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.
That drew a swift rebuke from Grassley. A spokesman for the senator said it was Simpson that had insisted “that the transcript be kept confidential,” adding that an invitation for Simpson to testify in public “remains on the table.”
"Senator Grassley provided Fusion GPS an opportunity for transparency six months ago when he invited the firm to publicly testify at an open committee hearing. Mr. Simpson declined," said Grassley spokesman Taylor Foy in a statement.
“Second, it is false that Fusion GPS has ‘consistently supported the release of the transcript’. Mr. Levy is recorded by the court reporter as saying during the interview, ‘We'd like to make a request that it be kept confidential given the sensitivity of the matters discussed today,’”
Foy also pushed back on the assertion that Fusion GPS complied with the panel's requests, saying they handed over thousands of pages of public news clippings as well as blank pages.
“It has still not responded to dozens of follow-up questions or responded sufficiently to document requests. Without that cooperation, the record is incomplete. And it took a bipartisan subpoena from Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Feinstein to achieve what little cooperation the committee has received through a transcribed interview,” Foy said
GPS was interviewed for 17 hours, congress investigated their bank accounts and other sources (but not Trumps banks).
Grassley is perfectly capable of releasing the transcript but would rather another public hearing after they already testified for 17 hours, does that make any sense at all?
GPS was interviewed for 17 hours, congress investigated their bank accounts and other sources (but not Trumps banks).
Grassley is perfectly capable of releasing the transcript but would rather another public hearing after they already testified for 17 hours, does that make any sense at all?
We don't know what Fusion turned over.
Fusion would not allow congress to see their banks records. They came to some kind of deal that was not disclosed to the public.
Sen. Grassley’s Spokesman To Fusion GPS: If You Wanted Transparency, Why Did You Plead The Fifth?
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom
Actually nobody is trying to distract anybody. Read the title of the thread. And what lies are the liberal pushing exactly?
You can start with this from Hot Air or go right to The Hill...
"Senator Grassley provided Fusion GPS an opportunity for transparency six months ago when he invited the firm to publicly testify at an open committee hearing. Mr. Simpson declined,” said Grassley spokesman Taylor Foy in a statement.
“When faced with a subpoena from the Chairman and Ranking Member, Mr. Simpson refused to provide public testimony, using his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to negotiate for a closed-door interview,” he added…
[Fusion attorney] Mr. Levy is recorded by the court reporter as saying during the interview, ‘We’d like to make a request that it be kept confidential given the sensitivity of the matters discussed today,’” Grassley’s spokesman continued"
That is old news. The owners have said they are OK with them being released. Today Grassley put out a statement through his office. It said to the effect that if they were to put it out it may compromise the investigation. Which is pure bunk.
Grassley originally indicated he couldn't release the transcript because it would compromise the investigation, then the FBI indicated that was not true. Then he said GPS didn't want them released which Simpson just contradicted. He obviously doesn't want the transcripts to be made public.
Even if you take the Papadopoulos claim as true, then the mere fact that Russia already had these emails and the first the Trump campaign learned about them was through Pap. would prove that Trump didn't collude
I think you're missing one fundamental point. It doesn't matter who had the emails first. What matters is if the Russians (Putin) had successfully cultivated the Trump team to conspire with a foreign adversary in a quid pro quo relationship. This is illegal for a very good reason.
Is it pointing in that direction? Yes.
We have Don Jr's "I love it" emails and him talking about the timing of the release of the emails. We have a softening of the Russian intervention in Crimea and the changing of the republican platform during the campaign to support Russia over Crimea. Why?
We have Flynn admitting to lying to the FBI about meeting with the Russians to talk about the sanctions. Do you remember when Obama imposed more sanctions on Russia for meddling in our election just before he left office? Russia decided not to do anything about it and speculation was because Trump would take care of them after the election. Read about how Trump tried to lift sanctions on Russia after he was sworn in. Also read about how more sanctions were passed in a bipartisan manner that Trump signed into law, but has yet to implemented.
So here we have a president that is very pro Russia who has never held a cabinet meeting on how to address the Russian meddling. Why?
We Flynn asking for immunity early on in the investigation. Why? We have Flynn and Trump's attorneys coordinating a defense. Why? We have Flynn's attorney breaking that tie and cooperating with Mueller's investigation.
Do you see where this is going? I'm sorry but your talking points are weak at best.
Grassley originally indicated he couldn't release the transcript because it would compromise the investigation, then the FBI indicated that was not true. Then he said GPS didn't want them released which Simpson just contradicted. He obviously doesn't want the transcripts to be made public.
well this gets to the core of it.
Grassley and the rest of the repubs on the committee don't want the full transcripts released. My guess is because it will completely expose the discrete leaks as out of context and phoney baloney, and will show that the "dossier" is critical to initiating the FBI's investigations.
each week we see new attacks all aimed at weakening Mueller's investigation and reducing the impact of any findings.
Grassley originally indicated he couldn't release the transcript because it would compromise the investigation, then the FBI indicated that was not true. Then he said GPS didn't want them released which Simpson just contradicted. He obviously doesn't want the transcripts to be made public.
Grassley has an open invitation for Fusion GPS to testify in an open session. So far they haven't taken him up on that.
It doesn't matter what Fusion has to say, it's irrelevant, the FBI, and DOJ have agreed to release the documents under subpoena.
Quote:
Originally Posted by animalcrazy
I think you're missing one fundamental point. It doesn't matter who had the emails first. What matters is if the Russians (Putin) had successfully cultivated the Trump team to conspire with a foreign adversary in a quid pro quo relationship. This is illegal for a very good reason.
Is it pointing in that direction? Yes.
We have Don Jr's "I love it" emails and him talking about the timing of the release of the emails. We have a softening of the Russian intervention in Crimea and the changing of the republican platform during the campaign to support Russia over Crimea. Why?
We have Flynn admitting to lying to the FBI about meeting with the Russians to talk about the sanctions. Do you remember when Obama imposed more sanctions on Russia for meddling in our election just before he left office? Russia decided not to do anything about it and speculation was because Trump would take care of them after the election. Read about how Trump tried to lift sanctions on Russia after he was sworn in. Also read about how more sanctions were passed in a bipartisan manner that Trump signed into law, but has yet to implemented.
So here we have a president that is very pro Russia who has never held a cabinet meeting on how to address the Russian meddling. Why?
We Flynn asking for immunity early on in the investigation. Why? We have Flynn and Trump's attorneys coordinating a defense. Why? We have Flynn's attorney breaking that tie and cooperating with Mueller's investigation.
Do you see where this is going? I'm sorry but your talking points are weak at best.
There's just one problem with your post.
Every person when asked under oath have stated unequivocally that there is no evidence of any collusion.
You can spin the CNN, WaPo , and NYT hit pieces all you want, but the fact remains, there is no evidence of any collusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilcart
each week we see new attacks all aimed at weakening Mueller's investigation and reducing the impact of any findings.
If there was nothing to criticize, and weaken Mueller's investigation, you would have nothing to worry about.
The problem is that there is a lot that is without question weaken Mueller's investigation. In fact, the only thing that can save Mueller's investigation is full transparency, and hope every piece of evidence is legitimate, and that his team is crossing every T, and dotting every I. The problem with transparency, is that it more likely to get his investigation shut down.
GPS was interviewed for 17 hours, congress investigated their bank accounts and other sources (but not Trumps banks).
Grassley is perfectly capable of releasing the transcript but would rather another public hearing after they already testified for 17 hours, does that make any sense at all?
And of those 17 hours, how many times did those 2 plead the 5th....
You act like those 17 hours were straight questions and answers....and it was,
Question 1: Do you know blah blah blah?
Answer: I plead the 5th
Question 2: Have you heard of blah blah blah
Answer: I plead the 5TH
And on and on and on.....
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.
Sen. Grassley’s Spokesman To Fusion GPS: If You Wanted Transparency, Why Did You Plead The Fifth?
