Congress and the American people deserve answers

[Unregistered]

I must have missed the "evidence" that came out from the Durham report. Where is that report anyway? It's long overdue. It's almost like trump just wants to point to an investigation and lie about what he hopes it will find instead of admitting the truth that there's nothing actually there. Sounds familiar. Burisma, anyone?

With trump it's always the "announcement" of an investigation that matters. It gives him a talking point he can build a bullsh1t narrative around. That was the case with Burisma (verified by multiple witnesses during impeachment) and it's the case with Durham too.

The proof that Durham has nothing is the fact that AG Barr blabbed about it while the investigation was still ongoing. Any lawyer doing that would be removed immediately for tainting the jury. Competent prosecutors always keep a tight lid on an investigation (i.e. Mueller), if they intend to present an actual case.

Nice try by the trumptard to deflect, though. Unfortunately for him, this scandal isn't going away any time soon. And it seems to keep getting worse for trump by the hour.

[Unregistered]

With trump it's always the "announcement" of an investigation that matters. It gives him a talking point he can build a bullsh1t narrative around. That was the case with Burisma (verified by multiple witnesses during impeachment) and it's the case with Durham too.

The proof that Durham has nothing is the fact that AG Barr blabbed about it while the investigation was still ongoing. Any lawyer doing that would be removed immediately for tainting the jury. Competent prosecutors always keep a tight lid on an investigation (i.e. Mueller), if they intend to present an actual case.

Nice try by the trumptard to deflect, though. Unfortunately for him, this scandal isn't going away any time soon. And it seems to keep getting worse for trump by the hour.

Kind of like his "election fraud" committee that couldn't find anything 😄

[Unregistered]

Betrayal

Former U.S Navy SEAL Dr. Dan Barkhuff wants to know if Donald Trump is a coward who can't stand up to Putin or if he's complicit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nytBEWbwOkw

Which is it?

[Unregistered]

Former U.S Navy SEAL Dr. Dan Barkhuff wants to know if Donald Trump is a coward who can't stand up to Putin or if he's complicit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nytBEWbwOkw

Which is it?

his support among military members was already slipping end of 2019. It had gone from well above the general population to equal to general population support. Since then there's been the obvious covid debacles, USS Roosevelt incident, West Point vanity trip, wanting to use troops against US citizens and the fallout from retired military leaders. So in other words it's probably even less

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/p...es-poll-shows/

[Unregistered]

The only people dismissing the Russia bounties intel: The Taliban, Russia and Trump

Even top republicans admit the intelligence report on Russian bounties is accurate:
"Rep. Mike McCaul (R-Tex.), the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, confirmed after a White House briefing that, “There was intelligence reported on the allegation that the Russians were offering a bounty to the Taliban to kill Americans.” He added that there was a “massive scrub within the intelligence community to try to find out the veracity of this reporting.” He has also suggested that it is serious enough that, if accurate, it would warrant “swift and serious action” against Russia."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...-russia-trump/

The only people dismissing this intel are:
1. The Taliban
2. Russia
3. Donald Trump

[Unregistered]

Kind of like his "election fraud" committee that couldn't find anything 😄

Hahaha. This is just another NYT hit piece. No names, anonymous sources, and zero evidence. Just a another boogie man that nobody knows or can verify. Gee where have we seen this before? Let me guess they heard it from a friend who, heard it from a friend who, heard it from another Trump is messing around??? We better impeach him again 🤣

[Unregistered]

Hahaha. This is just another NYT hit piece. No names, anonymous sources, and zero evidence. Just a another boogie man that nobody knows or can verify. Gee where have we seen this before? Let me guess they heard it from a friend who, heard it from a friend who, heard it from another Trump is messing around??? We better impeach him again 🤣

Backed up by every single person except Donnie. He's a liar.

[Unregistered]

Backed up by every single person except Donnie. He's a liar.

Backed up? Really? Who’s the source? When was it verified? Where’s the evidence? Maybe it’s on Schiff’’s mantle next to the Russia collision evidence. 🤣. Another libtard reach!

[Unregistered]

Backed up? Really? Who’s the source? When was it verified? Where’s the evidence? Maybe it’s on Schiff’’s mantle next to the Russia collision evidence. 🤣. Another libtard reach!

Read post #20, comrade. And please try to keep up with the adults.

[Unregistered]

Read post #20, comrade. And please try to keep up with the adults.

Oh look at you, you’re adorable. Like always you’re just a headline reader who doesn’t do there homework. Shall I break it down for you so you can keep up with the informed adults? Let’s see what he said:

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/29/88501...red-to-taliban

MCCAUL: Well, I think the allegations are very serious. And if true, I think we need to take swift and severe action against Putin and his mercenaries. I can tell you that the state of play is very interesting, and this happens from time to time in the intelligence community, where you have a threat of intelligence coming in from, say, a human source, and then you have other parts of the IC examine this. In this case, it - there was a very strong dissenting view on the validity of the intelligence from another agency that I can't name but one of those three-letter agencies. And because of that, typically, when there's not an agreement within the intelligence community and there's a very - divergence and dissenting view, as in this case, what they typically - unless - you know, you can't take action unless you have credible intelligence called actionable intelligence.

MCCAUL: One that believed there was strong evidence and another one with a very strong dissent - and usually what happens in this type of case is the national security adviser will then walk this through the National Security Council and vet the intelligence, as what was done, you know, in this case to go through what's called the inner agency. So they were in the process of really vetting this intelligence because, if true, this would be a strong divergence. I mean, we know that the Russians have been in Afghanistan giving the Taliban funding to, you know, take out ISIS. This would be (ph) the first allegation we've seen against Americans, so it's very significant if true.

MCCAUL: I think there's - it's a bit confused. I think you, again, have one level of intelligence coming from one source and then you've got another from a different type of more technical intelligence that indicates that this is probably not accurate information. And so, again, you can't take action unless you have credible intelligence. I think they were in the middle of going through the process when, all of a sudden, this was leaked out. I don't know.

MCCAUL: No, it was just the chief of staff, national security adviser and the director of national intelligence. They indicated to us that the president had not been briefed on this. They chose not to brief him based upon this - dissenting points of view within the IC, so we don't have a - you know, there's no - usually, they like the information to be verified across the intelligence community.

[Unregistered]

Oh look at you, you’re adorable. Like always you’re just a headline reader who doesn’t do there homework. Shall I break it down for you so you can keep up with the informed adults? Let’s see what he said:

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/29/88501...red-to-taliban

MCCAUL: Well, I think the allegations are very serious. And if true, I think we need to take swift and severe action against Putin and his mercenaries. I can tell you that the state of play is very interesting, and this happens from time to time in the intelligence community, where you have a threat of intelligence coming in from, say, a human source, and then you have other parts of the IC examine this. In this case, it - there was a very strong dissenting view on the validity of the intelligence from another agency that I can't name but one of those three-letter agencies. And because of that, typically, when there's not an agreement within the intelligence community and there's a very - divergence and dissenting view, as in this case, what they typically - unless - you know, you can't take action unless you have credible intelligence called actionable intelligence.

MCCAUL: One that believed there was strong evidence and another one with a very strong dissent - and usually what happens in this type of case is the national security adviser will then walk this through the National Security Council and vet the intelligence, as what was done, you know, in this case to go through what's called the inner agency. So they were in the process of really vetting this intelligence because, if true, this would be a strong divergence. I mean, we know that the Russians have been in Afghanistan giving the Taliban funding to, you know, take out ISIS. This would be (ph) the first allegation we've seen against Americans, so it's very significant if true.

MCCAUL: I think there's - it's a bit confused. I think you, again, have one level of intelligence coming from one source and then you've got another from a different type of more technical intelligence that indicates that this is probably not accurate information. And so, again, you can't take action unless you have credible intelligence. I think they were in the middle of going through the process when, all of a sudden, this was leaked out. I don't know.

MCCAUL: No, it was just the chief of staff, national security adviser and the director of national intelligence. They indicated to us that the president had not been briefed on this. They chose not to brief him based upon this - dissenting points of view within the IC, so we don't have a - you know, there's no - usually, they like the information to be verified across the intelligence community.

Yeah but but what about Helsinki? 😂

[Unregistered]

Oh look at you, you’re adorable. [...].

Thank you for helping to prove my point that nobody except the Taliban, Putin, and Trump are denying that Russia offered (and apparently paid) bounties for the heads of U.S. soldiers. Even the Republicans in congress can't bring themselves to agree with trump that it's a hoax.

Meanwhile, over in reality, sources in the Taliban — two current commanders and one former — have confirmed that Russia pays extremists in Afghanistan to attack US soldiers.
https://www.businessinsider.com/russ...ces-say-2020-7
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/w...middleman.html

Afghan officials said prizes of as much as $100,000 per killed soldier were offered for American and coalition targets.

Yet trump, now fully briefed on the matter, continues to do NOTHING about it.

[Unregistered]

Yeah but but what about Helsinki? 😂

Helsinki and the Russian bounty scandal are two of the most egregious examples of trump putting Russian interests ahead of American interests. There is no innocent explanation for this traitorous behavior.

trump is owned by Putin. Only the most brainwashed trump sycophants refuse to see the truth. 🐑🐑🐑

[Unregistered]

Tre45on

trump receives gratitude from a grateful nation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUBA...ature=youtu.be

[Unregistered]

Helsinki and the Russian bounty scandal are two of the most egregious examples of trump putting Russian interests ahead of American interests. There is no innocent explanation for this traitorous behavior.

trump is owned by Putin. Only the most brainwashed trump sycophants refuse to see the truth. 🐑🐑🐑

You’re right. It is a scandal perpetuated by the hit team at the NYT with their unnamed, unverified source. Your #20 post was destroyed after you attempted to mislead people with a fake story that there was confirmation from McCual when in fact he said there was so much dissension in the intel community over the authenticity of the reports that it was never relayed to Trump. Quite different than the bullshît you’re peddling. Just like the Russia and Ukraine hoaxes, you kinda need little things called proof & evidence to make it true. Once again, there is no proof, verification, or reliable sources. You Libtards should know how these things end without facts. You keep losing. Trump is no more owned by Russia than Biden is owned by China. Just curious, if Helsinki is as egregious as you say, why are you the only one talking about it. 🤔 Must be pretty lonely on Libtard island 🌴