Tags Posts tagged with "Russia ties"

Russia ties

0 139
Robert Mueller
"But, if you fire me, who will continue the witch hunt?"

President Trump seems to get increasingly frustrated with the investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential elections. He recently criticized special counsel Robert Mueller, the man in charge of the investigation, warning that he would be crossing the line by looking into the president’s personal businesses and finances.

According to recent reports, Mueller has now expanded the investigation to include Trump and his associates’ business transactions. The latest development in the long running Russian investigation is sure to further intensify the feud between the president and the authorities.

Mueller is also looking into potential obstruction of justice by President Trump, following his dismissal of Director FBI James Comey, at the peak of the federal agency’s probe into collusion between the Trump campaign and Moscow. It was Trump’s decision to fire Comey that later forced him to appoint Mueller as special counsel in the investigation.

While the president has been calling the investigation a “witch hunt,” Mueller has been recruiting some of the most popular lawyers in the country in the past couple of weeks; however, some of the special counsel’s appointees have faced criticism for being donors to several Democratic candidates.

Robert Mueller, who is also a former FBI Director with a reputation to uphold, was appointed as special counsel in the investigation by the Justice Department in May, following Trump’s dismissal of Comey.

In his role as the special counsel, Mueller has all the authority to investigate Russia’s alleged in the presidential elections and also allegations of the Trump campaign’s collusion with the Kremlin. While Trump is obviously getting frustrated with the direction in which the probe is headed, legal experts say it’s Mueller’s duty to look at the case from all aspects.

“I am totally not surprised that Mueller is following any leads,” said Steven Cash, a renowned DC attorney. “That’s the way all investigations are conducted, particularly into complex relations of business people.”

However, some Republicans believe Trump is right in accusing Mueller of overreaching.

“Mueller crosses ‘red line’ into potentially all of Trump’s billion$ in transactions. We now face a partisan war of investigative attrition,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) tweeted Thursday.

The spotlight seems to have shifted on to Mueller and the ongoing investigation once again, following Trump’s interview with the New York Times, where the president said that it would be a clear “violation” for Mueller to look into his family’s financial transactions. The president, however, declined to comment on the course of action he would take if such a thing happened.

But Trump did suggest that he had compromising information on the special counsel, stressing on the fact that he interviewed him as a potential replacement for Comey in May.

“The next day, he is appointed special counsel. I said, what the hell is this all about? Talk about conflicts? But he was interviewing for the job,” Trump told the Times. “There were many other conflicts that I haven’t said, but I will at some point.”

The president added, “I have done nothing wrong. A special counsel should never have been appointed in this case.”

The remarks have once again raised speculation that Trump could dismiss Mueller, a decision that many Republicans have constantly warned him against.

Member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Republican Senator Marco Rubio (Fla.), while talking to reporters on Thursday, said that “it would be a mistake to fire Bob Mueller,” calling him “a highly credible individual who will do a good job.”

However, President Trump’s lawyer and member of the American Center for Law & Justice, Jay Sekulow, last month hinted that the president could fire Mueller if he thought the investigation was not headed in the right direction.

“The president has authority to take action,” Sekulow said, while talking to ABC News. “Whether he would do it is ultimately a decision the president makes.”

Conversely, some think that Trump’s remarks about Mueller could be used against him as supporting evidence.

“Mueller like any good prosecutor will be looking at tweets, interviews, the Lester Holt interview, other public and private comments as potential admissions that are indicators of the president’s true intent,” said Ron Hosko, assistant director of the FBI under Mueller. “I think [Trump] is really on slippery terrain when he makes these public comments that … if charges were to come, could be potentially used as evidence of his intent.”

“Depending how the rest of the case lines up, it could enhance his risk,” Hosko added.

0 159
Silly Democrats
"And I promise that we will stand here and obstruct every single one of Trump's attempts to make America great again, isn't that right Nancy?"

The democrats continue to show signs of desperation as they file a “no confidence” resolution against President Trump. Rep. Steve Cohen along with few other House Democrats questioned President Trump mental fitness to serve as the commander in chief of the United States.

“President Trump has been President for six months and his probationary period is long over,” Cohen argued. “This resolution sends a clear message to the President that we disapprove of his cumulative actions, that we are simpatico with our constituents and a majority of the America people, and that we have no confidence in his service.”

Talking about Trump’s past experiences, Cohen argues that Trump is a “president that you wouldn’t want your children to look up to.” “The way he talks about women, the press, the language he uses, the use of Twitter — you don’t want him to be a role model,” Cohen added. . “It’s injurious to our culture, and it’s injurious to … our foreign policy.”

While, highlighting the very famous former FBI Director James Comey’s firing, Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns, the controversy surrounding Trump’s connections with Russia over the release of classified information and his excessive use of Twitter to discuss important issues and to insult the press — all symbolize “unacceptable behavior.”

Cohen was joined in his decision of filing the resolution by lawmakers such Barbara Lee, Sheila Jackson Lee, Al Green, Judy Chu, Mark DeSaulnier, Bonnie Watson Coleman and other members of Congress.

“Enough is enough,” said Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif. “This is not a president who respects our norms, our laws or even our people. He has no compassion and, therefore, he does not have our confidence.”

“It’s clear President Trump has no idea what makes this country great,” she added.

While, the resolution barely has a chance to survive in the Republican controlled chamber, it lists eighty-eight reasons that highlight that President Trump is not suitable to continue his presidency. The real motive of the Democrats for filing the resolution still remains in question, as Cohen argue that the resolution was not filed to make an effect on Trump. “Is it going to have an effect on him? Apparently, his family members don’t have an effect on him; his Republican friends don’t; his Cabinet members don’t,” Cohen stated. “This is an attempt at a political intervention,” Cohen said.

Cohen further mentioned that he sought the House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s blessing before he filed the resolution. Pelosi along with few other member of the Democratic Party has been focusing on anti-Trump efforts such as pushing for setting up an independent commission to look into the possibility of a collusion between President Trump and Russia. Talking about Pelosi, Cohen stated, that “She said she didn’t have a problem with us going forward with these types of actions.”

He added, “She preferred people to stay focused on what she thinks is the most important item present, which is an independent prosecutor bill, which I support.”

It is to be noted that the Democrats need to pay attention to the levels of fitness of their own party members, as Pelosi read a false account of the 56 Declaration of Independence during a press conference help this week.

As per FreeBeacon:

“Pelosi read the article during an event held by Democratic lawmakers to discuss the “Democrats for Democracy Reform Legislative Package” and #wethepeople campaign. The legislative package and campaign is a so-called ‘task force’ aimed at “[reforming] government to ensure it works for all Americans.”

The discredited piece, titled ‘The Price They Paid,’ was a popular essay circulating around the internet on Independence Day. The article outlines the fates of those who signed the Declaration of Independence, but according to the fact checkers at Snopes, ‘many of its details are inaccurate.’

0 106
Vladimir Putin
One day, I would like to have an entourage like that... armed guards and everything.

On Tuesday, the White House officially confirmed that President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin had an informal, second talk, in addition to their official meeting at the Group of 20 (G-20) conference in Hamburg, Germany, earlier this month.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer confirmed that Putin and Trump spoke at the G-20 heads of state dinner, only a few hours after their official meeting.

Reports have surfaced that in their second meeting, Trump and Putin spoke for about an hour, accompanied only by the Russian president’s translator. The second meeting between the two leaders had not been previously reported by the White House.

While the White House confirmed that President Trump and President Putin talked at the dinner for G-20 leaders, an official from the White House seemed to parry claims that the meeting lasted for an hour, instead claiming that the two leaders spoke “briefly” towards the end of the dinner.

“There was no ‘second meeting’ between President Trump and President Putin, just a brief conversation at the end of a dinner,” the official said. “The insinuation that the White House has tried to ‘hide’ a second meeting is false, malicious and absurd.”

According to the White House, the two leaders used Putin’s Russian translator since Trump’s translator could only speak Japanese.

A pool report from the dinner venue shows that Trump arrived at the dinner a little after 7 PM local time, and left the venue just a few minutes before midnight; even though the official G-20 schedule suggests the dinner was scheduled for 8:30 PM to 10 PM.

With the ongoing investigations, by both federal authorities and congressional committees, into the Trump campaign’s alleged ties with Moscow, Trump’s interaction with the Russian president have become the subject of intense scrutiny at home in the US, with the media also making it the center of attention.

However, the official from the White House reinstated the fact that it is the president’s job to talk to world leaders.

“It is not merely perfectly normal, it is part of a president’s duties, to interact with world leaders. Throughout the G-20 and in all his other foreign engagements, President Trump has demonstrated American leadership by representing our interests and values on the world stage,” the official said.

Ian Bremmer, President of the Eurasia Group, believes Trump breached national security by not allowing his translator to join his second, informal meeting with the Russian president. However, it is more than likely that Trump did not have knowledge of the national security protocol.

The formal meeting between Trump and Putin at the G-20 summit was officially scheduled to last for 30 minutes, but went on for over two hours; another thing that is bothering the mainstream media and critics back home.

Talking to Bloomberg’s Charlie Rose, Bremmer said that the understanding Trump established with Putin at the summit is “clearly his best personal relationship” with any G-20 leader.

“Never in my life as a political scientist have I seen two countries — major countries — with a constellation of national interests that are as dissonant, while the two leaders seem to be doing everything possible to make nice and be close to each other,” he said.

Reports indicate that President Trump, during the formal meeting, brought up the topic of Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential elections; however, Russian President Putin denied those claims.

0 37
Maxine Waters
Mad Maxine: Furious Allegations... coming to a theater near you.

As the Democrats continue to criticize Trump for his use of Twitter to discuss sensitive issues, it is important that they start taking a look at one of their own.

Maxine Waters continues to promote her agenda against impeaching President Trump, as she tries to take a stab at White House press secretary, Sean Spicer.

Waters tweeted on Friday stating, “Has anyone checked on Sean Spicer?”

However, the tweet backfired as Spicer didn’t hold back on his change to highlight Waters’ special position as “one of the most corrupt politicians.”

Spicer tweeted back, “Just reading about how you were named one of the most corrupt politicians in DC. Congrats!” in response to Water’s failed attempt to let down President Trump and his administration.

Despite being labelled as the most corrupt House member by both the conservative and the liberals group, Waters has been on President Trump’s case since the beginning of time, and has been failing her every attempt in trying to persuade Americans to impeach Trump. She stated that she is ready to take “the gloves off” and fight against Trump who is supposedly “a bully and dangerous for this country.”

“Trump was just so outrageous, so disrespectful, such a bully and dangerous for this country, I decided, ‘You know what? I’m taking the gloves off and I’m going to step out,’” Ms. Waters said. “I was going to not only challenge him but encourage others to see him for what he is: basically a bully, an egotistical maniac, a liar and someone who did not need to be president.”

Waters stated that President Trump is a “disgusting, poor excuse of a man.” She has called Mr. Trump and his administration “the Kremlin Klan.”

She went on to state that President Trump should be impeached and be charged with “obstruction of justice” for his role in Comey’s case. “This president needs to be impeached! I believe that,” Waters stated in May.

She even campaigned hard arguing that “I don’t respect this president. I don’t trust this president. He’s not working in the best interests of the American people. His motives and his actions are contemptible,” “I will fight every day until he is impeached,” Waters had reportedly stated. “Impeach 45! Impeach 45! Impeach 45!”

However, with the ongoing case against Trump Jr. and his meeting with the Russians, Waters believes that she can gain popularity on social media.

In a series of tweets on Tuesday night, Waters called on her party to not let Trump Jr. “off the hook.”

“At this point, the [New York Times] could release Trump leaving a voice message thanking Putin for his services and GOP would still say ‘nothing burger,”” she wrote.

“Don’t let Trump Jr off the hook. Emails show his willingness to get info from Russia to influence election,” the California Democrat added. “He is in a long line of LIARS.”

0 17
Trump Tower
How much longer will Trump tower over all this Russia controversy?

The controversial meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and Russian lawyer Natalya Veselnitskaya remained in the news over the weekend. The story, it seems, will retain the spotlight as lawmakers from both parties continue to argue about the meeting’s implications and new details keep emerging from various news sources.

One of President Donald Trump’s lawyers appeared on all five major news channels to present his defense, claiming that the president had absolutely no idea about the meeting, he also rejected the notion that the meeting violated laws.

However, the Senate Intelligence Committee’s vice chairman, Mark Warner, believes that the recent revelations regarding the meeting between Trump Jr. and Veselnitskaya will force the committee to take the Russian investigation to a whole new level.

The meeting, which took place back in June 2016, included Russian lawyer Natalya Veselnitskaya, Trump Jr., the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and then campaign manager Paul Manafort.

After The New York Times first reported about the meeting just last weekend, several new details have emerged. Donald Trump Jr. went as far as to publish his email correspondence with Rob Goldstone, a music publicist and the intermediary between Trump Jr. and Veselnitskaya.

While the White House maintains its stance that the Trump campaign did not coordinate with Moscow during the elections in any way, several lawmakers and investigation authorities have begun questioning the June 2016 meeting.

“Nothing in that meeting that would have taken place even if it was about the topic of an opposition research paper from the Russian lawyer is illegal or a violation of the law,” Trump’s attorney Jay Sekulow said on “Fox News Sunday.”

However, Senator Mark Warner (D – Va.), vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, had some serious questions about Trump Jr.’s meeting, saying he wanted to hear everyone’s side of the story.

He claimed he found it very difficult to believe that Trump wasn’t told about the meeting during the elections.

“It’s a little unbelievable that neither the son nor the son-in-law ever shared that information with their dad, the candidate,” Warner said.

Trump’s attorney has also emphasized on the fact that the president had no knowledge of the meeting until recently.

“The level of credibility from the senior levels of this administration really is suspect, and I think suspect regardless of what political party you belong to,” Warner added.

“This is the first time that the public has seen in black and white on the email thread clear evidence that the Russians — and particularly there was a Russian government effort to try to undermine [Hillary] Clinton, help Trump,” Warner said on “Face The Nation,” on CBS.

“And what was remarkable was you saw not only willingness but actually glee from the president’s son as well as involvement of the campaign manager and the president’s son-in-law to say in effect, ‘Yes, bring it on.'”

According to Warner, Trump Jr. hasn’t been very honest about the meeting, saying that he’s changed his story numerous times in a week since the story broke out. The president’s eldest son took to twitter on Tuesday, to release a series of emails between him and the intermediary, before the meeting.

Warner further said he wanted to talk to more people who were involved in the meeting. “I think we may find out there may have been other meetings as well,” he said. “We don’t know that yet. But what we’ve seen is a constant effort to hide contacts with Russians.”

Trump’s lawyer, talking to CBS’ Face The Nation, denied claims that Trump knew anything about the meeting.

“He said he has had no meetings, was aware of no meetings with Russians, was not aware of this one until really right before it all broke,” he said.

But Warner says this meeting aligns perfectly with the allegations that the campaign has attempted to cover up its contacts with the Russians.

Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff (Cali) while speaking on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, said that he thinks people can’t rely on Trump Jr. word.

“We can’t accept anything Don Jr. says, and of course, and we can’t accept much the president says about this either, because he has a similar record of not being forthcoming when it comes to Russia,” Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.

Several investigations are looking into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential race.

0 27
Blame Game
"Well, Ash, I don't have time to sit hear and listen to these complaints - I have another tropical vacation I need to be getting to..."

The former defense secretary for the Obama administration comes clean as he talks about how the Obama administration was well aware of Russia’s meddling in the elections and yet failed to do much against Russia for its meddling in the 2016 election. He stated that the administration took “some actions” against them, however, this “was not sufficient” enough to teach Russia a lesson.

While, on one side, Donald Trump Jr. is under the spotlight for his meeting with a Russian lawyer, the Obama administration too are not very far behind when it comes to building ties with Russia.

As reports revealed by the Washington Post suggested that the Obama administration was well aware of Russia’s hand in the elections, and yet they failed to take any serious measures, President Trump made complete use of this opportunity, as he tweeted, “The Obama Administration knew far in advance of November 8th about election meddling by Russia. Did nothing about it. WHY?” Trump tweeted on June 23.

The president argued in a tweet he posted in June that, “The reason that President Obama did NOTHING about Russia after being notified by the CIA of meddling is that he expected Clinton would win..”

This Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union,” host Dana Bash met with the former president’s defense secretary. She took this opportunity to allow the public to get a clear understanding of what the administration did or could have done to stop Russia in the near future.  Bash asked Carter, as to “why didn’t he [Obama] act?” against Russia?

It has been noted that Ash Carter was personally present in the Situation Room, as the former President was made aware of Russia’s intention in terms of the presidential election.

Carter responded by stating that the former president did take “some actions.” Whereas, the department that he managed “took a wide range of actions.”

“To me, this was part of a pattern. To me, personally, this was part of a pattern with Vladimir Putin. But I don’t think — I think it’s quite clear that was not sufficient,” Carter said.

“That’s why it’s so important to press the Russians now. If it were sufficient, Vladimir Putin’s answer to our president wouldn’t have been to cast doubt upon or ask for further intelligence from the United States,” Carter added.

“Did President Obama make a mistake in not doing more?” Bash asked Carter.

“He took some steps, no question about it. But I think you see from Vladimir Putin’s answer right now that more needs to be done,” Carter said.

“Putin is not convinced that there are going to be consequences of a magnitude for Russia, as a consequence of interfering with the U.S. election that make it unwise for him to do it in the future. That hasn’t been accomplished yet,” Carter said.

While, President Trump hasn’t quite yet set up a press conference to discuss his meeting with Vladimir Putin. However, Reuters has reported Putin stating, “I believe it would not be entirely appropriate on my part to disclose details of my discussion with Mr. Trump. He asked, I answered him. He asked pointed questions, I answered them. It seemed to me that he was satisfied with those answers.”

0 36
Intelligence Agencies
So, which one of you guys is the "Deep State"?

Last week, Associated Press and The New York Times rushed to post corrections to their widely reported and heavily emphasized upon claim that all 17 US intelligence agencies unanimously agreed that Russians in the 2016 presidential elections to help Donald Trump get into power.

Instead, what the news outlets failed to report, or rather realize, was that the information was published by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which represents all 17 US intelligence agencies; but it was only collected by the CIA, FBI, NSA and not all 17 of them.

On June 30, the Associated Press posted a “clarification” about four different reports published earlier, all of which stated that all 17 agencies had come to a conclusion that Russians had played a role in helping Donald Trump become the president. With the “clarification,” AP acknowledged that all the agencies were not involved in the assessment. AP’s statement read:

“In stories published April 6, June 2, June 26 and June 29, The Associated Press reported that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies have agreed that Russia tried to influence the 2016 election to benefit Donald Trump. That assessment was based on information collected by three agencies – the FBI, CIA and National Security Agency – and published by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which represents all U.S. intelligence agencies. Not all 17 intelligence agencies were involved in reaching the assessment.”

The New York Times is reported to have published a similar statement at the end of the article titled “Trump’s Deflections and Denials on Russia Frustrate Even His Allies” on June 29.

A White House Memo article on Monday about President Trump’s deflections and denials about Russia referred incorrectly to the source of an intelligence assessment that said Russia orchestrated hacking attacks during last year’s presidential election. The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.

The information about all US intelligence agencies being involved in the assessment of Russian interference in US election has been used constantly by the media and politicians to criticize President Trump and Republicans, James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence demystified the notion when he gave his testimony on Capitol Hill on May 08.

“The [intelligence community assessment] was a coordinated product from three agencies: CIA, NSA and the FBI, not all 17 components of the intelligence community. Those three, under the aegis of my former office,” Clapper said. “Following extensive intelligence reporting about many Russian efforts to collect on and influence the outcome of the presidential election, President Obama asked us to do this in early December and have it completed before the end of his term.

“The two-dozen or so analysts for this task were hand-picked, seasoned experts from each of the contributing agencies. They were given complete, unfettered, mutual access to all sensitive, raw intelligence data, and importantly, complete independence to reach their findings. They found that the Russian government pursued a multifaceted influence campaign in the run-up to the election, including aggressive use of cyber capabilities.

“The Russians used cyber operations against both political parties, including hacking into servers used by the Democratic National Committee, and releasing stolen data to WikiLeaks and other media outlets.”

During the hearing, Clapper responded to Senator Al Franken’s (D – Minn) claim that “all 17” agencies of the US intelligence committee had agreed that Russia meddled with the elections.

Franken said, “The intelligence communities have concluded, all 17 of them that Russia interfered with this election. And we all know how that’s right.”

To this, Clapper replied, “Senator, as I pointed out in my statement, Senator Franken, it was—there were only three agencies that [were] directly involved in this assessment, plus my office.”

Trying to prove himself right somehow, the senator emphasized on the number of agencies that acknowledged Russian interference, he asked Clapper, “But all 17 signed onto that?”

Clapper then clarified once again, “Well, we didn’t go through that process. This was a special situation because of the time limits and my—what I knew to be who could really contribute to this and the sensitivity of the information, we decided—it was a conscious judgment—to restrict it to those three. I’m not aware of anyone who dissented, or disagreed when it came out.”

0 15
Sean Spicer
"Well, um, what I'm trying to say is that - uh - I don't know. Can you restate the question?"

Sean Spicer finally opened about what then candidate Trump meant when he had asked the Russian hackers to dig into Hillary Clinton’s emails.

It was back in July, Trump had said in a press conference that, “If they hacked, they probably have her 33,000 emails. I hope they do. They probably have her 33,000 emails that she lost and deleted … Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you can find the 33,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Spicer stated, that President was joking at the time. We all know that.” He added, “It’s pretty clear they knew all along there was no collusion and that’s pretty helpful to the president.”

“What evidence does [Trump] have to prove that Obama was colluding or obstructing?” a reporter asked.

“they’ve been playing this card on Trump and Russia… If they didn’t take any action, does that make them complicit?” Spicer questioned, while pointing towards the fact that the Obama administration was aware of Russia’s hand in the elections.

“I think there’s a lot of questions about who did what, where, and when,” he added.

The reporter asked, “Is there an element of hypocrisy here, Sean, because this was President Trump on the campaign trail: ‘Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded.’ … How can you accuse President Obama of obstructing when [Trump] was egging Russia on?”

To this Spicer said Trump was “joking, and that “I think the idea was that you had Hillary Clinton with a secret server, that was very clear about what she had done to evade it, and I think that’s probably a bigger concern right now in terms of what they were doing, and the lack of security that they had, ” Spicer said.

0 25
Cyber Security
"I sure hope this Nigerian prince makes it to the US ok, I'm looking forward to enjoying my millions..."

On Monday, Rush Limbaugh shared a theory that former President Barack Obama may have chosen not to do anything about Russia’s alleged meddling in the 2016 US presidential elections for a very peculiar reason: he simply didn’t want Hillary Clinton to become the president.

“People had that theory bandied about before the election,” Rush said, while talking on his radio show.

Limbaugh explained his theory step by step, talking about how the former president’s decision to not take any action may have impacted the elections.

“Bottom line, Obama hears about all of these efforts and the brave struggle to contain it begins, and Obama meets with experts and advisers. They advise him what to do. Obama gives his own counsel,” Limbaugh explained. “At the end of it all Obama decided to do nothing other than call Putin and say ‘cut it out,’ an act of bravery and courage unlike most other in American history. And after telling Putin to cut it out, he then confronted Putin again in China and said, ‘Stop it or else.’ Putin and the Russians quaking away, cowering in laughter at the bravery and courage of Barack Hussein O.”

According to Limbaugh, the Obama administration had a very good idea of what was going on with the alleged Russian interference, from August to November of last year. However, he did absolutely nothing to stop it.

Limbaugh furthered his talk, “Obama didn’t choke. He thought Hillary was gonna win! Trump’s exactly right about this. He thought Hillary was gonna win.”

He later added, “Folks, let’s play this out: what if there is another possibility here explaining why Obama didn’t do anything?”

“What if, as the story says, Putin was trying to elect Trump — again, I, on the record think this is bogus, but that’s what the story said — what if Obama knew Putin was trying to elect Trump and didn’t do anything to stop the Russians because he really didn’t want Hillary to win?”

He then said, “This story says Obama was scared to death it could be done, worried very seriously it was being done and decided to do nothing about it. So people are livid at Obama on the left, and that’s gonna be a larger theme going forward as this massive story gets digested by more and more people. But as it gets digested and as more and more people read it and absorb it, it’s going to also be seen for what it is: a giant, big batch of nothing where Trump is concerned. Big batch of nothing.”

0 22
Hillary Concession
Blaming your friends, political allies, and wacky conspiracies is a sure sign of responsible leadership.

In an interview on Sunday, with ABC News’ “This Week’s” George Stephanopoulos, Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), the Senate Minority Leader, said that you shouldn’t blame anyone but yourself for losing an election.

During the interview, Schumer spoke about how Democrats need to move on following their latest defeat in the Georgia special election, where Republican Karen Handel defeated Democrat Jon Ossoff last Tuesday.

“Democrats need a strong, bold, sharp-edged and commonsense economic agenda,” Schumer said. “Policy, platform message that appeal to the middle class, that resonate with the middle class, and show that, and unite Democrats.”

“This economic message platform is going to resonate,” Schumer added. “It’s what we were missing, and it’s not going to be baby steps; it’s going to be bold.”

Moving on, most probably without even realizing it, Schumer said almost the same thing most people have been saying with regards to the way Hillary Clinton has reacted and responded to her defeat by Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

“But you lose an election, you don’t blame other people, you blame yourself,” he said.

However, the advice given by Schumer to Democrats doesn’t seem to be in line with Hillary Clinton’s response to the defeat and her strategy of consistently blaming everyone and everything but herself for the loss.

Earlier in May, while talking to the New York Magazine, Clinton said that she would have won the election if James Comey, the former FBI Director, and a few others had not acted against her.

“I would have won had I not been subjected to the unprecedented attacks by Comey and the Russians, aided and abetted by the suppression of the vote, particularly in Wisconsin,” Clinton said.

“Whoever comes next, this is not going to end. Republicans learned that if you suppress votes you win,” Clinton added.

Several Democrats seem to be frustrated with Clinton’s never ending blame game. Most are of the belief that the rhetoric will do more damage than good to the party’s long term chances.

Social Media