Trump tells Putin not to ‘meddle in the election,’ his tone was criticized
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
President Trump met face-to-face with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G-20 Summit in Japan and told his counterpart not to "meddle" in the 2020 elections when pressed by a reporter, but his delivery faced immediate criticism as being aloof.
Trump, who was seated next to Putin, was asked by a reporter if he would tell "the Russian president to not meddle in the election." There was some cross talk in the room at the time. Trump, without looking at Putin, responded, "Of course I will. Don't meddle in the election, president. Don't meddle in the election."
The report said his tone was "open to interpretation but would seem to do little to silence questions about Trump's relationship with Russia in the aftermath of special counsel Robert Mueller's conclusion that his campaign did not collude with Russia in 2016."
Trump's supporters will likely say the reporter's question was awkward and the serious discussion should not play out in the public eye. Trump's critics will likely conclude that he refuses to see the seriousness of defending U.S. elections from a foreign government, hence his offhanded response.
President Donald Trump, right, shakes hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin during a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Osaka, Japan, Friday, June 28, 2019. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
Friday’s meeting is the first between the two leaders since the Mueller Report documented the extensive ways in which Russia sought to influence the 2016 election. The Mueller report did not establish a criminal conspiracy between Trump associates and the Kremlin to sway the outcome of the election. Putin has denied that Russia meddled in the American election to help Trump win.
The two are in Osaka for the summit. Before the meeting, Trump said he expected a "very good conversation" but told reporters "what I say to him is none of your business."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
117 visitors
Even if Trump sucker punched Putin, it wouldn't be enough for the haters!
If Obama just joked around with Putin about something like this, do you really think you'd be defending him? Especially after he invited Russia to meddle, on national television? And claiming that what he says to Putin is none of our business - when he works for us and there are very valid concerns about his relationship with Putin?
Trump has made it clear that he won't accept the fact that Russia meddled in the election, because his ego won't allow him to.
This should not be a partisan thing. Any president who acts like this needs to be called out.
Now Trump is joking? He is either serious or joking when the left says so. Got it!
Especially after he invited Russia to meddle, on national television?
What is the quote, which you interpret as an "invitation to meddle"?
And claiming that what he says to Putin is none of our business - when he works for us and there are very valid concerns about his relationship with Putin?
It was none of our business when Obama was caught on an open mic telling a Russian official that he could be "more flexible with Russia" right after the election!
This should not be a partisan thing. Any president who acts like this needs to be called out.
Except that you are calling him out when he does the right thing.
"I had nothing to do with Russia helping me get elected."
"WASHINGTON—Attorney General William Barr’s review of the origins of the Russia investigation i s focused in part on the U.S. intelligence assessment that found Moscow intervened in the 2016 presidential election to help then-candidate Donald Trump , according to people familiar with the matter.
Paywall.
And Barr does like a cover-up, doesn't he? Iran-Contra, Russian meddling. He believes the President is above the law, which is why he's AG.
So we discredit the AG when we don't like what we hear, right?
We discredit the AG when his own actions merit it.
You discredit anyone who threatens the false narrative or those deep state officials who have lied, leaked, committed FISA fraud and have spied on American citizens.
From the video, Barr wanted to "get the whole report out."
So, why so many redactions, by Barr himself?
He was also called out several times for lies - blaming his mischaracterizations of Mueller's letter on the press, for example.
And right after that he went back to insisting that Russia didn't help get him elected. He slipped up and told the truth once, and then went back to his lies.
You've yet to reveal a "deep state".
Both this seed and the WSJ article you posted actually make Trump and Barr look bad. They don't show a "deep state"; they show Trump and his administration being called out on lies and putting personal interests (and Russian interests) above the good of their country.
Why do you have a problem with liars and cheats being held accountable? When did that become a bad thing?
By Law there must be redactions....All that Grand Jury stuff has to be redacted. BTW Barr didn't have to show any of it, but he showed a lot of it.
The report was released in a timely fashion. You even have Mueller coming to testify! This is what you told us to wait for, Sandy! What's wrong, Sandy?
Yup.
He's too stupid to keep all of his lies straight.
Trump smirked and Putin chuckled. Don't you believe your own eyes?
Whataboutism.
Address what Trump said. Do you think that 'We the people' have a right to know about what Trump is doing in our name? Do you think that Trump should be held to his claim of being the 'most transparent ever'?
So Trump delivering what should be a serious ultimatum with a smirk on his face is the 'right thing' when the right says so. Got it.
Did he want the whole report released, or didn't he? Why does he say one thing and do another, and why are you ok with that?
Did he mischaracterize Mueller's letter (yes) and then blame "the press" for his actions? Yes, and he got called on it. Why are you ok with lies and scapegoating?
Oh, I know, Sandy, There wasn't any animosity by FBI officials, no leaking by Comey and Clapper, no agents used on Papadopolous, Andy McCabe didn't admit that without the Steele Dossier there wouldn't be a FISA warrant, McCabe dosen't have a criminal referral, It's all a "conspiracy theory".
Why do you have a problem with liars and cheats being held accountable?
To the contrary, I'm all for it and it's coming Sandy!
He said he would release as much as he could. Promise kept
Did he mischaracterize Mueller's letter (yes)
What was the purpose of Mueller sending that letter, Sandy?
Take it easy on the coffee, your'e going 90 words per second. I type with one finger!
Don't believe in that? There are 3 investigations going on, one via a US Attorney. Don't think they'll find anything? I'll bet my life against yours!!
Let's drop the insults of the President. Stick to facts, Sandy
That is a fact.
He wasn't the one who lied to us for over two years about a conspiracy - that would be the people we depend on for news....and the truth!
It's a fact that he lied and then immediately turned around and said the exact opposite. An intelligent person would be able to keep track of their lies, one would think. As much as Trump insults everyone else - you're going to get outraged on his behalf when someone points out his stupidity?
" Christopher Steele's raw intelligence reporting did not inform the FBI's decision to initiate its counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016. In fact, the FBI's closely-held investigative team only received Steele's reporting in mid-September - more than seven weeks later. The FBI - and subsequently, the Special Counsel's - investigation into links between the Russian government and Trump campaign associates has been based on troubling law enforcement and intelligence information unrelated to the "dossier".
There's more there about the date on which the investigation began, and the date of the Steele dossier, if you care to read something which has facts counter to your beliefs.
I am sticking to facts.
What if your'e an imaginary fetus inside Julian Castro's trans gender men? Then I'll have to pretend to protect you and the tax payers will have to pretend to pay for you!
You will bet your life? Yikes.
But you have a loophole in your wording.
Every investigation finds "something". I'll bet my life you will never see an investigator come out after spending a million dollars and say "our great team of investigators found absolutely nothing about anything"
I haven't had my coffee, I'm a lousy typist, and I'm still pointing out the holes in your assertions.
Kat, neither you or anyone has demonstrated here that Barr lied. If it's him saying he would try to get out as much as possible, as soon as possible, I'm afraid youv'e failed
I'm still waiting for that part
My 1.1.25 would be a good start. I provided a link. You'd do well to follow it.
The minority memo? Haha!!!! What about Andrew McCabe's sworn testimony?
My nephew told me that I text like a hyperactive woodpecker.
Barr totally deliberately mischaracterized the Mueller report. Among other things, Barr said that Mueller did not conclude he could not indict Trump because of DOJ guidelines concerning not indicting a sitting president. It turned out that Barr's words were in direct conflict with what Mueller thought and later expressed in public.
Your post only restates what the FBI came out with to counter McCabe's testimony. After the FBI got caught red handed using the unverified (and they knew it was BS) Steele Dossier to get FISA warrants, did the FBI put forward the narrative that the Dossier didn't start the investigation, it supposedly began with info from "foreign sources" on Papadopolous. As your linked document (which tries to back up the claim) claims - the investigation began with the Papadopolous info in late July of 2016. I think we are about to find out that was a lie too. The investigation most likely began earlier than that. As I said, we now have 3 investigations of the actions of the intelligence agencies.
As you once said - I'll stand by the findings of the investigation. The difference is I mean it!
Correct! There were other people in the room with Barr & Mueller when Mueller was supposed to have said the DOJ policy was not part of his decision. Let's ask them who is lying!
Mueller has specifically said, more than once , that the DOJ guidelines did effect his decision. In fact he said that the DOJ guidelines effected him so completely that he NEVER EVEN CONSIDERED indicting Trump, FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE INVESTIGATION.
I dont know whether Barr is bored or stupid or just dishonest but he openly mischaracterized Mueller's position.
Yes he did.
I dont know whether Barr is bored or stupid or just dishonest but he openly mischaracterized Mueller's position.
Barr DISPUTED IT! According to Barr, Mueller told him that the DOJ policy DID NOT play a part in Mueller's decision.
In other words Barr is a liar because YOU & OTHERS prefer to believe Mueller. I believe Barr. Why? Because Mueller investigated a false claim based on no crime for over 2 years.
Investigations should be narrowly defined. You don't search people for crimes. You investigate a crime!
Although I won't dispute that you are a fairly intelligent guy, you endlessly prove that you have blinders on the size of the Grand Canyon.
Mueller showed the Russians interfered with the election. He showed that the Trump team appreciated the interference and never reported it. He showed that Trump encouraged it and Trump's son sought it out. He showed that numerous trump underlings lied to or did not cooperate in the investigation. He showed that there is a viable case that Trump obstructed justice.
Now you are going to tell us that Barr is more believable than Mueller because Mueller investigated Trump. What you are trying to tell us is laughable Vic.
John, what launched that investigation?
Now you are going to tell us that Barr is more believable than Mueller because Mueller investigated Trump
I'm telling you that Barr is eminently more believable than Mueller because there was nothing to investigate and Mueller knew it.
'Well then, if your are making silly wagers...I'll just claim I'm a fetus and you'll be forced to protect me.'
You are aware that Trump's campaign associates were under investigation before Trump himself was, yes? And that plenty of them were found to have met with Russian agents (and in fact, WERE foreign agents, like Manafort and Flynn).
We know that members of Trump's campaign team met with Russian officials. Period.
And regardless of whether Trump or his lackeys had any hand in it whatsoever (they did), Russia meddled in our elections. They manipulated social media in Trump's favor. They hacked into our voting rolls.
Are you ok with that?
I'm an even lousier texter than I am a typist. I miss the physical keyboard on my Blackberry. I made a lot fewer flubs on that.
Sure you will, Vic. That's why you don't see that earlier beginnings to the investigations pretty much preclude their being based on the Steele dossier, because it didn't yet exist.
There are hardly any redactions. What would expect to find there?
A smoking gun? An unexploded bombshell?
Really? What's your definition of "hardly any"?
No, Barr's words were not in conflict, they actually supporter Mueller's conclusions.
The report is over and done, and Mueller will reveal nothing new or additional next month.
So how many are there? Do you have a number?
Do you realize some redactions are required by law, and what the reasons are?
What information do you think is somehow hidden in those redactions?
You double and triple down on nonsense. Oh well, thats your choice.
About 12% of the report.
Yes, I do realize some redactions are required by law.
Considering Barr's penchant for concealing presidential crimes, I don't trust him to fairly assess what should and should not be released.
Did you believe Mueller and his report ?
He really didn't "Swing" one way or another on obstruction (which normally means "Not enough evidence"), but sure did say "No Americans" in his narrative on Collusion. Is Trump a foreigner ?
Don't forget, Mueller issued a press release (the night of his press conference) agreeing with Barr's statement.
It's sort of comical to believe there's redacted evidence that is relevant. Mueller put the redacted evidence in the report, it's not going to change his conclusions.
Yep !
Hmmmmm.
I believe Mueller. I distrust Barr's spin on the Mueller report, and with good reason.
But …… Just couldn't come to a definitive "CONCLUSION" !
In real honest words.... "Conjecture Just wouldn't hold up in court" !
Funny …. how Ken Starr was able to "Make" a Conclusion, but Mueller just couldn't.
hmmmmmmmmm………...
Yeah. They tried to clear Trump, but couldn't. His own words and actions kept them from doing so.
And couldn't "Conclude the opposite" either.
Weird huh ?
"Innuendo" does make for great reporting though. It's a "Money Maker" for the "Billionaire" News Mogul's.
Yes, the double standards regarding the Clinton investigation and the Trump investigation are funny, and very revealing. Nobody could prove Clinton had committed sexual harassment, so they decided a lie about a consensual BJ would do.
Nobody can prove, despite trying, that Trump didn't obstruct justice, and found multiple instance in which he probably did, but somehow the whole investigation is an illegal witch hunt.
Did Clinton's BJ compromise national security? Of course not. Did Russian meddling? Yes, but some people don't care, so long as it was a Republican benefitting.
The point IS.... a "Conclusion" was made by the "Special Council" appointed then.
Billy was Disbarred and Impeached !
Mueller could have done the same and let the chips fall where they may with congress.
Mueller chose NOT TO conclude ANYTHING !
"Innuendos" don't cut it !
Mueller's hands were tied. That's something you'd like to ignore.
Nothing tied his hands in making a definitive "CONCLUSION" in a simple "Report".
From the same source (bolding mine):
Basically, Mueller's hands were tied by the fact that he's a more honorable man than Starr was, or than House Republicans were during the Clinton investigation and impeachment.
Mueller could still make a conclusion without actually indicting a president himself.
The "Report" was supposed to be about "Fact", not "Could be's" !
"Just the facts".
That's all that was needed by Mueller !
He "Lacked" in actual "Facts" on obstruction !
He presented the facts. He left to others to decide whether the facts support prosecution. In anyone but a sitting president, they likely would.
Is it ok with you that your president is only not officially a criminal because he's president? If so, why? Because it's certainly not ok with me.
He presented situations that occurred with no conclusion.....period !
"Is it ok with you that your president is only not officially a criminal because he's president?"
Is Trump a Criminal ?
Mueller said the OLC guidelines did not stop him from charging Trump. It's simply dishonest to claim the OLc guidelines prevented him from indicting Trump.
Look it up.
Um, yes, factual situations.
And was handcuffed regarding making a conclusion.
Why do you think that Trump's case is strengthened by Mueller not "reaching conclusions" he was legally and ethically prevented from reaching?
Why do you ignore the fact that Mueller was unable to exonerate Trump of multiple instances of obstruction of justice? Not because he didn't try to exonerate him, but because Trump repeatedly obstructed justice, even when he was aware he was under investigation for...obstructing justice, rather supporting my earlier statement about Trump's stupidity.
What pre-tell, handcuffed him from making a conclusion ?
The definition of "Conclusion" doesn't have the word "Indict" in it.
If you were the CEO of a company that had an internal fraud review done by forensic accountants who had no authority to arrest or fire anyone found defrauding the company, they could only present the evidence to the board who could review it and decide what to do. Now the accountants present their findings which show numerous transfers of company money into your own personal accounts. If the accountants had concluded that you stole money and presented it to the board without you having a chance to defend yourself and explain the deposits, you could rightly proclaim that you were unjustly convicted without being given any chance to defend yourself.
Instead, the forensic accountants simply deliver the facts to the board that can then use their powers of oversight to investigate those anomalous withdrawals and deposits into your personal accounts. And during that process of determining whether you stole money or if you had a good explanation for the money transfers.
Mueller was the forensic accountant, he delivered all the facts of what appear to be intentional obstructive behavior on not one, not two, but of at least ten individual instances. He delivered his finding to the Justice department with the stated intent that it be delivered to congress so they can exercise their oversight responsibilities and determine whether none, some, or all the instances could be considered obstruction of justice and once determined, they have to decide whether it warrants impeachment, censure or doing nothing.
Appear to whom ?
I'VE sat down with a member of a competitor from another company, because he was a friend of mine. Were we "Conspiring" because we sat down and just talked ?
Nothing came of it BUT JUST TALK amongst ourselves !
Am I, or my friend, a conspirator ?
by the by....How are those "Liberal" run Congressional Committee investigations going so far ?
He said the opposite. Volume II, page 1 of the Mueller report.
Is firing Comey and telling Lester Holt that it was because of the Russia investigation "just talking" to a competitor?
Do you mean "pray tell"?
The OLC and the fact that he was employed by the DOJ.
His job was to present the facts as he found them. That is what he did. It was not his role to draw conclusions. That was up to others. Some base their conclusions on those facts. Others base their conclusions on their own prejudices, even while acknowledging the facts.
The Democrats and the ones in congress wanted Comey OUT.
Oct. 30, 2016: Then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, accused the FBI director of breaking the Hatch Act, a federal law, by publicly disclosing new information about the Clinton investigation 11 days ahead of the presidential election.
Oct. 31, 2016: The next day, Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tennessee, echoed concerns similar to Reid’s and called for Comey to resign his FBI post.
Nov. 2, 2016: Days later, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, told Bloomberg News that he had lost confidence in Comey for his handling of Clinton’s email investigation.
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on FBI Director James Comey: "Maybe he's not in the right job"
1:41 PM - Nov 2, 2016
Jan. 13, 2017: Two months after Clinton lost to Trump, Democrats blasted Comey after a briefing on the agency’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the election.
One of them was Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Georgia, who at the time said, “My confidence in the FBI director’s ability to lead this agency has been shaken.”
Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, put it more bluntly: “The FBI director has no credibility.”
Jan. 24, 2017: The fading confidence in Comey continued toward the end of January when Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-North Carolina, said “I think that James Comey needs to fade away into oblivion.”
On Oct. 30, 2016, the New York Daily News editorial board called on Comey to resign.
On Oct. 31, 2016, ThinkProgress justice editor Ian Millhiser wrote a post making “the case for firing James Comey”
On Nov. 7, 2016, Newsweek columnist Kurt Eichenwald didn’t just call for the FBI director’s firing — he said Comey was unfit for public service
Trump Complied with their wishes.
I just saw the video of Trump telling Putin "don't meddle" . It is quite obvious that Trump feels put upon being called to do this by the media and it is something that Trump has no heart in. Essentially his words to Putin are a charade.
I am at a loss for words as for why Vic and the other conservatives here feel this was a good look for Trump that should be seeded.
Its obvious the Trumpers on here (even the ones who pretend not to be) don't care how low he goes or who he turns to for the 'win'. They do not care. Lies? Don't care. Ignorance? Don't care. Making money off the office? Don't care. Executive time filled with Fox and Breitbart? Don't care. Attack allies and embrace murderous dictators and autocrats? Don't care. Explode the deficit? Don't care. Incite violence? Don't care. Rape/sexual abuse allegations? Don't care. Giving comfort to racists? Don't care. Inhumanity and cruelty to CHILDREN? Don't care. There is nothing he can do they won't defend, even if it means twisting into pretzels. And they want to be the moral compass for everybody.
Because we don’t care what the Trump haters including the media draw as conclusions about Trump. Haters are going to hate, and you John are obsessed with hating both Trump and those of us who support our president
We don't hate the 'president'. We find him deplorable.
John and many others on the left have openly stated their hatred of both Trump and those of us who support him.
Honest dialogue here and elsewhere would acknowledge the very real cultural and political civil war we are already engaged in.
this divide will only grow worse as evidenced by the views and proposals put forward by the Democrats running for president. Not one of them actually believes this country can be re-unified which only serves to prove my point that all politicians are pathological liars.
I dont hate Trump or his supporters. I can analyze stupidity without becoming emotional.
Good rant.
I havent seen the clip yet, but if Putin was sitting next to Trump and Trump didnt look at Putin when he said "don't meddle" then Trump was clowning.
Not sure why you wanted to seed this Vic, as it does not make your boy look good.
He looks good from where I'm sitting.
That's truly a shame. I don't understand how any American can see this crap without being bothered by it. Trump prefers dictators to democracy and supports Putin over our own people, and I find that truly disgusting.
And I can make outrageous claims too! It's rather easy
And you have. Multitudes of them.
So many that can't name one
Clearly you don't ever bother listening to what Trump says, or reading about it. Or even reading what his own officials say.
[Removed.]
For crying out loud, haven't you even heard of things like the Helsinki summit? Does your support for Trump over your country have no bounds?
'So many that can't name one'
Well the 'deep state' whoever they are, would be one.
It's outrageous?
Andrew McCabe !
We are definitely dealing with a "deep state", the deep state of denial among Trump supporters who refuse to accept facts, make excuses for this Presidents disgusting behavior and reject western democracy that they now see as a threat to "white culture" because it embraces diversity and immigrants of every faith and color. It's why both Trump and his followers have such a connection to the white nationalists in Russia that Putin controls and manipulates just like he does our feckless moron commander incompetent.
Once the term "white culture" enters the conversation, Victory is near!
The 'president' would never punch little putin.
'The two are in Osaka for the summit. Before the meeting, Trump said he expected a "very good conversation" but told reporters "what I say to him is none of your business."
I'm sure he brought his 'presidential' knee pads for his one on one meeting while the 'president' thanked little putin for his assistance.
I don't know, I saw this on Facebook and thought of you calling out the turd in chief and had to show you!
So many mock me for calling a spade a spade but I guess I'm not the only one. Thanks hon!
[deleted]
Suddenly the woke crowd has awoken!
Trump says something stupid or damaging 50 times and the right sees nothing. Obama says one thing to the Russians and the right brings it up very time.
Strange and ineffectual.
Because one thing really happened and the others are part of a narrative. And every time you claim that this President is cozy with Putin, you'll be lookin right at that tape of radical Obama and Medvedev
Thats your problem. I deal with reality.
Don't think so !
Obama promised Russia better times after his election.
The "Reporting" on what those "Good Times" actually were...… not much.
That's "Reality" !
"Please Please Please, Putin My Dearest Friend, whatever you do, Please Please Please, do not meddle in the 2020 US elections. Wink Wink Wink, Please Please Please, do not hack the Democrats and their nominee. Wink Wink Wink! Please Please Please, do not mess with all the state's voter rolls and data systems. Wink Wink Wink! We would not want a repeat of 2016. Would we? Wink Wink Wink"...
Ya, Please don't....That's the job of the American biased media!
[Deleted]
This is an open conversation and I see we do have moderation, so I'll be back in a few
So Br’er Fox had caught Br’er Rabbit and this time Br’er Fox said he was going to cook Br’er Rabbit and eat him up for good! Br’er Rabbit was mighty scared. He begged, “Oh, Br’er Fox, I don’t care what you do with me, so long as you just don’t throw me in that briar patch over there. Go on and barbecue me up, Br’er Fox, but please don’t throw me in that briar patch.”
Br’er Fox said he was going to roast him anyhow, but when he went to hang Br’er Rabbit up over the fire, he found he didn’t have any string to tie him up with. “Well, I guess I can’t roast you,” Br’er Fox said. “I guess I’ll have to drown you instead.” Br’er Rabbit pleaded, “Oh, Br’er Fox, go ahead and drown me then, just so long as you don’t throw me into that briar patch!”
“Well,” said Br’er Fox, “it looks like there’s no water around here to drown you in. I guess I’ll skin you instead.” “Okay, Br’er Fox, no problem,” chattered Br’er Rabbit, “Go ahead and skin me, cut out my eyes, cut off my legs, just don’t throw me into that briar patch!”
By this time, Br’er Fox had gotten the idea that Br’er Rabbit really, really didn’t want to get anywhere near that briar patch. Br’er Fox wanted to hurt Br’er Rabbit as bad as he could, so he took Br’er Rabbit by the legs and threw him right smack into the middle of that briar patch. He heard a lot of rustling and crackling when Br’er Rabbit landed, and he waited around to see what terrible thing was going to happen.
But a few minutes later, he hears somebody calling, “Oh, yoo-hoo, Br’er Fox! Over here!” and he looks – and he sees Br’er Rabbit, sitting on a rock, combing the tar out of his fur with a stick. “Didn’t you know, Br’er Fox,” called Br’er Rabbit. “I was bred and born in the briar patch! Bred and born!” And he hopped away.
Let me end this by stating the obvious. An issue like Russian interference is dealt with behind the scenes by the various agencies of government, not by a reporter wager her finger, every time the President sits down with the Russian leader, demanding that the President tell Putin in front of everybody to knock it off!
The President responded to such theatrics as was appropriate! He demonstrated how idiotic that would look!