Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Senate update happened during March 1st week. We haven't heard anything after that. Then there are some reports about Democrats tampering down Russian line after that, https://theintercept.com/2017/03/16/...sia-collusion/
To be fair, there has been a lot of criticism on more liberal-leaning sites of Glenn Greenwald's approach to the whole Russia affair. I think a lot of the criticism is fair. For example, Greenwald claims liberals have a singular obsession with Russia and are neglecting to challenge Republicans on substantive policy issues like healthcare, but that's clearly not true. Compare, for example, the number of extremely detailed policy articles Sarah Kliff has written on Vox related to the ACHA to the number of policy articles on ACHA appearing on Red State, National Review, Breitbart, etc. One side is clearly more interested in policy where the other is focused on politics. The two are not one in the same.
To be fair, there has been a lot of criticism on more liberal-leaning sites of Glenn Greenwald's approach to the whole Russia affair. I think a lot of the criticism is fair. For example, Greenwald claims liberals have a singular obsession with Russia and are neglecting to challenge Republicans on substantive policy issues like healthcare, but that's clearly not true. Compare, for example, the number of extremely detailed policy articles Sarah Kliff has written on Vox related to the ACHA to the number of policy articles on ACHA appearing on Red State, National Review, Breitbart, etc. One side is clearly more interested in policy where the other is focused on politics. The two are not one in the same.
I am kinda little trust in Greenwald reporting than rest of the media outlets. Greenwald is consistent with his views from the beginning. He also wrote another article from leading putin Critic where she compiles evidence from media outlets trying to create a narrative against Russia. Basically we need a proof. It is difficult to believe media reports recycling information from 2005 for quite some time to believe this story.
The walls are closing in on Dirty Donny and I don't think Manafort,Flynn,Page or Stone will take a bullet for him. Orange jump suit here we come!
Adding another chapter to a story we already know to be bull **** only inspires the simple-minded.
The Russia connection was rolled-out when the Podesta e-mails exposed the Clinton campaign's efforts to steal the election, first from Sanders and then Trump.
Hillary, dirty Debbie and Donna Brazile had all been shown by the e-mails to have been cheating in the election and colluding with news outlets that were working behind the scenes to help Hillary.
The Russian hacking angle gave them a reason (and not a very good one) to not answer any questions about the e-mails.
Instead of admitting that they were cheating in the election, they simply refused to respond because "Russia!"
"I did not have connections with Russia" is essentially the Trump administration's "I did not have sexual relations with that woman". Russiagate may very well involve treason, which could turn out to be the most serious scandal in our nation's history. If it turns out that the whole administration is involved, including hypocrite fake Christian Pence, can't we call another election?
One thing that I'm almost certain of... Trump's days in office are numbered. Tick-tock. Tick-tock.
Basically we need a proof. It is difficult to believe media reports recycling information from 2005 for quite some time to believe this story.
Proof of what? The OP's article is not supposed to be proof of collusion. It is, however, proof that someone connected to the administration has once again been caught in a Russia-related lie, which then begs the question why they keep lying about their connections to Russia.
In an exclusive AP report, former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort worked for a close Putin associate to draw up strategic plans to disrupt pro-Western governments in Eastern Europe to benefit Russian interests. Manafort was wired millions of dollars to the work, which later became the subject of a lawsuit in the Cayman Islands.
Previously the Trump administration and Manafort denied he had any links to Russia. This new report disputes that.
Now we have a link between Trump and Putin's inner circle, with Manafort as the middle man. Manafort was campaign manager around the time Russia hacked the DNC. Roger Stone admitted he had a back door line of communication with WikiLeaks. The pieces are coming together.
Can anyone give an innocuous explanation for everything we know about Trump and Russia to date (including Flynn's lie about not discussing sanctions with the Russian ambassador)? If there's an innocent reason for all of this, I'm all ears.
In an exclusive AP report, former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort worked for a close Putin associate to draw up strategic plans to disrupt pro-Western governments in Eastern Europe to benefit Russian interests. Manafort was wired millions of dollars to the work, which later became the subject of a lawsuit in the Cayman Islands.
Previously the Trump administration and Manafort denied he had any links to Russia. This new report disputes that.
Now we have a link between Trump and Putin's inner circle, with Manafort as the middle man. Manafort was campaign manager around the time Russia hacked the DNC. Roger Stone admitted he had a back door line of communication with WikiLeaks. The pieces are coming together.
Meanwhile, the other candidates in the election were being advised by election consultants who worked for the Clinton and Obama campaigns.
Quote:
Manafort isn’t alone in plying his trade in the former Soviet republic; as the Times noted in 2007, former Bill Clinton pollster Stan Greenberg was working for Ukraine’s then-president, Viktor Yushchenko, as were GOP operatives Steve Schmidt and Neil Newhouse. By the 2010 presidential campaign, the Times reported, Yuschenko had retained another former Clinton strategist, Mark Penn, while then-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko had hired David Axelrod’s old firm, AKPD Media. (It’s a small world after all: Schmidt would go on to manage John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign against AKPD client Barack Obama; Newhouse would in 2012 poll for long-time client Mitt Romney in his presidential bid.)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
