Breaking: F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia


#1

Stunning.

Agents and senior F.B.I. officials had grown suspicious of Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia during the 2016 campaign but held off on opening an investigation into him, the people said, in part because they were uncertain how to proceed with an inquiry of such sensitivity and magnitude. But the president’s activities before and after Mr. Comey’s firing in May 2017, particularly two instances in which Mr. Trump tied the Comey dismissal to the Russia investigation, helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry, the people said.


#2

Hmmm: the NYT that bends over backward to praise the left and condemn Trump, and the FBI who wouldn’t touch a Hillary investigation with a ten light-year pole. I see a credibility problem without even getting to the links.


#3

What’s “stunning” is that you continue to take anything the NYT publishes as true.


#4

There’s nothing to dispute. As a matter of fact, senior career officials at the FBI became seriously concerned that Donald Trump was a Russian agent, and the investigation into whether he is in fact compromised by, or working with, Russian intelligence is still on-going.

You can choose (in my view, bizarrely) to see that as a big nothingburger if you want. But the idea that it’s crazy to be alarmed by this fact just exposes your inability to engage in basic critical thinking.


#5

The constraints that Trump imposed are part of a broader pattern by the president of shielding his communications with Putin from public scrutiny and preventing even high-ranking officials in his own administration from fully knowing what he has told one of the United States’ main adversaries.

As a result, U.S. officials said there is no detailed record, even in classified files, of Trump’s face-to-face interactions with the Russian leader at five locations over the past two years. Such a gap would be unusual in any presidency, let alone one that Russia sought to install through what U.S. intelligence agencies have described as an unprecedented campaign of election interference.

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III is thought to be in the final stages of an investigation that has focused largely on whether Trump or his associates conspired with Russia during the 2016 presidential campaign. The new details about Trump’s continued secrecy underscore the extent to which little is known about his communications with Putin since becoming president.


#6

That’s simply IGNORANT, J.A. Those folks who “opened this investigation” are the SAME PEOPLE who have since been fired or had to resign in disgrace for their unprofessional, even criminal behavior under color of their offices.


#7

From the Barr nomination hearing:

And the chairman, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), usually a Trump loyalist, seemed to be trolling the president.

“Do you believe Mr. Mueller would be involved in a witch hunt against anybody?” Graham asked, invoking the president’s favorite phrase.

“I don’t believe Mr. Mueller would be involved in a witch hunt,” the nominee replied.

Asked whether then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions was right to recuse himself from the Russia investigation — a source of Trump’s fury — Barr replied: “I think he probably did the right thing recusing himself.”

“I agree,” Graham added, before poking fun at Trump’s lack of intellectual curiosity. “President Trump is a one-pager kind of guy,” he said.

“I suspect he is,” Barr concurred.

There was laughter in the hearing room at Trump’s expense.


#8

"I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or between people in the campaign [and Russia]. I have no idea" - Giuliani, 1/16/19

"There was no Russian collusion. We're now a year and a half, two years into this, no Russian collusion, case over" - Giuliani, 5/2/18

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) January 17, 2019

#9

It’s not a great sign for Trump supporters when Trump’s head lawyer starts suddenly walking back denials about collusion and begins saying he has “no idea” if the Trump team colluded with the primary geopolitical foe of the United States to win the presidency.


#10

So the new line is going to be “Trump didn’t know about the collusion with Russia.”

This is what we’ve come to. The President of the United States is going to defend himself by saying he was too incompetent to know that his campaign lead was colluding with the primary geopolitical foe of the United States to win the election. Of course, this is obviously a lie. Which means that the President of the United States almost certainly knowingly colluded with the Kremlin to get elected.


#11

The fact that they’ve been looking for 2 1/2 years for literally any evidence on a man who has absolutely no subtlety would tend to indict the critical thinking of someone who continues to think it may be true.

Much like people in the same intelligence agencies insisting that 3 years into the Iraq war we’d totally find WMDs. “Oh look! Some 25 year mustard gas shells that haven’t been touched in… 25 years!” <- You are here

The Trump-Russia thing is an Obama birth certificate levels of wild eyed stupidity.

Jet fuel can’t melt steel beams. AIDS was created to genocide black people. The CIA is turning the frogs gay. And Donald Trump is a puppet of Russia.


#12

dude, it’s over. Trump’s team colluded with the Kremlin. The only question at this point is if they can prove Trump knew about it. It takes 5 seconds of thought to realize he must have known about it, and that the denials are BS. His legal team is already switching to “collusion isn’t a crime anyway.”


#13

And he wasn’t subtle about it. When it came out that Trump Jr said “I love it” to an offer from a Russian agent to collude with him to win the election, Trump dictated a letter filled with outright lies to the American public. Comparing this to Trump’s crazy lying during Birtherism is a joke.


#14

If J.Anderson wanted to have any credibility as the 19th century libertarian he says he is, he’d find something of value in what Trump as done over two years in office. He would not need to endorse him. He could say now and then, “I agree with that.” Instead he aligns himself with the Democrat witch-hunt, which blows whatever credibility he thinks he has earned with his essays and comments.

Why don’t you just come clean? You are card carrying Democrat who admires Nancy Pelosi, Adam Shift, Maxine Waters and Robert Muller. I don’t know why you bother to keep up the façade. When you post stuff like this, any credible claims to conservatism that you think you have, are blown completely out the window.

You don’t get it. There are rogue elements of the FBI and the Justice Department that are totally in the tank the Democrat Party. That situation is dangerous for the continuation of a democracy. Some of these people are not far from the level of The Checka and other totalitarian police forces whose goal is to end any kind of dissent.


#15

That post is alarmingly stupid.

I’ve never claimed to be a “19th century libertarian.” Do you mean “classical liberal”?

I’ve never claimed to be a conservative, and every time you say that I have claimed to be a conservative, I reiterate that I am not a conservative, and have never claimed to be. Incredibly, this has not stopped you from repeating falsely that I have claimed to be a conservative.

Trump is as offensive to classical liberal philosophy as any political figure in American history. He hasn’t done anything I agree with. Even the tax cuts are a joke. You don’t know what you’re talking about.


#16

Does “Classical Liberal” = Marxist?

The Liberals of the 19th century opposed the divine rule of kings and the mercantilist system which gave exclusive trade rights to favored individuals, joint stock companies and firms like the East India Company. They supported equitable taxation and free trade without restrictions within the capitalist system. They supported Democracy and the rights of the people to air their grievances. The most articulate American supporter of those positions was Thomas Jefferson although he certainly had his issues with slavery and petty politics when he was in the arena.

Where have I seen you endorse these ideals? Nowhere.

Instead you support news stories like this which are the invention of the modern socialist Democrats who are anything but “Classical Liberals.” The worst of them are Marxists. Their plans are to go back to the bad old days when a small ruling class ran and decided everything. That’s why I call them “Regressives” instead of their preferred name, “Progressives.” They want to go back to the days of the kings and the lords, except the ruling class will be high government officials instead of hereditary monarchs and lords.

The Classical Liberals believed in freedom. As Barry Goldwater said many years ago, the modern liberals co-opted the term for themselves which made them seem like people who believed in the will of the people. In their modern incantation, they don’t. Instead they whine like spoiled children because they lost a fair election.


#17

Dude, I argue for free trade in almost every thread that’s even remotely related to the topic.

Sick of your (rule-violating insult and accusation deleted by F.C.). You call me a Marxist. I ask you to provide evidence. You don’t. Rinse and repeat. Even when I went through my socialist phase as an undergraduate, over 10 years ago, I still wasn’t a “Marxist.” I wonder if you even understand what that word means.

Buzz off.