“I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election,”
Samantha Power, former Ambassador to the UN, when asked about collusion between Trump or anyone in his campaign and Russia said:
Ben Rhodes, former deputy DNI and the man who lied to America in order to help Iran get nuclear weapons, said:
“I wouldn’t have received any information on any criminal or counterintelligence investigations into what the Trump campaign was doing, so I would not have seen that information,” Rhodes said.
When pressed again, he said: “I saw indications of potential coordination, but I did not see, you know, the specific evidence of the actions of the Trump campaign.”
That response is interesting in that first he says he wouldn't have been privy to any relevant information then he alludes to in fact seeing signs of "potential" coordination. It's hard to see how he can have it both ways.
Susan Rice, former National Security Advisor, said:
“I don’t recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect that I saw…conspiracy prior to my departure.”
When asked whether she had any evidence of “coordination,” Rice replied: “I don’t recall any intelligence or evidence to that effect.”
When asked about collusion, Rice replied: “Same answer.”
When asked whether she had any evidence of “coordination,” Rice replied: “I don’t recall any intelligence or evidence to that effect.”
When asked about collusion, Rice replied: “Same answer.”
Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch when asked about evidence showing any collusion/coordination between Russia and Trump's campaign said that she did "not recall that being briefed up to me."
"I can't say that it existed or not," Lynch said, referring to evidence of collusion, conspiracy or coordination.
Her response is very revealing. She's saying that on her watch an investigation into an opposition party's candidate for President was opened up without out her knowing of any evidence that would justify such an investigation.
Can you imagine the outcry if the FBI opened an investigation into Joe Biden, not about his collusion with Ukraine or China nor about his alleged sexual assault, with no evidence that Joe or any of his campaign staff had in fact done anything wrong?
In a related note disgraced Andrew McCabe, former FBI deputy director and now CNN "expert", when asked about the accuracy of the Steele dossier--a report compiled by a foreign ex-spy and paid for by Hillary which contains, by it's own admission, nothing more than rumors about Trump that none the less was used by the FBI to get FISA warrants to spy on Trump-- he said:
Even Adam Schiff is effectively admitting that there was no evidence. He does so by citing Trump Jr's willingness to meet with a random Russian lawyer who claimed to have dirt on Hillary.
It turns out the lawyer had no dirt and so Trump Jr. left the meeting. But if the lawyer had had dirt and Trump Jr would have used it how is that different from what we know for a fact Hillary did?
We know that Hillary paid a British ex-spy to collect, and pay for , unsubstantiated dirt on Trump from Russian sources. We know that that dossier was then used against Trump during and after the 2016 campaign.
So how could Trump Jr pondering what Hillary actually did be a sign of collusion if what Hillary did isn't wrong; which is Schiff's position?
Schiff then lies about the conclusions of the Mueller Report. The Mueller Report categorically stated there was no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians yet Schiff says the opposite.
The other example Schiff cited was Trump's joke about asking the Russians to find Hillary's missing 30,000 emails.
First if you watch the video Trump and his audience are laughing; he wasn't actually asking the Russians to dig up the emails.
Second even if he was serious there was no quid pro quo. On the other hand when Obama asked Putin to not make waves during the 2012 election Obama did promise Putin that he, Obama, would make it worth Putin's while and he, Obama, delivered on that after he was reelected.
Third the emails that Wikileaks revealed weren't the 30,000 emails Hillary Clinton had illegally deleted and to which Trump was referring. The emails that WikiLeaks leaked were from the DNC, not Hillary's illegal private email server.
Fourth what Schiff is saying is that the Russians leaking emails that Hillary wanted to keep hidden from the American people is somehow bad.
It's just like Joe Biden saying he won't open his records because there's stuff in there that if we the people knew about it we wouldn't vote for him.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment