Notice at the top where it says "Analysis". That means that anything in this article is not news...it's merely the interpretations of someone with a heavy political leanings and a stated agenda to undermine the President of the United States.Originally Posted by Poopadoop
What I got from that article
1) The Trump team, apart from Pops, adamantly denied the prospect of any meeting with Russia. In other words, the EVIDENCE shows a narrative that is entirely contrary to the left's preferred outcome. Therefore the evidence must be impugned with INSANE questions like "well we know that the Trump team denied Russia on 7 occassions, but what if there was an 8th inquiry that we don't know about!??" At some point you have to accept what the evidence is telling you, and the evidence is telling you that there was no fucking collusion.
2) The Washington Post clearly has a political agenda and is using their reputation and media gravitas to further a partisan plan to undermine the President. Talking about Sessions meeting with Kislyak is a red fucking herring. By all accounts Kislyak is a real man-about-town in DC and attends shitloads of events with all kinds of political figures. So he and sessions were in the same room once, with 500 other people, and Sessions forgot. That's HARDLY evidence of treasonous diplomatic collusion.
So all this talk about how Trump's team kept meeting with Russia is sensational, salacious, garbage. Even the Washington Post admits...
The only thing that's not "normal" about these circumstances is that the left-wing media fucking hates Trump.There’s also nothing unusual about campaigns meeting with foreign officials in normal circumstances.
Reply With Quote