|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 14 2017 07:55 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2017 07:53 oneofthem wrote:On February 14 2017 07:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 14 2017 07:44 oneofthem wrote: that just says federal election spending. not sure what that means lol That would (at least in part) mean "not used for state level candidates." maybe they had candidate supply constraints and whatnot. i'm not sure what happened at the state level, probably a function of the very geographically concentrated nature of dem voters and general low level of participation in non-presidential races. It's consistent across several states, red and blue. State candidates got jack from HVF. The overwhelming majority went back into campaign efforts for Hillary, circumventing the contribution limits. the pa committee sent back 400k to the dnc. not checked others
|
On February 14 2017 08:02 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2017 08:00 Plansix wrote:On February 14 2017 07:56 LegalLord wrote: The Democrats as a party have as much hubris as Hillary herself in thinking they can do whatever they want and get away with it. There was a pretty gross misunderstanding of how much transparency their base is looking for. Announcing how much money they are spending on a specific race is a bad idea. But taking all the money in and saying "trust us" while there is this ongoing narrative of the money being horded is equally stupid. The old political theory of weather the storm until you can get back on message just doesn't work. Has it crossed your mind that perhaps they were saying "trust us" because we wouldn't like what we saw if they were transparent? Or more accurately, that it would undermine the narrative they were trying to portray about Hillary doing so much more for these other candidates that were by all appearances given a pittance of the funds. Many things cross my mind GH. As we have discussed before, I am just not as cynical as you.
|
oh its not cynicism. its just not assuming the worst when it comes to big evil establishment.
|
Why aren't Trump aides on the same page?
Amid reports that National Security Adviser Michael Flynn might be forced out of his post, President Trump managed to escape being asked about the controversy at his press conference with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
With no definitive statement from the president, confusion reigned over Flynn’s future. Trump’s close aide Kellyanne Conway went on MSNBC to say Flynn had the “full confidence” of the president, but later in the afternoon, press secretary Sean Spicer said the president was still “evaluating the situation.”
Yahoo
|
They talked to Trump at different times of day and received conflicting instructions about Flynn. Also Sean Spicer has a master degree in national security and knows you can say "full confidence" the guy might be brought up on some serious charges. Kellyanne Conway is the propaganda machine given life.
|
Well, on Friday Conway also said that Flynn (at the time the soon to be National Security Adviser who should probably be thinking about these things when talking with foreign nationals) simply can't recall whether he discussed the sanctions. Saying that as well as having full confidence in him is almost total gibberish, so I would ignore her.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
btw loyalty isnt what's expected. just basic fairness to people and facts and maybe some level of working together for common purpose
|
I'm just wondering, whatever happened to Chris Christie?
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On February 14 2017 10:02 Nevuk wrote: I'm just wondering, whatever happened to Chris Christie? His poor reputation cost him any chance of having a place in the new administration.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 14 2017 10:02 Nevuk wrote: I'm just wondering, whatever happened to Chris Christie? hopefully in federal prison soon
|
On February 14 2017 10:04 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2017 10:02 Nevuk wrote: I'm just wondering, whatever happened to Chris Christie? His poor reputation cost him any chance of having a place in the new administration. That and his history with the Kushner family. I doubt Jared would be too happy to see him in the administration.
|
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On February 14 2017 10:10 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2017 10:02 Nevuk wrote: I'm just wondering, whatever happened to Chris Christie? hopefully in federal prison soon Maybe he and Hillary can be cellmates.
|
God let it be Petraeus. Can we reach peek levels of hypocrisy before March?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 14 2017 10:44 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2017 10:10 oneofthem wrote:On February 14 2017 10:02 Nevuk wrote: I'm just wondering, whatever happened to Chris Christie? hopefully in federal prison soon Maybe he and Hillary can be cellmates. har har har
|
I'm sure Flynn is just a rogue bad apple!
/s
The acting attorney general informed the Trump White House late last month that she believed Michael Flynn had misled senior administration officials about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States, and warned that the national security adviser was potentially vulnerable to Russian blackmail, current and former U.S. officials said.
The message, delivered by Sally Q. Yates and a senior career national security official to the White House counsel, was prompted by concerns that Flynn, when asked about his calls and texts with the Russian diplomat, had told Vice President-elect Mike Pence and others that he had not discussed the Obama administration sanctions on Russia for its interference in the 2016 election, the officials said. It is unclear what the White House counsel, Donald McGahn, did with the information.
In the waning days of the Obama administration, James R. Clapper Jr., who was the director of national intelligence, and John Brennan, the CIA director at the time, shared Yates’s concerns and concurred with her recommendation to inform the Trump White House. They feared that “Flynn had put himself in a compromising position” and thought that Pence had a right to know that he had been misled, according to one of the officials, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.
...
U.S. intelligence reports during the 2016 presidential campaign showed that [Russian ambassador] Kislyak was in touch with Flynn, officials said. Communications between the two continued after Trump’s victory on Nov. 8, according to officials with access to intelligence reports on the matter.
Kislyak, in a brief interview with The Post, confirmed having contacts with Flynn before and after the election, but he declined to say what was discussed.
For Yates and other officials, concerns about the communications peaked in the days after the Obama administration on Dec. 29 announced measures to punish Russia for what it said was the Kremlin’s interference in the election to help Trump.
After the sanctions were rolled out, the Obama administration braced itself for the Russian retaliation. To the surprise of many U.S. officials, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on Dec. 30 that there would be no response. Trump praised the decision on Twitter.
The Washington Post
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
keep in mind some ambassadors are intelligence officers, some are gift positions. this one is an intelligence officer.
|
|
Fox & Friends host Heather Nauert was spotted at the White House last week, reportedly because she was interviewing for a job in the Donald Trump administration.
Axois’ Mike Allen first reported the news in a story about how White House communications staffers, among others, felt their job security was on the line. “Heather Nauert… was spotted at the White House last week — talking to Trump, we’re told, about a communications job…” Allen wrote Monday morning. “That certainly doesn’t make embattled West Wing officials feel any more secure as they try to put out what one called ‘400 fires a day.'”
Allen notes that after the interview, Nauert pointedly tweeted out an image of herself wearing Ivanka Trump‘s clothing line.
Mediaite
|
The pressure is building on Flynn, but it's pretty naive to think he acted without Trump's knowledge or direction on this.
|
|
|
|