James Dodson that the Trump organization no longer uses American banks but instead gets all the funding that they need from Russian banks. Dodson quoted him, and then Eric quickly denied it.

Eh, what? We know the Trump Organisation runs on loans from Deutsche Bank. DB isn't a Russian bank.; 7/17/18, 11:57 AM
Qwinn said...: I think the Left always felt a little guilty about defending Soviet and Russian malfeasance for 80 continuous years. Well, maybe not guilt, that's hard to have when you have literally zero sense of shame... let's say embarrassed. It had to be awkward dismissing gulags as no big deal as long as it gets us to socialist utopia.

So when the marching orders went out to suddenly, on a dime, with zero explanation, turn around from carrying water for every atrocity ever committed by the Russians to deeming them the evilest of all Evil Empires... imagine the sense of relief they must have felt. The fact that they characterized conservatives as lunatics and crazy for treating the Russians as a threat for those 80 years, even if much less hysterically than the Left is pretending to today... no, that doesn't require any apology or explanation or acknowledgment at all, why do you ask?; 7/17/18, 12:03 PM
Cassandra said...: This whole thing makes one long for the good old days when Wikileaks was the Ultimate Defender of Truth, Chelsea Manning was a Shero, and the Obama admin didn't want to make a fuss over repeated Russian hacking because doing so might sow discord and erode our faith in the electoral process.; 7/17/18, 12:10 PM
Drago said...: Poor LLR Chuck.

So many of his MSNBC-infused lefty talking points keep falling flat and have no effect on the polls.

For LLR Chucks lefty team that can be an astonishingly difficult thing to deal with.

Just look at how ridiculous 2 if LLR Chucks favorite hero dems, Durbin and Stolen Valor Blumenthal, are beclowning themselves left and right after LLR defended them strongly.

Its not a good look....

LOL; 7/17/18, 12:24 PM
Drago said...: Balfegor: "We know the Trump Organisation runs on loans from Deutsche Bank. DB isn't a Russian bank."

But its all "foreign" sounding so it serves the lefties and their house-pet LLR operational allies purposes.; 7/17/18, 12:26 PM
Yancey Ward said...: Chuck continues to make himself the fool.

Presidents meet privately with other heads of state all the time- both those that friendly and those that are rivalrous. If they don't speak a common language, it is usually the case that each has an interpreter. These are not really staff- in such instances the interpreters are strictly to consider themselves non-participants- in other words, it is an unforgivable act of non-professionalism to ever discuss the contents of the meeting with anyone else. It would be like Chuck talking to a newspaper about his conversations with a client.

In yesterday's summit, this is what happened- Trump and Putin met privately with interpreters present. Now Putin can speak English- I have seen him do it, and take questions in English, but those were in situations where accuracy was time were less an issue. I can sit down and have a conversation over a beer in German, but I wouldn't want to have to do a press conference or an important meeting in the language because I can only understand about 30-50% of what someone is actually saying- the rest I can get by inference or by simply asking for a restatement.

I realize that you keep wanting to make something out of it being a private meeting, so that is why you ask your "non-rhetorical" and "honest" questions. Just accept the answer about the practice itself- it happens and yesterday was nothing unusual.; 7/17/18, 12:46 PM
Balfegor said...: Re: Qwinn:

So when the marching orders went out to suddenly, on a dime, with zero explanation, turn around from carrying water for every atrocity ever committed by the Russians to deeming them the evilest of all Evil Empires... imagine the sense of relief they must have felt.

Haha, it's like Stalin's useful idiots in the run-up to World War II. When the Communists and the Nazis are jointly invading Poland and carving up East Europe between them, the American Communists are fervently anti-war and anti-interventionist. But two years later, as soon as the villains turn on each other and the Nazis invade Russia, they promptly switch to the new party line, which is pro-war and pro-interventionist.

In fairness, though, you could see Obama realising, around 2014 that he had made a huge mistake. In 2014, we backed the Maidan uprising to overthrow the lawfully elected government of the Ukraine (one year before the next scheduled election), Russia annexed the Crimea, and we started complaining about that. Then people who were totally not Russian soldiers started fighting a separatist war in the eastern part of the Ukraine, and the US government complained about that too. Ultimately, we gave the Ukraine every support, short of help, but those events in 2014 were still the point where you saw the rhetorical turnaround, from 2012, when Obama was still sucking up to the Russians and making dingbatty cracks about Romney's concerns about Russia, to the present, where Democrats have gone full Bircher.; 7/17/18, 12:55 PM
Jim at said...: Blame Trump because the Clinton Campaign was staffed by idiots and Obama looked the other way.

Makes sense.; 7/17/18, 1:00 PM
Yancey Ward said...: I submit that Obama "realized his error" came when Pussy Riot was arrested. That was when Putin really angered the Left in the US. It suddenly became extremely unpolitically correct to treat Putin with anything other than contempt for a Leftist.; 7/17/18, 1:01 PM
tommyesq said...: Note that, according to the Dems/MSM, the dastardly plot to influence the election and get Trump into office was to obtain and release un-altered Democratic Part communications - the feasibility of the entire plan required that these previously-written e-mails contained damaging stuff. In other words, it was so certain that the Dems were spouting illegal and/or anti-American things in private that simply making their communications publicly accessible would be sufficient to influence the outcome.; 7/17/18, 1:07 PM
cubanbob said...: Putin should have asked Wallace why are you showing me this and asking me about this when you should be asking Obama about this.
Putin should have also told Wallace that Russia doesn't allow government ministers to conduct state business on non-state servers to avoid state supervision. I believe your laws also do not permit that. Please ask Obama about why this occurred.; 7/17/18, 1:11 PM
wwww said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/17/18, 1:31 PM
FullMoon said...: The Russian goal is to sow discord. The left have taken the bait, hook, line,and sinker.

Who is hysterical? The most mis-informed and gullible. Naturally the usual hobby protesters who hate 'something' show up for any protest at all. Now they are joined by the easily duped.

As far as MSM goes, most don't believe the stuff they say. They go along to get along.; 7/17/18, 3:20 PM
Rusty said...: Chuck said...
Michael K said...
"Why does anyone think that 'staff were [also] there'?"

"Because it's normal ?

I made the point that there were probably only a few since leaking is the DC daily news.

Yes; both points I addressed yesterday. It would be "normal" to have some staff there, even for a private, informal meeting. It would be "abnormal" almost beyond belief, if there had been no one there apart from two translators. It would be "abnormal" in a particularly acute way since the CIA actually has some rules as I understand it against our agents ever having any meetings with Russian counterparts unless we have two agents present.

And yes, Trump might well be concerned about leaks in his remarkably leaky White House operation which of course is running like a fine-tuned machine. But if Trump doesn't have a couple of staff he can trust enough to do a private meeting with Putin, that is pretty sick.

My question is simple and straightforward. It is not rhetorical; I do not know the answer. Did Putin and Trump meet alone with only a translator or two present?

Yesterday, I presumed that that was what was happening because that is what was reported to be planned. Now, after the fact, we should be able to know. Is that what happened?"

And my question is even simpler and to the point.
Who killed Seth Rich?; 7/17/18, 6:44 PM
Michael K said...: The Russian goal is to sow discord. The left have taken the bait, hook, line,and sinker.

Putin has to be hugely entertained by the Democrats' freakout.

After all, they like Soros funded some of the BLM agitation.; 7/17/18, 7:23 PM