Russia

Whose stuff did Steele shovel?

Featured image I have repeatedly observed here that if the so-called Steele dossier commissioned by the Clinton campaign is what it purports to be, it disseminates intelligence supplied by Russian authorities and, further, the intelligence is highly likely to constitute Russian disinformation. Eric Felten comes at the related issues from different angles in articles carried in the past two issues of the Weekly Standard. In “The Romanian ruse” Eric traces the origin »

The McGahn interviews, Andy McCarthy’s take

Featured image Andy McCarthy provides his views of the New York Times’ report on Don McGahn’s interviews with prosecutors on Robert Mueller’s staff. I wrote about the same subject here. Like me, McCarthy believes it was a mistake for Trump and his then-legal team to agree to the interviews. Andy adds that the Times’ account of what went down in the McGahn interviews “bolsters the already strong argument that the president should »

Steele, Simpson, and Ohr linked with Russian oligarch

Featured image Byron York reports: Emails in 2016 between former British spy Christopher Steele and Justice Department official Bruce Ohr suggest Steele was deeply concerned about the legal status of a Putin-linked Russian oligarch, and at times seemed to be advocating on the oligarch’s behalf, in the same time period Steele worked on collecting the Russia-related allegations against Donald Trump that came to be known as the Trump dossier. The emails show »

Fake news from the New York Times

Featured image The New York Times breathlessly reports: “President Admits Focus of Trump Tower Meeting Was Getting Dirt on Clinton.” But in portraying this “admission” as news, the Times is playing fast and loose with the English language. In the process, it is dishing out fake news. What Trump acknowledged was that “this was a meeting to get information on an opponent.” In other words, the purpose of holding the meeting, from »

FBI continued to get info from Steele after terminating formal relationship

Featured image Because Christopher Steele, author of the bogus anti-Trump dossier, supplied confidential information to the media, the FBI formally terminated him as a source. Therefore, FBI personnel were not supposed to accept information from him. But Byron York reports that the FBI continued to use Steele as a source. In fact, it did so on 12 separate occasions: [The FBI] devis[ed] a system in which Steele spoke regularly with Bruce Ohr, »

Democrats: Treason!! Voters: Ho Hum

Featured image Paul noted earlier today several surveys, including the NBC/Wall St. Journal poll, that found that hysteria over Helsinki had little or no impact on President Trump’s standing with voters. For entertainment value, the opening minutes of this MSNBC program are worth watching. The far-left crew can’t understand why no one seems to care what they think: I follow the Rasmussen survey because it is currently the only presidential approval daily »

Shocker: Nation not as irate as Washington about Helsinki

Featured image In a report that should come as news to no one, the Washington Post informs us: [P]ublic reaction nationally [to the Helsinki summit] appears more muted than in Washington, where Trump faced withering bipartisan criticism for appearing to side with Putin over U.S. intelligence agencies at a July 16 news conference in Helsinki. Imagine that. For the record, Trump did not appear to side with Putin over U.S. intelligence agencies. »

Basic instincts

Featured image Nicholas Frankovich at NRO writes: Foreign-policy veterans of past Republican administrations figure disproportionately in the ranks of prominent conservatives who have checked out of the GOP since 2016. Some have concluded in good faith that the foreign-policy instincts of the Democratic party are less incompatible [than President Trump’s] with America’s best interest. To Republicans who chide them for party disloyalty, they answer that loyalty to country takes precedence. Republican foreign »

Trump’s incredible take on Putin’s “incredible offer”

Featured image I’ve commented on two appalling aspects of Trump’s Helsinki news conference — his placing equal blame on the United States for the problematic state of Russian–American relations and his refusal to side with his own intelligence appointees on the matter of Russia’s cyberespionage. Andy McCarthy finds it even more mind-boggling that Trump touted Putin’s “incredible offer” to have Robert Mueller’s team come to Russia to work with Russian investigators regarding »

What Putin Was Up To (2)

Featured image One sentence of Paul’s post from this morning stands out for further reflection: “an experienced intelligence hand articulated it to me: If we know the Russians hacked the Democrats, it’s probably because the Russians want us to know.” This would not be the first time that a seeming anomaly ought to stop us in our tracks, but unfortunately most of the media and analysts have a child’s grasp of the »

Trump . . . What?

Featured image Let’s see if I have this straight: Trump is now retracting his previous retraction of the first retraction about how he flubbed the use of the double-negative about Russian election meddling. Got that? At least that’s what I take from this Washington Examiner story just out: President Trump was “very strong” with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the prospect of future Kremlin-linked interference in U.S. elections, he stated in a »

Trump’s inadequate “clarification”

Featured image Yesterday, President Trump claimed that when he said “I don’t see any reason why it would be Russia” that interfered in the 2016 election, he meant to say “I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be Russia.” I can imagine Trump meaning to say either thing. “I don’t see any reason why it would be Russia” is consistent with the pro-Trump talking point that Russia had no reason to »

Putin on the Fritz

Featured image Okay, so now we have Trump’s word for it that he got tripped up by an insufficient grasp of the use of double-negatives, but at least he didn’t say, “I did not have inappropriate syntax with that man, Mr. Putin.” It also puts me in the frame of mind of an old story I think attributed to the largely forgotten philosopher Morris Cohen, who in a lecture one day remarked »

Loony Dems want Trump’s Russia interpreter to testify

Featured image Two Democratic members of Congress, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and Rep. Joe Kennedy, are demanding that President Trump’s interpreter testify before Congress about what Trump said to Vladimir Putin during their meeting in Helsinki. Shaheen tweeted: I’m calling for a hearing with the U.S. interpreter who was present during President Trump’s meeting with Putin to uncover what they discussed privately. This interpreter can help determine what @POTUS shared/promised Putin on our »

Why did Trump do it?

Featured image Why did Trump refuse to acknowledge Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election? Byron York takes up this question. He concludes: Trump’s problem is that he has always refused, or been unable, to separate the two. One is about national security and international relations, while the other is about Donald Trump. The president clearly believes if he gives an inch on the what-Russia-did part — if he concedes that Russia »

Are you sure Frank done it this way?

Featured image First Vladimir Putin and then President Trump gave statements following their meeting in Helsinki yesterday. I have posted the video below (about 47 minutes); the White House has posted a transcript of the entire event. Angelo Codevilla makes a contrarian case for Trump’s performance in a column for American Greatness, but I thought it was a low point in the Trump presidency. In the questions and answers, President Trump name-checked »

For Trump, the Political Is Personal

Featured image As so often happens, President Trump’s critics are so crazy that one feels compelled to take his side. Thus, former Communist and CIA Director John Brennan tweeted earlier today: This is simply insane. Other Democrats, not going as far as Brennan, say that Trump “gave away the store,” or made inappropriate concessions to President Putin. But there is no evidence that Trump gave anything away in his meeting with Putin, »