Trump says Democratic memo on Russia is 'very political,' needs redactions

[rooster59]

Trump says Democratic memo on Russia is 'very political,' needs redactions

 

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, U.S., February 9, 2018. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A classified memo by congressional Democrats related to investigations of Russian influence in the 2016 U.S. presidential election is "very political and long" and must be "heavily redacted" before it could be released, President Donald Trump said on Twitter on Saturday.

 

The release of the memo was blocked by Trump on Friday, kicking off a new skirmish between Democrats and the White House. Written by Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee, is was intended to rebut a Republican document made public last week with Trump's consent.

 

The memo by committee Republicans claimed bias against Trump by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Justice Department in the federal investigation of Russia and the 2016 U.S. election.

 

The Intelligence Committee had voted unanimously on Monday to release the document drafted by the panel's Democrats, contingent on the Republican president agreeing.

 

"The Democrats sent a very political and long response memo which they knew, because of sources and methods (and more), would have to be heavily redacted, whereupon they would blame the White House for lack of transparency," Trump tweeted. "Told them to re-do and send back in proper form!"

 

Trump's decision to block the release of the memo infuriated Democrats, who said it showed a double standard on transparency on the part of the Republican president.

 

Representative Adam Schiff, the senior Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said in a statement on Saturday that he will review redactions recommended by the FBI and Justice Department.

 

"We hope this matter can be quickly resolved so the committee can return to its charge - fully investigating the Russian interference in our election and the role of the Trump campaign, and what steps need to be taken to protect against foreign interference in the next election, now only months away," Schiff said.

 

He was referring to November's U.S. elections in which all 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and 34 of 100 Senate seats are in play. Currently, Republicans hold majorities in both chambers. Democrats hope Trump's low popularity in public opinion polls will help them win majorities, and some analysts give them a good chance.

 

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, in a statement posted on Twitter, called on Democrats to accept the Justice Department's recommendations and "make the appropriate technical changes and redactions" so that the memo can be declassified as soon as possible.

 

Trump on Feb. 2 allowed the release of the Republican document with no redactions, even though the Justice Department and FBI argued against making it public. The FBI expressed "grave concerns about material omissions of fact" in the Republic memo.

 

Democrats said it mischaracterised highly sensitive classified information and was intended to discredit special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation of potential collusion between Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia.

 

Trump repeatedly has denied any such collusion.

 

Late on Friday, Senator Dianne Feinstein, a senior Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused Trump of "hypocrisy at its worst" in blocking, at least for now, release of the House Democrats' memo.

 

"Any minor redactions should be made as quickly as possible and the memo should be released,” she said.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-02-11

[darksidedog]

12 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

The FBI expressed "grave concerns about material omissions of fact" in the Republic memo.

I suspect some of those omissions are dealt with in the Democrat memo. I also suspect Trump is blocking it simply because he doesn't like the nature of the content. The accusation of hypocrisy at its worst rings very true, given he released the Republican one with no redaction's, despite being urged to do so.

[boomerangutang]

If Trump applied to be a mafia don, the mafia would kick his fat butt out onto the sidewalk while shouting, "you're too dumb and corrupt to be in the mafia!"

[mtls2005]

His lawyers must be going nuts.

 

Citing "political", or even "length", concerns makes it look like he wants to be less than transparent.

 

He might have said he thought the Dem. memo revealed too many secrets and bounced it over the transom to the FBI, DoJ, Congress for resolution and potential release.

[Bluespunk]

1 hour ago, rooster59 said:

 

"The Democrats sent a very political and long response memo which they knew, because of sources and methods (and more), would have to be heavily redacted, whereupon they would blame the White House for lack of transparency," Trump tweeted.

The Democrats would be entirely correct in asserting that. 

[Boon Mee]

Well, he's absolutely correct. Schiff threw in all kinds of material that is classified intending to make Trump appear less than opaque. 

Then they were cought out. - again. 

[mamypoko]

13 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Well, he's absolutely correct. Schiff threw in all kinds of material that is classified intending to make Trump appear less than opaque. 

Then they were cought out. - again. 

I held a tssci. That aside, how do you know what Schiff threw in? You have some level of access the rest of us do not?

[stevenl]

41 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Well, he's absolutely correct. Schiff threw in all kinds of material that is classified intending to make Trump appear less than opaque. 

Then they were cought out. - again. 

Since the full committee voted to release, your version of events is doubtful at best.

[worgeordie]

Black out all the important parts,and then i'll be happy......Trump.

and make it just one page.

regards worgeordie

[Jingthing]

Too long means he definitely hasn't even read it! Anything over one page that is peppered with references to "trump" is beyond his attention span.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[ELVIS123456]

Dems - no no no you cant release the memo - classified - security.

 

WH - parts redacted - memo released

 

Dems - you must release our memo unredacted - classified and security dont matter this time

 

WH - yes they do 

 

[stevenl]

11 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

Dems - no no no you cant release the memo - classified - security.

 

WH - parts redacted - memo released

 

Dems - you must release our memo unredacted - classified and security dont matter this time

 

WH - yes they do 

 

All lines in your post are incorrect. Beyond me why you're posting this nonsense.

[ELVIS123456]

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

All lines in your post are incorrect. Beyond me why you're posting this nonsense.

Hypocrisy - you either see it, or you are it.

 

[FritsSikkink]

1 hour ago, Boon Mee said:

Well, he's absolutely correct. Schiff threw in all kinds of material that is classified intending to make Trump appear less than opaque. 

Then they were cought out. - again. 

It is too lengthy, trouble reading 10 pages, what a joker

[JCauto]

59 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

Dems - no no no you cant release the memo - classified - security.

 

WH - parts redacted - memo released

 

Dems - you must release our memo unredacted - classified and security dont matter this time

 

WH - yes they do 

 

Incorrect - the Democrats, FBI and DOJ objected to the release of the memo, not just the Democrats.
Incorrect - the objection was that the FBI and DOJ hadn't even been able to review it. Afterwards, they reviewed it and objected to several parts.
Incorrect - the Democrats are simply asking for the same standard to be applied to both memos. They're not.
Incorrect - the WH did not care in the slightest about the classification or security consequences when they released this initial memo, hence they're not even allowing the FBI and DOJ to review it first.

[JCauto]

2 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Well, he's absolutely correct. Schiff threw in all kinds of material that is classified intending to make Trump appear less than opaque. 

Then they were cought out. - again. 

Wow - we have us an NSA insider here! Could you publish it then and TVF will have a worldwide scoop?

[ELVIS123456]

2 minutes ago, JCauto said:

Incorrect - the Democrats, FBI and DOJ objected to the release of the memo, not just the Democrats.
Incorrect - the objection was that the FBI and DOJ hadn't even been able to review it. Afterwards, they reviewed it and objected to several parts.
Incorrect - the Democrats are simply asking for the same standard to be applied to both memos. They're not.
Incorrect - the WH did not care in the slightest about the classification or security consequences when they released this initial memo, hence they're not even allowing the FBI and DOJ to review it first.

you say tomato i say tomato

you are incorrect i am incorect

 

either way - trump is triggering and i love the show.

 

[JCauto]

7 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

you say tomato i say tomato

you are incorrect i am incorect

 

either way - trump is triggering and i love the show.

 

Actually, no. You see, when you assert something as fact, and the other people challenge you on those facts, if you wish to retain integrity, you back it up with some sort of evidence. Instead, you pretend that there are no such things as facts, and that anyone can believe anything they like so long as it supports their argument. You then acknowledge that you're basically trolling as is Trump.

At least you're being somewhat honest I guess. You don't care about facts, you don't care for facts, and you don't even attempt to pretend you're doing anything but trolling. And of course, this is what the world requires, honest, transparent leadership based on fact-based rational behaviour. I guess this is the old man equivalent of enjoying watching the world burn.

[Jingthing]

18 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

you say tomato i say tomato

you are incorrect i am incorect

 

either way - trump is triggering and i love the show.

 

You and Putin love it. 

Russian mission accomplished.

Phase One anyway.

Edited February 11, 2018 by Jingthing

[ELVIS123456]

So let me get this right. 

The Dems started an investigation into Russia and Trump that has been going a year, based on a false dossier created by money from Clinton and DNC. After one year there is no evidence of any crime nor any evidence of any implication against Trump, but the Dems wont shut the investigation down (as it would show they were wrong).

 

Meanwhile, HRC was actually caught breaching national security laws, and deliberately bleached incriminating evidence both before and after being issued a warrant, and has been caught getting debate questions in advance, and has been implicated as involved in the false report about Trump, and has been implicated in the Clinton Foundation 'pay for play' scheme, and has been implicated in the Russia Uranium deal.

 

And the liberals refuse to see that something is wrong with their candidate, but think Trump is bad because he is alleged to have interfered in the election with help from Russia to win??  Wake up people !! 

 

Putting the big ugly issues aside - HRC destroyed classified emails to avoid an investigation, HRC and DNC conspired to stop Bernie getting nominated, and HRC got the debate questions in advance - now THAT is interfering in the election !!! 

[JCauto]

1 minute ago, ELVIS123456 said:

So let me get this right. 

The Dems started an investigation into Russia and Trump that has been going a year, based on a false dossier created by money from Clinton and DNC. After one year there is no evidence of any crime nor any evidence of any implication against Trump, but the Dems wont shut the investigation down (as it would show they were wrong).

 

Meanwhile, HRC was actually caught breaching national security laws, and deliberately bleached incriminating evidence both before and after being issued a warrant, and has been caught getting debate questions in advance, and has been implicated as involved in the false report about Trump, and has been implicated in the Clinton Foundation 'pay for play' scheme, and has been implicated in the Russia Uranium deal.

 

And the liberals refuse to see that something is wrong with their candidate, but think Trump is bad because he is alleged to have interfered in the election with help from Russia to win??  Wake up people !! 

 

Putting the big ugly issues aside - HRC destroyed classified emails to avoid an investigation, HRC and DNC conspired to stop Bernie getting nominated, and HRC got the debate questions in advance - now THAT is interfering in the election !!! 

You would like to get things right? Excellent! Let's start then, shall we?

 

"The Dems started an investigation into Russia and Trump that has been going a year, based on a false dossier created by money from Clinton and DNC. "

Incorrect - the investigation was started by the FBI and DOJ after Trump advisor George Papadopoulis drunkenly leaked information to an Australian diplomat who then subsequently informed them. That started the investigations. So your statement is completely and irrefutably false. This was the main disinformation attempt of the leaked memo, to falsely assert that the Steele dossier started the investigations. It did not.

 

"After one year there is no evidence of any crime nor any evidence of any implication against Trump, but the Dems won't shut the investigation down (as it would show they were wrong)."

Ah, the second of our esteemed TVF colleagues who has access to the FBI's investigation and documents! This is very exciting! Who would have thought that in all the internet fora in all the countries in all the world, humble ol' ThaiVisa happens to have insider information on the Russia investigation such that they can assert with complete confidence that there's been no evidence of any crime or implications against Trump! WOW! 

So why don't you just shut us Libtard Snowflakes up by publishing this insider information you have?

 

"Meanwhile, HRC...and the liberals refuse to see that something is wrong with their candidate, but think Trump is bad because he is alleged to have interfered in the election with help from Russia to win??  Wake up people !! "

Actually, I think you'd find that a significant number if not majority of those on the Left would agree with your assertion that HRC was a terrible candidate and that she along with the DNC rigged their primaries so that she became the Democrat candidate rather than Bernie. But as she is not the President, it's kind of irrelevant. That's because she has no power, is not in control of the country, and anything that she does really doesn't matter at this point. Trump, on the other hand, is President, does have power, and is under investigation. So while I'm sure you'd love to divert the discussion to the esoteric issue of the Democrats (and isn't it heartwarming to see the deep concern the Republicans have about that terrible subversion of the people's will), your man is President, and as such is the one who's under the microscope. Just like Obama was for all those years. Comes with the territory. 

So as you're the party of law and order, I'm sure you'd rather that the wheels of justice turn according to their internal pace and that no interference occurs so that it prevails. I'll wait on your actual use of some facts to back up your assertions in the meantime (but likely without success).

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, ELVIS123456 said:

Dems - no no no you cant release the memo - classified - security.

 

WH - parts redacted - memo released

 

Dems - you must release our memo unredacted - classified and security dont matter this time

 

WH - yes they do 

 

Yeah, the Dems expecting a level playing field where the same rules are applied to Democrats and Republicans--how crazy is that?

[heybruce]

Here's a recent post from Elvis123456 on another tread:

 

"will someone give me some logical and coherent thoughts to support their opinion that the junta is bad and democracy is good.

 

i have given just a few examples of countries where military/monarchy was replaced by a democracy and it has been a disaster.

 

the past is a great predictor for the future, and is a far better test than "my teacher told me it was so"."  https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1024529-hundreds-gather-at-bangkoks-democracy-monument-to-demand-election/?page=6

 

The Trump defender is no fan of democracy.  What a surprise.

 

[ELVIS123456]

all your points my "liberal snowflake' friends are nothing burgers

big fat nothing burgers - one year and nothing 

by the way i have a question:

what interference did the russians do that is the cause of the investigation being started by the dems appointees, many who have been shown to be clearly biased and involved in the survelliance of trump's campaign based on a false dossier.

 

that's right - what was the 'interference' that russia did? what was the exact interference that lead to:

 

Since May 2017, a Special Counsel investigation has been led by the current Special Counsel, former FBI Director Robert Mueller, into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017–present)

 

did they falsify votes?

did they cheat during the public debates?

did they use their mates to avoid an investigation?

did they give overwhelmingly negative media reports about one candidate?

 

what did the russians actually do??

 

was someone killed?

was someone kidnapped?

by 'interfere' did you mean they 'touched' hillary?

 

what did they do - what am i missing? 

 

[ELVIS123456]

23 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Here's a recent post from Elvis123456 on another tread:

 

"will someone give me some logical and coherent thoughts to support their opinion that the junta is bad and democracy is good.

 

i have given just a few examples of countries where military/monarchy was replaced by a democracy and it has been a disaster.

 

the past is a great predictor for the future, and is a far better test than "my teacher told me it was so"."  https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1024529-hundreds-gather-at-bangkoks-democracy-monument-to-demand-election/?page=6

 

The Trump defender is no fan of democracy.  What a surprise.

 

oh dear me - you wanna tell my mummy on me too?

 

you gonna tell your dad?

 

[heybruce]

4 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

oh dear me - you wanna tell my mummy on me too?

 

you gonna tell your dad?

 

Are you aware that "adolescent logic" is an oxymoron?

[Jingthing]

It's time to stop feeding the ... 

[heybruce]

10 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

all your points my "liberal snowflake' friends are nothing burgers

big fat nothing burgers - one year and nothing 

by the way i have a question:

what interference did the russians do that is the cause of the investigation being started by the dems appointees, many who have been shown to be clearly biased and involved in the survelliance of trump's campaign based on a false dossier.

 

that's right - what was the 'interference' that russia did? what was the exact interference that lead to:

 

Since May 2017, a Special Counsel investigation has been led by the current Special Counsel, former FBI Director Robert Mueller, into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017–present)

 

did they falsify votes?

did they cheat during the public debates?

did they use their mates to avoid an investigation?

did they give overwhelmingly negative media reports about one candidate?

 

what did the russians actually do??

 

was someone killed?

was someone kidnapped?

by 'interfere' did you mean they 'touched' hillary?

 

what did they do - what am i missing? 

 

" In a move that is both astonishing and without precedent the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) on January 6th issued a declassified version of a secret assessment earlier given to Barack Obama and Donald Trump. It found that the intelligence services of a foreign country hacked into the e-mail accounts and computers of senior officials involved in the 2016 presidential campaign, notably at the Democratic National Committee, and released much of that stolen data to the WikiLeaks anti-secrecy website. The same hostile power also gained access to computer systems of several state and local electoral boards (though not systems involved in vote tallying) and used an array of front organisations, television channels and social media “trolls” to feed disinformation and propaganda to American audiences, in a bid to influence the result of the election and “undermine the US-led liberal democratic order.” "     https://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2017/01/assault-democracy

 

The Economist is one of my main news sources.  If you were unaware of the above, your news sources are seriously lacking.

[JCauto]

3 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

all your points my "liberal snowflake' friends are nothing burgers

big fat nothing burgers - one year and nothing 

by the way i have a question:

what interference did the russians do that is the cause of the investigation being started by the dems appointees, many who have been shown to be clearly biased and involved in the survelliance of trump's campaign based on a false dossier.

 

that's right - what was the 'interference' that russia did? what was the exact interference that lead to:

 

Since May 2017, a Special Counsel investigation has been led by the current Special Counsel, former FBI Director Robert Mueller, into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017–present)

 

did they falsify votes?

did they cheat during the public debates?

did they use their mates to avoid an investigation?

did they give overwhelmingly negative media reports about one candidate?

 

what did the russians actually do??

 

was someone killed?

was someone kidnapped?

by 'interfere' did you mean they 'touched' hillary?

 

what did they do - what am i missing? 

 

So, despite repeated requests for some facts to back up your points, we're just getting continued obfuscation and repetition of already debunked claims. I'll just put some of these to rest:

"what interference did the russians do that is the cause of the investigation being started by the dems appointees, many who have been shown to be clearly biased and involved in the survelliance of trump's campaign based on a false dossier."

 

1. "dems appointees" - James Comey and Robert Mueller were and are lifelong Republicans, who were appointed by Republican Presidents and confirmed by Republican congress. They are highly respected law enforcement officials who reached the pinnacle of their professions after an unimpeachable career of public service, including in the case of Mueller, volunteering for and serving honourably in Vietnam. Are these the appointees to whom you are referring? You seem to think that there are a large number of people who started the investigation. There are not. There are two. These two are indisputably both Republican and of highest integrity.

 

2. The FBI and all other branches of government are staffed by American citizens. It is NOT a requirement of their jobs that they be apolitical or that if they do belong to a party that this disqualifies them from investigations should the investigated party be of a different political party. This has never been a requirement for any law enforcement measures, and any such requirement would be considered absurd and a complete abrogation of the basic ideal of justice and the creed, credo and credibility of law enforcement. So no, finding a few FBI agents who are Democrats and disparaging of Donald does not in any way disqualify the investigation.

 

3. What did the Russians do? Well, seems they hacked the voting machines in 21 States, they mobilized their security agencies to provide a massive push for Donald on social media, they leaked all sorts of disinformation that was picked up and broadcast by their bots and found their way into the minds and FB pages of the Alt-Right who were more than happy to ignore the source and veracity of these claims. What other things they did we will find out soon enough, but given the wide scope of contact, the numerous dubious financial transactions and low standards of integrity by the different Trump advisors (several of whom have been indicted and have already turned State's evidence) we can be reasonably sure that this is the tip of the iceberg.

Be patient! It will all come out in the end. And you should be both confident and push for that if you believe in the innocence of Trump and his coterie of cronies.

[riclag]

Shouldn't the Dem's  be calling for  the FISA court transcripts released ?

              Transcripts equal full transparency .  This would clear the memos and restore what little credibility both sides have 

Edited February 11, 2018 by riclag