Trump reacts to testimony that Clinton spread Russia allegations

[civilwarbuff]

Trump reacts to testimony that Clinton spread Russia allegations: 'Where do I get my reputation back?'

EXCLUSIVE: Former President Donald Trump reacted to the bombshell testimony out of the trial of Michael Sussmann that Hillary Clinton herself approved the dissemination of false information alleging a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank to the media.

Trump told Fox News Digital that the entire Russia investigation is "one of the greatest political scandals in history," and that he will "never" get his "reputation fully back."

Former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook on Friday testified as part of the first criminal trial out of Special Counsel John Durham’s years-long investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, saying Clinton approved and "agreed" to share the discredited data with the media.

Comments/thoughts?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Trump reacts to testimony that Clinton spread Russia allegations: 'Where do I get my reputation back?'

EXCLUSIVE: Former President Donald Trump reacted to the bombshell testimony out of the trial of Michael Sussmann that Hillary Clinton herself approved the dissemination of false information alleging a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank to the media.

Trump told Fox News Digital that the entire Russia investigation is "one of the greatest political scandals in history," and that he will "never" get his "reputation fully back."

Former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook on Friday testified as part of the first criminal trial out of Special Counsel John Durham’s years-long investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, saying Clinton approved and "agreed" to share the discredited data with the media.

Comments/thoughts?

The data shared had nothing to do with the FBI probe into connections between Trump campaign associates and Russia, nor the WikiLeaks email dumps, nor the Steele dossier. It is about a little discussed story involving data showing communications between a server at a Russian bank and one owned by the Trump Org. The story the Clinton campaign was trying to get the FBI to investigate and the press to cover was only printed in the last week of the campaign after the Trump "Me Too" revelations and the WikiLeak dump of Clinton staff email and had almost no impact on election.

The trial is about whether the attempts to get the FBI to look into the bank/Trump server traffic involved criminal falsehoods by a campaign lawyer. But whether it is criminal is up to a jury in a couple weeks (or whenever this over long trial ends.)

 

[SavedByGrace3]

The complicity of the media is mind boggling.
Will we ever be able to trust them again?

 

[Tom 1]

Trump reacts to testimony that Clinton spread Russia allegations: 'Where do I get my reputation back?'

EXCLUSIVE: Former President Donald Trump reacted to the bombshell testimony out of the trial of Michael Sussmann that Hillary Clinton herself approved the dissemination of false information alleging a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank to the media.

Trump told Fox News Digital that the entire Russia investigation is "one of the greatest political scandals in history," and that he will "never" get his "reputation fully back."

Former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook on Friday testified as part of the first criminal trial out of Special Counsel John Durham’s years-long investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, saying Clinton approved and "agreed" to share the discredited data with the media.

Comments/thoughts?

What reputation is he talking about?

 

[Tom 1]

The complicity of the media is mind boggling.
Will we ever be able to trust them again?

Presumably you mean they printed something they knew not to be true, but said it was, or something like that? What is the basis for your claim? Specifically I mean. What actual articles are you referring to.

 

[stevil]

The complicity of the media is mind boggling.
Will we ever be able to trust them again?

CNN Exclusive: New text messages reveal Fox's Hannity advising Trump White House and seeking direction - CNNPolitics
On the afternoon of Election Day, Hannity texted Meadows at 1:36 p.m. to ask about turnout in North Carolina. Two hours later, Meadows responded: "Stress every vote matters. Get out and vote. On radio."

"Yes sir," Hannity replied. "On it. Any place in particular we need a push."

"Pennsylvania. NC AZ," Meadows wrote, adding: "Nevada."



"Got it. Everywhere," Hannity said.

 

[KCfromNC]

Trump reacts to testimony that Clinton spread Russia allegations: 'Where do I get my reputation back?'

Assuming this question is genuine, he could start by clearing the air by testifying under oath about his actions which led to both of his impeachments. And perhaps explaining why he chose to support Putin instead of our intelligence agencies. And what his kids were doing meeting with Russian agents during his 2016 campaign. And why he asked on live TV for Russia to release dirt on his political opponent.

Lots of opportunities to explain his actions.

 

[civilwarbuff]

What reputation is he talking about?

That's your entire takeaway?.....SMH.....

 

[civilwarbuff]

he could start by clearing the air by testifying under oath about his actions which led to both of his impeachments.

That has what to do with the OP? This is about both dems and media screaming 'Russia, Russia, Russia' and the FBI says 'There's nothing there.'

And perhaps explaining why he chose to support Putin instead of our intelligence agencies. And what his kids were doing meeting with Russian agents during his 2016 campaign. And why he asked on live TV for Russia to release dirt on his political opponent.

If you want to discuss those things please feel free to start another thread rather than attempt to de-rail this one. TY.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Presumably you mean they printed something they knew not to be true, but said it was, or something like that? What is the basis for your claim? Specifically I mean. What actual articles are you referring to.

See CNN, MSNBC, WAPO, NY Times for some examples just about any article just about any day from 2016 through 2021.

 

[grasping the after wind]

What reputation is he talking about?

The fact that he believes his reputation was positive prior to his being the target of a disinformation campaign tells us how out of touch about what most people think of him he has always been.

 

[Tom 1]

a disinformation campaign

What disinformation campaign? I've seen a lot of posts here about that, but every time I've asked the person what they mean, it has turned out they never read the 'media' articles, but somehow thought they knew what was in them, without reading them. There's a lot more disinformation about the 'msm' on this site, for example, than about Trump.

 

[Tom 1]

See CNN, MSNBC, WAPO, NY Times for some examples just about any article just about any day from 2016 through 2021.

I've read those articles, and they never say what it is claimed they say. Show me one you believe to be misleading pls.

 

[Tom 1]

That's your entire takeaway?.....SMH.....

There were sufficient reasons to investigate the Trump campaign's suspicious Russia connections. You even know what they are (probably, or you should at least, it's hardly secret information). It turns out it was more about Russia trying to angle Trump into the WH than Trump actively seeking that, but without an investigation that wouldn't have been determined one way or another (and those people working for the campaign who did break the law would not have had to face the music). Trump has shown his true colours with his attempts to overturn a legitimate election, among other things, so whatever reputation it is he thinks he had, the one he has now is of someone who thinks democracy is only good when it works for him.

 

[stevil]

That has what to do with the OP? This is about both dems and media screaming 'Russia, Russia, Russia' and the FBI says 'There's nothing there.'

The FBI were investigating Russian interference in the 2016 USA presidential election and potential conspiracy with the Trump Campaign well before the Democrats or the Media knew about it.
Once the media found out about the investigation then they reported it to the public, because that is their purpose (to report the news). They reported that there was an ongoing investigation. They didn't say that Trump's campaign was guilty.
FoxNews though, didn't say a thing about it, instead they published nonsense about the Dems (It's called misdirection)

 

[Blade]

Trump reacts to testimony that Clinton spread Russia allegations: 'Where do I get my reputation back?'

EXCLUSIVE: Former President Donald Trump reacted to the bombshell testimony out of the trial of Michael Sussmann that Hillary Clinton herself approved the dissemination of false information alleging a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank to the media.

Trump told Fox News Digital that the entire Russia investigation is "one of the greatest political scandals in history," and that he will "never" get his "reputation fully back."

Former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook on Friday testified as part of the first criminal trial out of Special Counsel John Durham’s years-long investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, saying Clinton approved and "agreed" to share the discredited data with the media.

Comments/thoughts?

Yeah but..well to make it short.. this again will not go anywhere. The right can simply lie and get in huge trouble yet the left. This reminds me. It was early 2016 Feb I think and she Clinton was on some Brit talk show. They were talking about truth and he said to her "I think some people in America might disagree with you". To that she said "I don't lie, I don't think I have ever lied or ever will". Odd how that never made it in the states and no one shows that video of her that never lies.

 

[civilwarbuff]

There were sufficient reasons to investigate the Trump campaign's suspicious Russia connections.

Not according to the FBI. Read the article.

It turns out it was more about Russia trying to angle Trump into the WH than Trump actively seeking that, but without an investigation that wouldn't have been determined one way or another (and those people working for the campaign who did break the law would not have had to face the music).

Once more the FBI says 'nothing there'

Trump has shown his true colours with his attempts to overturn a legitimate election, among other things,

Got nothing to do with the OP; try sticking to that for a change.
You wanna keep believing in the Tooth Fairy and the leftist media and politicians......go right ahead and live a fantasy life.

 

[civilwarbuff]

The FBI were investigating Russian interference in the 2016 USA presidential election and potential conspiracy with the Trump Campaign well before the Democrats or the Media knew about it.

And once again the FBI says 'nothing there'.

Once the media found out about the investigation then they reported it to the public, because that is their purpose (to report the news). They reported that there was an ongoing investigation. They didn't say that Trump's campaign was guilty.

That is not the takeaway I got. The media can accuse a person without actually getting themselves set up for defamation just in case they are wrong.....they have had lots of practice at that.......

 

[stevil]

And once again the FBI says 'nothing there'.

They investigated because there was sufficient evidence and reason to start the investigation. Once they investigated they found many suspect things, especially the Trump tower meeting with the Russian where the attendees constantly lied about the purpose and the attendees of the meeting, and the fact of Manafort sharing polling data with the Russians. Lots of suspect things, that thankfully the media brought to the public's attention.

That is not the takeaway I got. The media can accuse a person without actually getting themselves set up for defamation just in case they are wrong.....they have had lots of practice at that.......

It depends who you are talking about. Journalists seem to be held to a higher standard than Fox news opinion show hosts.

Tucker Carlson Successfully Argues Nobody Really Believes Tucker Carlson Is Reporting Facts - FindLaw
When Tucker Carlson says on his show “remember the facts of the story; these are undisputed" no reasonable person would believe that he was about to state facts. At least, that was Tucker Carlson's own argument in defending himself from a libel suit.

 

[Tom 1]

Not according to the FBI. Read the article.

Once more the FBI says 'nothing there'

Got nothing to do with the OP; try sticking to that for a change.
You wanna keep believing in the Tooth Fairy and the leftist media and politicians......go right ahead and live a fantasy life.

The fantasy is in the version you have of what the ‘leftist media’ actually said, which in reality isn’t the distorted notion you have in your head. A number of dubious incidents led the FBI to investigate a number of people involved in Trumps campaign, several of whom were convicted on federal charges. The FBI, and intelligence services around the world, concluded that the Russian govt had indeed interfered in the election in Trump’s favour. It is still unclear/unknown to what extent Trump was aware of this. The media, the real media, reported on this as it happened. In what way is that ‘nothing to see?’. Only in Fox fantasy land did this not actually happen, in reality, it did.