Posted on 06/13/2019 8:05:32 AM PDT by McQ444
President Trump on Thursday defended his comment that he would listen if a foreign entity offered damaging information on a political opponent, equating it to his contacts with foreign governments as part of his role as president. In a series of tweets, the president sought to downplay the significance of his comment a day earlier to ABC News, which critics argued invited a foreign power to interfere in the 2020 election and some Democrats highlighted as reason to begin impeachment proceedings. Trump first suggested listening to damaging information from a foreign actor was equivalent to holding diplomatic meetings with foreign heads of state, while later arguing Democrats were guilty of improper contacts.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Hillary not only (indirectly) worked with the Russians calling it operation research, she tried to hide the payment.
Trump is merely calling her out on what SHE did.
Trump got asked a straight question (albeit a stupid question, and he gave a straight answer...to a stupid guy
Listening to information is not the same as acting upon it.
This is such insanity it’s gotten so crazy that we now have a demand that foreign evidence of criminality by Americans be hidden.
So there is a free pass for Americans to commit crimes with the assistance of foreigners? Insanity.
And think about it this all was about Russia, so they are saying that Hillary or any Democrat can commit crimes working with Russia and you will be the wrong one for exposing it. They are so sick.
Nancy and the Dems are having a field day with this!
Does anyone even stop to think why would his opponent have committed some crime let’s say with Russia? We’re talking about a situation in which his political opponent is a criminal.
Published on May 15, 2015
President George Bush VS Stephanopoulos, Larry King Live 1992
Watch this!
Again, for entertainment purposes, the keen and thoughtful observations from the commenters:
“First Trump denied he conspired with the Russians.
Now Trump says it’s okay for him to conspire with the Russians.”
“Today’s Conservatives
1. No Ethics
2. No Rule of Law
3. No Law and Order
4. No Morality
5. No Sanity
6. No Decency
7. No dedication
8. No Patriotism
9. No Religious Belief
10. No Authenticity
11. No Vision
12. No Diversity
13. No Diligence
14. No compassion
15. No Empathy
16. No Brains
17. No Balls
Please add If I missed something.”
“This just gave the Iranians an open invitation to hack HIM.
And the Chinese.
Because Trump basically said its ok to do that in political campaigns. And China is over the tariffs and Iran is over the war tactics.
He’s so dumb”
The left just can’t stand that Trump is so frank and willing to tell the truth about what politicians always have and always will do. His honesty is driving them off the rails (which is why they pretend he is the most dishonest president, instead of the most lied about president). They only want to hear normal politician B.S. They hate that he’s making it harder for them to cover up the normal way they (and everyone in Washington) work, and foremost they hate him for not conforming and doing things they way they say they should be done.
Anti-American leftists pretending that they care about what foreign nations do to us is a pretty funny joke though. They sure didn’t when it was the Soviets spying on us or Clinton handing over our technology to the ChiComs.
Shock of shocks: it’s sometimes a good idea to cooperate and be friendly with the Russians. Today there are four dead Americans who were murdered by Mudslimes in the Boston Marathon Bombing who’d be alive if we’d just cooperated with the Russians when they warned us about the soon to be bombers.
These are the comments I posted (some are repeats or stated in different ways and presented in no particular order):
When the Clinton campaign paid for opposition research from Christopher Steele, did Steele at any time claim his 'research' was based on sources from British intelligence?
Did Christopher Steele falsely claim his dossier was based on British intelligence when he sold it to the Clinton Campaign?
Did Christopher Steele represent his phoney dossier as coming from British intelligence?
Christopher Steele wrote a phoney dossier based on phoney intelligence from alleged Russian sources and the Clinton campaign paid for it.
The Steele dossier was the Clinton campaigns' opposition research from a foreign source.
The Mueller 'investigation' was based on opposition 'research' from a foreign source.
The Steele dossier was opposition research. It was the basis of the Mueller 'investigation'.
The Clinton campaign paid for opposition research from Christopher Steele, a former agent of the British government.
Christopher Steele is a foreign agent. The Clinton campaign paid a foreign agent for opposition research.
When the Clinton campaign paid for opposition research, did Christopher Steele represent himself as an agent of British intelligence?
When the Clinton campaign paid for opposition research, did Christopher Steele claim British intelligence as a source?
Did Christopher Steele represent himself as an agent of British intelligence?
Did Christopher Steele claim British intelligence as a source of his opposition research?
Did Chrisopher Steele use his past experience with British intelligence to claim British intelligence as a source?
Adam Schiff was willing to use opposition research from comedians he believed to be 'Russians'.
Nancy is trying to crucify him over his answer. If you don’t listen to it how do you know if it’s something bad? What do you do, call the FBI and say someone might want to say something but you don’t know what it is? What if they are trying to tell you your opponent is breaking the law buying false info on you? Not listen?
“This is such insanity it’s gotten so crazy that we now have a demand that foreign evidence of criminality by Americans be hidden.”
That’s a great, logical point, but you are acting like the Dems want to set a new “standard.” They don’t. None of what they are saying now is supposed to ever apply to them or any circumstance that isn’t politically useful to them. We’ve already seen that enough times. This is just about grasping for current political ammo; it’s not supposed to make sense on a larger scale or long term.
I agree with all the Freeper comments... but I wish PDJT wouldn’t fall for this obvious setup. Unnecessary.
Anyone remember the time Shiff got pranked by those Ukranian
radio jocks offering dirt on Trump. I must have missed the uproar over that.
There is no law mandating you have to go to the FBI about ‘dirt’ unless it’s about a bribe, or some national security issue. Maybe we should make a law, and create a Federal Bureau of Dirt (FBD).
Donald Trump has spent three years ridiculing the news media as "failing" and "fake news." If he really thought he was going to get a fair shake from a Democrat political operative like George Whats-His-Name, then he's as dumb as a post. That's clearly not the case here.
Why would you do one if you had no intent of doing the other?
Stephanopolis’ question to Trump was a setup in light of his son’s testimony yesterday, regarding his meeting with Russians claiming to have dirt on Hillary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.