you make it seem like there something so wrong and sinister and horrible about this. can you explain? oh wait no you can’t because you can’t think or talk for yourself never mind, sheep.
“Russia Investigation: It's beginning to look as if claims of monstrous collusion between Russian officials and U.S. political operatives were true. But it wasn't Donald Trump who was guilty of Russian collusion. It was Hillary Clinton and U.S. intelligence officials who worked with Russians and others to entrap Trump.”
President Donald Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani on Sunday claimed "truth isn't truth" when trying to explain why the president should not testify for special counsel Robert Mueller for fear of being trapped into a lie that could lead to a perjury charge.
“When you tell me that, you know, he should testify because he’s going to tell the truth and he shouldn’t worry, well that’s so silly because it’s somebody’s version of the truth. Not the truth,” Giuliani told Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday morning
“Truth is truth,” Todd responded.
“No, no, it isn’t truth,” Giuliani said. “Truth isn’t truth. The President of the United States says, “I didn’t …”
A startled Todd answered: “Truth isn’t truth?”
Giuliani: “No, no, no.”
Todd said: “This is going to become a bad meme.“
Giuliani‘s remark was not the first time he has gone down this road.
Reacting to The New York Times story that White House Counsel Don McGahn has been speaking with Robert Mueller’s team, President Trump tweeted out that McGahn is not a “John Dean type ‘RAT,’” and that the story was fake news.
It’s odd that Trump should bring up John Dean this weekend, for it was just this week that we also learned Trump has an Enemies List, just like Richard Nixon. Unlike Nixon, though, the president is hiding nothing—using security clearances and his Twitter account as the chief weapons to go after his opponents.
This is a dangerous move.
...
As we enter the midterm season, where the country will finally have the chance to create an actual check against this president through divided government, the question remains: What are voters willing to do about all this? Is the electorate capable of getting so angry about a situation that it is willing to take action through the ballot box, or have government institutions broken down so much that in Washington, anything goes?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.