Trump's Moment of Truth
Trump's Moment of Truth
John McCain's statement that Trump's scandals have reached Watergate proportions changes everything. It is a clear call to the Republicans in Congress to consider their position. So far they have been willing to trade off Trump's obvious incompetence and untrustworthiness against the opportunity to push through parts of their agenda that have never before been possible.
They know the chance to do this will not come again in a functioning democracy. The changes they are making look backwards, not forwards. In a democracy, demographics ensure that cannot continue for long. It is a balancing act well understood by the more rational wing of the party. They know that the longer they stick with Trump, the greater the risk that they will suffer a catastrophic loss of support that could put them out of power for a generation. McCain's comment indicates that some think that risk is now too high.
For the rest of us the question is where the balance of Republican power rests, with McCain or with the extremists who are willing to destroy democracy to maintain power. Make no mistake this is a real issue. In the US there is a long tradition of right wing extremism seeking to undermine the Federal Government and they have long sought shelter in the Republican Party.
Trump has already done such immense damage to the judicial system that it cannot be counted on to function independently. His attacks on other agencies suggest that the US democracy, on its present trajectory, is not robust enough to survive an entire Trump Presidency. The issue is not Trump himself. His record proves that he is incapable of thinking rationally for long enough to plan anything beyond the next trip around his self-created goldfish bowl. His profound cognitive limitations, matched by his bottomless narcissism, suggest a personality trapped in an infantile state. The people who put him into the White House now control him. The question is whether there is enough courage and will power in congress to oppose them.
There is a point of no return approaching. A point at which the US will finally and completely cease to be what it has long proclaimed itself to be; a force for stability and good, not only for its own citizens, but for the world as a whole. It had travelled a long way towards that destination before Trump. Its reckless abuse of its power over many decades has brought it to the edge. Impeachment would at least be a step back. It cannot long be delayed.
What time is it on the doomsday clock now ?
Hyperbole o'clock !!!!
Of all the things I thought they would hang trump on even I never thought it was going to be for helpin the 'commies!
It seems notoriously difficult for them to make shit stick on a guy already completely made of shit so I guess we'll just wait and see how this one unfolds.
"For the rest of us the question is where the balance of Republican power rests, with McCain or with the extremists who are willing to destroy democracy to maintain power."
The democrats have already 'been there, done that' ...that's why we have trump
Seriously, everyday the NYT or WP comes out with another trump scandal story, supported by another plethora of anonymous sources. If someone put their name to these accusations, and media followed up on them, then they might get somewhere. But not once do these anonymous sources come out of the shadows, nor do the stories develop.
Both sides are addicted to this fake news MO. Put the outrageous story out there - with no evidence, just the word of the reporter - it travels around the world in half a day, doing it's intended damage, before anyone can confirm or deny any details. Then the next day, when we should have explanations and details....its gone...but there's another story, another team of hyperventillating reporters, and another anonymous source...
This latest one might have legs, as they have mc cain on board, but seriously, don't any of these people have any integrity?
Polls find trump has more public trust than the media. Way to go media!!
You are lower in honesty stakes than a rambling lunatic. Lying is part of being a politician, trump has an excuse (besides his being a dickhead excuse), how the fuck do the media live with themselves? Reporting facts is what they're supposed to do.
Even if they have a good story (like someting actually true) people take it with a pinch of salt because we've been burnt so many times. Bannon was correct, the media need to shut up for a while, and actually work out what's going on, as well as their part in it.
What trump is doing is nothing short of a revolution, a bloodless coup...so far...you don't make an ommlette without breaking some eggs. The public knows and accepts this. The media however, are trying to squeeze any mileage possible out of the daily realignments of the political establishment.
It's a credit to the american people (and trump), that there hasn't been any real serious violence. Especially considering how many people in america get around holding arms. The left have gone a bit loopy, and should be thankful most people just roll their eyes at their loopyness. luckily the left are not the traditional gun toting types. But they better be careful because they've been busy pissing a lot of people off, whilst setting new low standards of acceptable behaviour
https://thefederalist.com/2017/05/12/american-left-talking-violence/
They have set the bar really really low for what a crybaby is to do when one doesn't get their own way. If the crybabies of the right soon don't get their way well....
This is especially the case now, now that the republican elites are all getting antsy again, after swallowing their pride (and donald's load) when trump won, however...
"The 25th Amendment is not, however, a way for elites to get rid of a president they despise without having to persuade the millions of people who voted for him that he is indeed unfit for office. Douthat is indulging a dangerous fantasy here. It might feel good to write a column calling for the president’s removal. It might give pundits a rush of blood to the head. But this is not a parlor game.
The country is deeply divided. People have taken to attacking each other in the streets and threatening congressmen when they venture outside Washington. We’re still recovering from a presidential election that actually ended marriages and tore families apart. Trump’s election was, more than anything else, a giant middle finger to the political establishment, which has lost the confidence of the American people.
If now seems like the right time for that establishment to launch an unconstitutional coup to remove the president through a specious application of the 25th Amendment, then I respectfully submit that you’re underestimating the precariousness of national life at this moment."
http://thefederalist.com/2017/05/17/media-elite-indulging-dangerous-fant...
People voted with conviction, gun toting patriot prepper types voted with real conviction, because they were all fired up. The way the left has behaved post election has made the tea party look subdued and sophisticated in opposition, as the whole of society has stooped to new lows.
Be careful what you wish for, you might get rid of trump, but you may like even less what follows...
Violence seems somewhat inevitable when both sides are unnecessarily trigger happy about a lot of things.
(Sorry to overuse 'the federalist', but the rag for right wing christian nutjobs - all things I try not to associate with - has had some of the best (unbiased) reporting throughout this whole trump debacle)
Oh yeah, and, the irony of the democrats going full cold war crazy about russia is a laugh a minute for anyone who lived through the republican russia paranoia of the 1980's, it seems 'the commies' aren't so commie anymore
And, I have to say, this 'resistance' so called movement has to be the most pathetic contrived constructed movement in poltical history. Besides the party faithful I think their support is really rather weak. Something to think about before you tear down a legitimately democratically elected president
So what are these accusations or stories from anonymous sources sypkan? As far as I can see the sources are all out there in the open. What have you got?
what trump is doing is a revolution? i hope your referring to a voting revolution rather than trump himself enacting any sort of revolution. was that just a typo sypkan?
There 's been six months of stories with loose 'facts' at the WP and NYT. It seems everyday there's a new outrage, backed by another anonymous source.
All this following on from the six month smear campaign pre-election, which at least, probably had more facts...but all to no avail nonetheless.
It's quite bloody obvious that a heap of staff in the whitehouse don't want trump there, hence the daily leaks. And the media are more than happy to fan these little embers as they don't want him there either. They really are the opposition party. An opposition party having a war of semantics as they try to twist every little development into an anti trump message. There's some prime examples in this article, but really it's a daily occurance that the media devolves into the 'he said she said' bullshit.
http://thefederalist.com/2017/05/16/tips-for-reading-washington-post-sto...
The whole russian thing is just hilarious. If the 'shattered' recount of events is close to the truth, hilary and co. cooked it up in the first 24 hours post election, manufactured talking points, and the press ran with it...boy did they run with it!
All those press outlets, and government agencies trying to pin trump down, and still not a skerrick of good information. A guy on abc the other day said hilary has been way more dangerous internationally than trump by allowing this all to develop. Same goes for the whitehouse leakers and press fanning the flames.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/05/17/donald-trump-russia-in...
Is all a bit much especially considering the free pass obama got. I liked obama, still do, but the man literally got away with murder, as a fawning press hung off his every word. As many have pointed out, obama was both a blessing and a curse for the democrats, a blessing in beiing one of the most popular presidents ever. A curse in being so damm good the party rested solely on his laurels, essentially leaving them with nothing in his wake.
No happy not a typo, this is a real bona fide revolution. One just has to look at the hissy fits and meltdowns to see trump is fundamentally changing power structures. It may not be the revolution many envisaged (myself included) but definitely a revolution of sorts.
Trump may not have lived up to the predictions of becoming an outright dictator , the USA may not have become a totalitarian fascistic state , drug dealers may not have been thrown from helicopters personally by the president and the world may not have been enveloped in nuclear holocaust.
Some may say those were all pure fantasy anyway , concocted by people that refuse to respect democracy when it fails to reflect THEIR will and were merely repeated and repeated again in an attempt to paint it as truth .
Regardless ,it's about more than that.
It's about the integrity of the Presidency of the USA.
It's too important a position to go to such an avaricious , manipulative and graspingly ambitious person that will bend the truth in any fashion without regret in order to further their advance - The lies.
The damned lies.
https://m.
So sypkan, what are these loose facts? As I said before most of what I read clearly comes from named sources. So what have you got?
It's more about maintaining respect for the office.
Continuance of the lineage of great leaders that humanity could take faith in.
https://m.
"Some White House staffers have turned to impeachment gallows humor. Other mid-level aides have started contacting consultants, shopping their résumés. And at least one senior staffer has begun privately talking to friends about what a post-White House job would look like, according to two people close to the staffer."
A little ambiguous...no?
"...according to two people in close contact with administration officials. "
"...according to people close to him and the White House."
"...one of the people said."
"...as friends and outside operatives repeatedly warn..."
"One West Wing official recently stopped defending..."
"Another characterized the operation as ..."
"One Republican operative ..."
"Another said..."
"And a third said ..."
"...including the situation in which Trump allegedly asked..."
All that from just one WP article today
Can you fill in the gaps for me blindboy? with your sources it might be a little more convincing.
This particular article is probably a poor example because his team is no doubt falterig under the immense pressure to unseat him, but I think you get the idea. Day after day, loose allegations and anonymous sources.
https
://www
.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-worst-job-in-washington-right-now-working-for-trump/2017/05/17/a3d9ec00-3b17-11e7-a058-ddbb23c75d82_story.html?utm_term=.14a747e85d4f
Except sypkan you have not told us what these loose allegations are. No doubt there are numerous anonymous quotes emerging from all sorts of sources but when it comes to the real evidence, it is substantial and sourced. Comey made detailed verbatim notes of the conversation with Trump in which Trump suggested he drop the investigation into Flynn. Trump's refusal to distance himself from his business interests is a matter of record. His sacking of officials in the Justice Department is a simple fact. None of these key issues are loose allegations. Fool yourself if you must, but don't expect anyone else to be taken in.
If you can't see the many loose allegations in the links I provided there's nothing I can do to convince you otherwise.
A rational person could/would at least concede the coverage from the sources you love so dearly are full of rumours and inuendo at best. Which is fine, if its analysed and balanced out with a bit of conflicting perspective, but no, there's none of that. And now a harvard study has proven it to be the case.
"...That said, the coverage of some news organizations was so negative, according to the Harvard study, that it seems hard to argue that the coverage was anywhere near a neutral presentation of facts. Assessing the tone of news coverage, the Harvard researchers found that CNN's Trump coverage was 93 percent negative, and seven percent positive. The researchers found the same numbers for NBC."
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-harvard-study-cnn-nbc-trump...
Even lefty sources are now pulling back on expectations for the russia story as it becomes clear there's really not much to it. If there's nothing to it at all, which looks increasingly to be the case, the democrats and their press are going to have no credibility left whatsoever.
But, if one wants to bunker down within their media bubble there's plenty of opportunity. This vox piece has some great examples of leftys going full loopy, full nutjob rightwing conspiracy nutjob type loopy....but left.
https://www.vox.com/world/2017/5/19/15561842/trump-russia-louise-mensch
It also has some reasonable perspective and tempering of expectations for anyone who actually wants to know what's going on.
But some don't want to know. Its too confronting that reality is worlds away from the pc bubble of delusionment they created.
Seriously half of these press guys should loose their jobs either for incompetence or outright dishonesty.
Its most interesting watching trump deal with international relations. While the usual suspects said he would be useless, incompetent and downright dangerous, he seems to be the exact opposite. He won over the japanese leader, same with china - against the odds. And now, surprisingly, he seems to be killing it in the middle east despite seemingly having everything pitted against him. But there's the NYT and WAPO still bagging him all the way. Geez even CNN had to give him positive coverage, as the vast majority of the worlld conceded he did quite well, and presented a good speach. Yet there's the WAPO, calling it un-american and bizzarre.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2017/05/21/trumps...
There's dedinitely one thing that's bizzarre, these intelligent people still holding onto their bizzarre perspectives of non reality despite all the evidence proving otherwise.
The guy is still a dickhead, and a bit of a bumbling fool, but he seems to have gotten some things right, flat out denial, day after day isn't serving anybodies cause. They're just proving trump correct.
I would have loved to have been in a clinton camp room as they watched the saudi's genuinely embrace the supposed islamaphobe. That room was vibrant, maybe that's what you get if you're a straight talker.... and don't require a $100 mil 'donation' just for someone to get your ear.
Oh yeh and the comey memo, seriously?
A friend of a friend of a reporter, might have seen a sentence, referring to something about trump, that came from a memo, that comey might have written after a conversation with trump.
Yep solid evidence that one...if only somone actually saw it...
Yeah its all a big fat conspiracy against the most persecuted president in history, believe me.
"He won over the japanese leader, same with china - against the odds. And now, surprisingly, he seems to be killing it in the middle east despite seemingly having everything pitted against him."
Questionable but lucid post up till this bizarre statement. I mean, fuck...Trump is still the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth, of course foreign diplomats will fawn and flatter. Japan needs America to retain their presence in Asia, China needs US trade deals to keep their economy ticking over, and the Saudis need to sell oil or they're fucked.
No its the ultimate corruption of a media/political system that once worked relatively well
Corruption of process, rather than corruption of people
And both sides are guilty, politics got too professional, too polished, too much about spinimg it your way....relentlessly
Yeh no doubt a big influence stunet, but it does all seem very genuine, with all of them, each time. None of that awkwardness of the merkel meeting.
I wanted to hate the saudi leg. I still think the whole thing is incredibly grubby. But the saudi's appeared absolutely jubilent about his visit, even after his speach, which would have been a very confronting moment for many
Got to agree Fox News has certainly corrupted factual political debate for years!
Not just fox smiley guy
Not just fox!
tremendous deal, tremendous...
http://fair.org/home/arms-deal-stories-omit-war-crimes-arms-will-be-used...
"I would have loved to have been in a clinton camp room as they watched the saudi's genuinely embrace the supposed islamaphobe. That room was vibrant, maybe that's what you get if you're a straight talker.... and don't require a $100 mil 'donation' just for someone to get your ear."
"There's dedinitely one thing that's bizzarre, these intelligent people still holding onto their bizzarre perspectives of non reality despite all the evidence proving otherwise."
Its certainly a parallel universe thing .... Trump selling arms to the Saudis who back terrorism all the while criticising Iran which on any objective measure is a way more democratic and moderate country than Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile back in the land of the free
Trump selling arms to the Saudis ?
You reckon a $100 Billion arms sale got cobbled together in the last few months ?
And what has Trump got to do with any arms sales regardless ?
I reckon if Trump even voiced a negative opinion of the military industry he'd be lying under six feet of dirt not long after.
Yep, yep, yep turkeyman
I was wodering how this yemem thing fitted into the narrative of these virtue signallling, trunp bashing, holier than thou reporters that love to pick him on every detail. ... except some of the most obvious and pertinent ones.
“Trump Says Saudi Arabia Deal Will Create ‘Jobs, Jobs, Jobs,’”
How trump managed to blurt that out sporting that ridiculous shit eating grin on his face - without one of these self appointed gate keepers of all things cultural and kosher pointing it out - was rather baffling.
And yep blowin
It was clearly obama and co.'s deal
But trump somehow seemed to be getting a hell of a lot more love than good ol' hussein
That was an interesting article TT.
I don't really have a clue as to most of the permutations of the Middle East and the meddling of the west . The whole deal seems abstract and opinions that I have zero reference on are often conflicting.
But the article you posted was revealing.
What - in your forthright opinion - is the reasoning of the USA in supporting Saudi Arabia beyond that of the obvious monetary gain from an arms deal ?
Is that reason enough ? Operating under the assumption that the USA was capable of energy self sufficiency now . Or is there a material difference between the oil that USA possesses to that which the Saudis provide ?
Or is this pure disruption of a foreign state for the sake of a few dollars ?
An honest - and self penned -explanation would be gratefully appreciated , Turkey.
You two guys...
Sippy you might have to keep calm and do a bit of clean-up editing there, comrade...very sloppy...
but hey, at least you don't self-redact like ol' Blowie.
Now, where to start...
You both have had a look at at least something about Trump's budget blueprint, yeah? How he's planning to cut the bejeezus outta all sorts of programs and departments. Well, all except the military...he wants to give them a $54 billion boost. Old scaredy-cat looking after his arse, hey Blowie? Lest they put a cap in it.
Fake news, yada yada
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/president-trumps-ha...
Yes, as Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said, "This is a hard power budget, not a soft power budget."
Military spending up, diplomacy spending (amongst a lot of other stuff), down.
So what was Trump doing in Saudi Arabia?
America first! Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!
And repairing bridges!
Obama, bad deal.
Back in September, the Obama administration approved a multi-billion dollar arms deal with the Saudis. About the same as Trump's new initial offer. But as the death toll and reports of human rights violations in the Saudi-led war on Yemen began to rise dramatically, the Obama administration nixed the sale of the precision-guided munitions it had originally agreed to put in the deal to try to coerce the Saudis into curbing those atrocities. It also backed out on the intelligence help.
Now those sort of munitions are back in the Trump arms package.
Also, “tanks and helicopters for border security, ships for coastal security, intelligence-gathering aircraft, a missile-defense radar system, and cybersecurity tools,” that form part of a 10-year, $350 billion agreement in a “strategic vision” between the two countries.
Jobs ! Jobs! Jobs!
Fake news, yada yada yada
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-21/what-do-we-know-about-saudi-arabia...
Oh yeah, the biggie, Saudi Arabia was particularly pissed by the deal Obama reached with Iran to lift sanctions in return for the curbing of Iran's nuclear program.
The Saudis hate Iran. And vice versa. It's a cultural thing; a religious thing; a geo-political thing; hell, an oil thing! Ka-ching!
"As far as Saudi Arabia is concerned, Trump's anti-Muslim rabble-rousing at home is just red meat for the American rubes. They don't take anything Trump says seriously, only what he does. And what's clear is that (a) Trump's personal brand of nepotism/'swamp draining' is reassuringly Middle Eastern, (b) he hates Iran, (c) he's not going to harass the Saudis over trivia like human rights, and (d) he doesn't care how brutal they get in their war against the Houthi rebels in Yemen."
Trump, good deal.
The art of the deal, indeed.
Good shit, hey boys?
(Fark, Yemen was on Trump's 'muslim-ban', yeah? I know Saudi Arabia wasn't. Shit, maybe we need one...QUICK. DUTTTTTTON! To the barricades!)
if you're interested, Blowie...some more meat on the bones
https://theconversation.com/trump-saudi-arabia-and-yet-another-arms-deal...
"That room was vibrant, maybe that's what you get if you're a straight talker.... and don't require a $100 mil 'donation' just for someone to get your ear." - Sippy
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/21/529417148/saudis-and-t...
Sorry turkeyman, my writing is terrible, I'm just a ramblin, struggling to multi -task, phone warrior, with a dysfunctional backspace key.
"As far as Saudi Arabia is concerned, Trump's anti-Muslim rabble-rousing at home is just red meat for the American rubes. They don't take anything Trump says seriously, only what he does.
It's interesting how much this appears to have been the case in saudi arabia. Probably because they throw the same red meat to their domestic audience. Something the word police seem to overlook.
It looks like palestine is on board now. The bulk of the middle east seems a whole lot happier with a less interventionist US policy. And fair enough, the Bushes' and clintons' attempts at transposing democracy haven't gone well. Countries need to sort their own shit out
But there looks to be a lot more than just the above going on, for some reason obama and co. seem to have pretty much pissed everyone off...even iran at the end
Comrade, a motza of the current 'problems' in the Middle East are old colonial problems from a century or two ago. The chickens have been coming home to roost for a lot longer than the Bush's & Clinton's time in office.
The history of the country that was designated Iran, let alone Israel/Palestine, fuck, take your historical pick, shows us these colonial interventionist follies of yore.
Nicely put , Turkey.
The article that fleshed it out was informative as fuck.
Might have to keep my eyes on that site.
Cheers
The Conversation is absolute gold, IMO it embarrasses sites like the ABC, SMH, The Guardian etc.
"The Conversation is an independent source of news and views, sourced from the academic and research community and delivered direct to the public.
Our team of professional editors work with university, CSIRO and research institute experts to unlock their knowledge for use by the wider public.
Access to independent, high-quality, authenticated, explanatory journalism underpins a functioning democracy. Our aim is to allow for better understanding of current affairs and complex issues. And hopefully allow for a better quality of public discourse and conversations."
And guess who cut its funding and tried to kill it? Tones, you old cultural warrior, you.
I think we are starting to realise that it's not hard to provide better journalism than either the ABC, SMH or Telegraph. Our eyes are opening.
...and they're currently rattling the tin.
https://donate.theconversation.com/au
Some of the writing on The Conversation kills me and the soft left topics can leave me cold, but a morning scan usually turns up some worthwhile reading. Can't agree with all that's writen but at least it doesn't have the relentless culture warring of The Australian.
Better than the ABC?
Fuck TB, Four Corners? Street Royal Commission, Fitzgerald Inquiry, Don Dale, greyhound racing, Rainbow Warrior etc etc etc.
And the SMH holds - or perhaps held - a fine line with Chris Masters, Kate McClymont, and Michael West. The reason Obeid is in jail is cos of McClymont and the whole Google tax issue was initiated by West.
Yeah Fairfax is sinking - they sacked West after his expose - but they did some pretty bold stuff. Few have come close here in Australia.
Yep The Conversation is not-for-profit.
Stu, some articles miss the mark but their are plenty of hits and generally the credibility is very high.
Do you see The Conversation as being more "soft left" then The Guardian or the ABC? The Guardian in particular can hover very close to satire sometimes.
As for investigative journalism Stu, that's not in any way, shape or form The Conversation's gig.
No, not soft left as a whole - The Conversation largely defies categorisation anyway - but individual stories with a soft left focus. Not held to high real world scrutiny, which, I guess is a product of being an academic outlet.
And that's no slight on academia, I get the battle of ideas and adversarial argument etc, just that some topics don't stand up outside of that setting.
No, understand The Conversation isn't investigative. That reply was to TB dissing journalism on the ABC.
Apologies Stu.
At the same time, the ABC needs to be dissed sometimes - for example, they were way too quick to toe the line regarding the U.S. reporting of Assad's alleged chemical attack.
Don't get me wrong, the ABC is currently irreplaceable especially regarding investigative journalism but for me, having the heads of departments of the leading Australian academic institutions writing critiques etc. in The Conversation is very high in the credibility stakes.
Wow!
No doubt the timing of trump's election lead to the unravelling of this dirty little affair
Bad guardian
Bad australia
Bad UK
A disgraceful little affair really
https://newmatilda.com/2017/05/21/getting-julian-assange-the-untold-story/
I'm curious Stu - by saying that articles in The Conversation aren't held to high real world scrutiny, are you implying that the ABC etc are?
What topics don't you see as being able to stand up outside an academic setting?
Maybe conspiracy isn't too strong of a word smiling guy
"Two months ago, I would have dismissed as fantasy any thoughts of a conspiracy based in America’s national security agencies to bring down Donald Trump. But now I am not so sure. Many of my friends who are former intelligence officers are increasingly asking questions. It is worth pointing out that none of us are fans of what the White House has been doing and saying—quite the contrary. Still, alerting the country to concerns over what might be a developing soft coup orchestrated by the intelligence and law-enforcement agencies to nullify the results of a national election in no way equates to trying to protect Donald Trump and his uncouth and ill-informed behavior. It is rather a defense of the Constitution."
"...This involvement of FBI and CIA in the campaign, whether inadvertently or by design, was particularly evident in the various reports that surfaced and were leaked to the press during the campaign and right up to the inauguration. The leaks of that type of information, to include technical intelligence and Special Access Program “codeword” material, require top-level access as well as the ability to arrange clandestine contacts with major players in the media, something far beyond the reach of most employees at CIA or the FBI."
"...Nevertheless, in spite of the overwhelming groupthink, it has been repeated ad nauseam by people like myself that no actual evidence has been produced to support any of the claims being made about Russia and Trump. There is more evidence that the White House was penetrated by Ankara..."
Combining the thougts from this guy with the john pilger article above and there's a hell of a lot at stake, even if it's just about saving face.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/do-high-level-leaks-sugg...
And for the blind one that doesn't believe anything unless its peddled by his own particular media brand. Is the BBC good enough for you?
"...Although some of the participants ignored host Owen Bennett Jones’s exhortations to keep strictly to the facts, the program nonetheless generally avoided baseless innuendo and by comparison with recent U.S. mainstream media coverage seemed a model of impartiality. Certainly it was notable for avoiding the worst excesses of anti-Russian hysteria that lately has been so prevalent elsewhere.
As the BBC’s world affairs correspondent Paul Wood put it, “anything you can say about President Trump and Russia is still an allegation, not proven.” Wood went on to provide a useful summing up of the main allegations, enumerating them as follows:"
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/trump-and-the-russians-t...
And note that these are not pro - trump people
...and yet, here you are! Yew!
.