Morning Joe Blasts Trump Over Senate Intel Russian Report: All His Allies Calling it a ‘Hoax’ Will Look Like ‘Absolute Fools’

This Senate report, produced by a Republican majority committee m serves as evidence that all the investigations of the Trump campaign by the FBI, CIA, etc, were justified.  There was no "hoax". 

By the way Trump committed perjury, a crime , when he answered a Robert Mueller written question about his conversations with Roger Stone concerning  wikileaks with a denial.  

The problem is that, by definition, TrumpTrueBelievers^TM are impervious to reality. If someone came up with a photo of Trump literally kissing Putin's ass, TrumpTrueBelievers^TM would blithely explain it away.

Well... perhaps within that tiny sliver of "centrist, undecided", this will convince one or two people.

Scarborough is right to be outraged. The Trump/Russian collaboration was scandalous - bordering on treason - and the disdainful dismissal of the very idea of "collaboration, ha-ha" by all of America's right-wingers, including here on NT... is profoundly disgusting.

Scarborough is right!

But he won't change very many opinions...

The problem is that, by definition, TrumpTrueBelievers^TM are impervious to reality.

followed by 

. The Trump/Russian collaboration was scandalous - bordering on treason -

Just Perfect. It’s too good for satire.

"Collusion with a foreign power to unfairly win an American election". That sounds like a pretty good indictment for a treason trial.

You know there was no collusion, right? It's been a year since the mueller report was issued. Have you not had time to digest  it yet?   There's nothing new here. No collusion. No coordination. 

Also, you might want to look up the definition of treason.

Ummmm......... Sean??

That's the interest in this Senate report.

The bi-partisan report won't make a dent with any of the forever-trumpers here on NT.... period.  They are just like Trump, and just as devoid of ethics and country first thinking, as he is.

Even more detrimental to the country.... what of the Trump enablers in Congress?  They had this information at the impeachment trial or sooner, and even now some are still useful idiots pushing Russian disinformation.

The rats haven't yet decided if the ship is sure to sink.

As they realize... they'll race to the lifeboats... and we'll see all manner of Republican had-wringing...

They had this information at the impeachment trial or sooner, an

No shit. Everyone did.  And the Democratic Party didn't impeach Trump for anything to do with Russia. Do you know why? Because Trump did not collude or conspire with Russia. 

It's amazing how gullible many progressives are.  They buy the same recycled material from the same sources over and over again and somehow think they've bought something new. 

Here's a tip. Read the Mueller report. Digest it.  Learn the facts.  And then have a baseline of knowledge to evaluate headlines from progressive clickbait sites so you can realize you are being played.

Because Trump did not collude or conspire with Russia. 

Holy F, Sean!

The Senate publishes a report saying there was collusion... but you blithely go back a year and deny reality.

Amazing...

Okay. Tell me on what page the Report details the "collusion" that wasn't covered by Mueller. 

Please tell me you aren't relying on Joe Scarbourgh's opinion.  That's not a good look.

How many different fucking ways does the truth need to be pointed out to you Sean while you want to twist on semantics

"The Committee found that Manafort's presence on the Campaign and proximity to Trump created opportunities for Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign," the report concludes. "Taken as a whole, Manafort's high level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik and associates of Oleg Deripaska, represented a grave counterintelligence threat."

"Willingness to share information with Russia" = "secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others". When you apply it to federal campaign laws, that IS collusion by the very definition.

None of this is new. Did you read the Mueller report?  Manafort was investigated by the FBI and Mueller's team about his Russian contacts and no charges were filed.  

Do you think you understand federal campaign laws better than Mueller and his team of Democratic super lawyers?

Do you not see, nor care about complicity and willful disregard to do their sworn constitutional duty by senate republicans in the face of evidence that they had in their hands at the time of the impeachment trial?  Of course you don't..... It's always been party first for you Sean..... constitution be damned.    

ee, nor care about complicity and willful disregard to do their sworn constitutional duty by senate republicans in the face of evidenc

You understand that the Democrats in the House refused to impeach him over this, right? Take it up with them because it never reached the Senate. 

The Senate’s report documents the many contacts between the Trump campaign, Trump Organization, and Russian officials, making abundantly clear why U.S. law enforcement agencies perceived a potential counterintelligence threat and opened an investigation into the Trump campaign.

Trump's major grievance against the intelligence communities is that he was "spied on". 

Whatever it was, he  deserved it.  I so hope Barr tries to indict someone for spying on Trump, it will backfire spectacularly. The defense can read this Senate report into the court record. 

All of this kvetching that Trump would use “damaging information” If it was presented to him by the same people who ignore that the Clinton campaign actively sought damaging information from Russia and peddled the Made up Russian propaganda it received  it to the press before the election.  

Y

Ah yes... the "lowest" standard for Trumpian behavior:

Trump may go as low as anything that anyone has ever done, ever in the whole history of the world!
 - Nero fiddled while Rome burned, so it's OK for Trump to golf while Covid-19 slaughters Americans.
 - and so on...

yes... the "lowest" standard for Trumpian behavior

Great. We both agree that what Clinton's active procurement of propaganda from Russia was much worse than Trump taking advantage of information that that was placed in the public sphere by Russia. 

Sean, was the investigation of the Trump campaign by the US intelligence community a "hoax" as Trump has been saying ad nauseum for 3 or 4 years, or was the investigation of the Trump campaign more than justified by information such as revealed in this Senate report? 

We all know the answer but let's see if you do. 

Well, at least you understand the argument.  It's not about proving Trump or anyone on his campaign conspired with Russia. That was dealt with by Mueller and as the New York times says, the Senate report  supports his conclusions.

IF you want to know whether the FBI investigation was legally predicated, It was.  Again, this was dealt with by the IG who detailed how low of a bar it is to open an investigation. You or I could have an FBI investigation opened on Biden with a sufficiently thought out anonymous call.  (at least before the reforms generated following what happened to Trump).

The issue is always what the FBI did after opening it's investigation. Forging evidence. Witholding evidence from the FISA court.  Submitting, in the words of the resistance queen Sally Yates, insufficiently supported applications to spy on American citizens, Comey, also in the words of Ms. Yates, going rogue in the Flynn debacle,  it's utter mishandling and reliance upon the disgraced Steele dossier etc...

The press won't talk about it, but the Senate report is damning of both the FBI and Steele.  But again, the FBI abusing power is not the narrative the MSM wants to talk about.

Funny how time flies. Just a few years ago,  the left suggested Trump was paranoid and should be removed form office for daring to suggest the FBI spied on his campaign, for it was such a slur upon the FBI to suggest it would spy on a campaign. Now it's all about justifying the spying everyone admits occurred.

The IC IG report leveled criticism against the FBI for it's procedures and tactics in the course of a legitimate investigation.  I guess no one is above criticism and things can always be done better. 

It is an entirely other matter though, when Trump says, like he does constantly, that the Russian investigation of his campaign was a "hoax", which strongly implies that the investigation was not warranted . 

Trump is lying when he says that isn't he? 

The day Trump stood on stage and asked Russia to hack Hillary Clinton to find dirt I thought to myself "this is going to be a big deal one day", and of course it is/was. 

The truth is that Trump sees nothing wrong with using hostile foreign governments to cause chaos and help him win what he wants. 

If he and his supporters want to try and argue Hillary Clinton did the same thing, they can and do, but Trump is the one who says the investigation of he and his campaign was not warranted ("it is a hoax") and that is a lie. 

He still says it, and Trumpsters still eat it up. 

https://www.salon.com/2020/08/19/7-damning-revelations-from-the-new-senate-report-on-trump-and-russia_partner/

Long after any debate about whether President Donald Trump's ties to Russia's 2016 election interference might lead to his impeachment had fizzled out, the Senate Intelligence Committee dropped a bomb of a report on Tuesday including explosive new details of the sordid affair.

While the new report doesn't completely upend the story of the 2016 campaign as we knew it — much of the outline of the conduct was contained in former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report and previous news articles — it highlights new details and facts that emphasize the duplicity going on behind the scenes. It completely undermines the notion, pushed by the president and attorney general, that there was no basis for the investigation and shows there is ample evidence for what was once widely discussed as "collusion." And this is particularly significant because the report was developed by a committee led by Republicans — they can't be painted as enemies of the president, as Mueller's team was.

Here are seven of the most striking details from the new report:

1. Paul Manafort worked closely with a "Russian intelligence officer."

Among the most explosive allegations in the Mueller report were the ties between Manafort, Trump's campaign manager for the summer of 2016, and Russia. In particular, he had a series of contacts and meetings with Konstantin Kilimnik, who was known to have a past with Russian intelligence.

But the committee's report is much more explicit about Kilimnik's role:

Manafort hired and worked increasingly closely with a Russian national, Konstantin Kilimnik. Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer. Kilimnik became an integral part of Manafort's operations in Ukraine and Russia, serving as Manafort's primary liaison to Deripaska and eventually managing Manafort's office in Kyiv. Kilimnik and Manafort formed a close and lasting relationship that endured to the 2016 U.S. elections and beyond. [emphasis added]

And it noted: "On August 18, 2016, Kilimnik told a journalist in private that he had 'almost daily contacts with Manafort these days on this 'Ukraine crisis.'"

"The report states flatly that Konstantin Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer," noted NBC reporter Ken Dilanian. "So let that sink in: Donald Trump's campaign chairman worked closely with a Russian intelligence officer. What say those who argue the FBI had no reason to investigate?"

2. Kilimnik and Manafort are even potentially tied to the criminal hacking of Democratic emails.

Kilimnik's links to Russian intelligence and Mueller's finding that Manafort shared internal campaign data with him were some of the most explosive revelations in the entire scandal. And the Senate report makes those findings even more inflammatory by tying Kilimnik to the hack-and-leak operation, the most significant aspect of the Russian attack on 2016:

Some evidence suggests Kilimnik may be connected to the GRU hack-and-leak operation related to the 2016 U.S. election. This assessment is based on a body of fragmentary information.

The information that follows is redacted.

The report also says: "Two pieces of information, however, raise the possibility of Manafort's potential connection to the hack-and-leak operations." What follows is redacted.

3. Trump discussed WikiLeaks with Stone during his 2016 campaign

In written responses during Mueller's investigation, Trump denied recalling having communications with Roger Stone about WikiLeaks's leaking of the hacked Democratic emails in 2016. A lot of evidence already suggested that was false and that Trump likely lied to Mueller about it — which would be a crime.

The Senate report lays out the contradiction clearly:

Trump, in written responses to the SCO, stated: "I do not recall discussing WikiLeaks with [Stone], nor do I recall being aware of Mr. Stone having discussed WikiLeaks. with individuals associated with my campaign."1624 Trump further claimed that he had "no recollection of the specifics of any conversations I had with Mr. Stone between June 1, 2016 and November 8, 2016."1625 Despite Trump's recollection, the Committee ass~sses that Trump did, in fact, speak with Stone about WikiLeaks and with members of his Campaign about Stone's access to WikiLeaks on multiple occasions.

"Damning," said Lawfare's Quinta Jurecic, "especially in light of newly unredacted material from the Mueller report that suggests Mueller also thought Trump had lied to him about conversations re Wikileaks."

4. Stone e-mailed draft tweets to Trump attacking Hillary Clinton for her anti-Russia views

The report explained:

On Sunday July 31, at 9:15 p.m., the day after speaking at length with Manafort, Stone called Gates. Ten minutes later, Stone had two phone calls with Trump that lasted over ten minutes. Stone then emailed Jessica Macchia, one of Trump's assistants, eight draft tweets for Trump, under the subject line "Tweets Mr. Trump requested last night."1552 Many of the draft tweets attacked Clinton for her adversarial posture toward Russia and mentioned a new peace deal with Putin, such as "I want a new detente with Russia under Putin."

Politico's Natasha Bertrand noted that Stone was suggesting these tweets even while he was trying to act as a conduit between the campaign and WikiLeaks.

5. Stone wanted WikiLeaks to drop new hacked emails after the Access Hollywood tape went live — and it did.

The report explained:

At approximately 4 p.m. on October 7, The Washington Post released the Access Hollywood tape. Witnesses involved in Trump's debate preparation recalled that the team first heard of the tape about an hour prior to its public release. According to Jerome Corsi, however, news of the release also made its way to Roger Stone. Corsi and Stone spoke twice that day at length: once at 1:42 p.m. for 18 minutes, and once at 2:18 p.m. for 21 minutes. Corsi recalled learning from Stone that the Access Hollywood tape would be coming out, and that Stone "[w]anted the Podesta stuff to balance the news cycle" either "right then or at least coincident." According to Corsi, Stone also told him to have WikiLeaks "drop the Podesta emails immediately."

…

Corsi recalled previewing the Access Hollywood tape with conference call participants during one or two calls that day: a WorldNetDaily staff call at 1 :08 p.m., or a 2 p.m. call involving Total Banking Solutions that included Malloch. Corsi remembered telling conference participants that the tape was a problem and to contact Assange. Corsi then "watched all day to see what Assap.ge would do," and when the Podesta emails were released, he thought to himself that Malloch "had finally got to Assange."However, Corsi later told investigators that he did,not call Malloch or Stone after the WikiLeaks release to convey this reaction because, in contradiction to his earlier statements, he was "doubtful" that Malloch had succeeded.

…

After the Podesta emails were released on October 7, 2016, Trump and senior Campaign officials acknowledged internally and to Stone that Stone had predicted the WikiLeaks release about Podesta.

6. Kilimnik helped push the story that Ukraine intervened in 2016, but the committee found no evidence to support that view.

The report explained:

The Committee observed numerous Russian-government actors from late 2016 until at ;east January 2020 consistently spreading overlapping false narratives which sought to discredit investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections and spread false information about the events of 2016. Manafort, Kilimnik, Deripaska, and others associated with Deripaska participated in these influence operations. As part of these efforts, Manafort and Kilimnik both sought to promote the narrative that Ukraine, not Russia, had interfered in the 2016 U.s: election and that the "ledger" naming payments to Manafort was fake.

It added:

Kilimnik appeared to be under the impression that Trump believed that Ukraine interfered. Kilimnik made this statement in a private email with a journalist, making the accuracy of the statement is difficult to assess. The Committee's efforts focused on investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. However, during the course of the investigation, the Committee identified no reliable evidence that the Ukrainian government interfered in the 2016 U.S. election.

Fiona Hill, Trump's former White House aide specializing in Russian affairs, famously called the Ukraine allegations a "fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves."

7. The committee believed that WikiLeaks was actively collaborating with Russia, despite its claims to the contrary.

"Although WikiLeaks seeks to portray itself as a legitimate media organization, its disclosures have jeopardized the safety and privacy of individual Americans and foreign allies because WikiLeaks has made only minimal, and sometimes no efforts to redact sensitive information, and does not seem to weigh whether its disclosures add any public interest value," the report noted.

It continued:

The Russian government has pursued a relationship with Julian Assange and WikiLeaks that includes formal partnerships with state-owned media platforms, government assistance for WikiLeaks associates and sources, and information sharing. This relationship has existed since at least 2012 and reflects an alignment between the Russian government and WikiLeaks in seeking to undermine U.S. institutions and security.

And then, in one heavily redacted section, the report leaves one sentence uncovered: "However, the Committee found significant evidence to suggest that, in the summer of 2016, WikiLeaks was knowingly collaborating with Russian government officials."

Trump has been saying since early 2017 that the "Russian" thing was a hoax spread by his enemies such as Obama and the NYT and other "fake news".  Although it has long been known there was no "hoax", this new Senate report puts a ribbon and bow on the conclusion that there was more than sufficient reason to investigate Trump. 

I see new additions to Trump's 20,000 lie total in the near future. 

I've been curious, what will the Trump Presidential Library look like? All of his tweets on the wall? A chronological list of his lies? what about all of he investigations against his admin? how about clips of all the times Trump denied collusion or responsibility?  

it will reveal Trump to be the pos so many of US, know he is.