Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
NYT Columnist Calls It ‘Striking How Little Evidence’ There Is For Trump, Russia Collusion - Concedes Trump's Right
Posted by:
David Brooks
()
Date: June 20, 2017 05:09PM
NYT Columnist Calls It ‘Striking How Little Evidence’ There Is For Trump, Russia Collusion
10:30 AM 06/20/2017
NYTimes columnist David Brooks challenged the paper’s dominant narrative in a Tuesday op-ed in which he cautioned critics of President Donald Trump to show restraint in light of the absence of evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.
“There may be a giant revelation still to come. But as the Trump-Russia story has evolved, it is striking how little evidence there is that any underlying crime occurred — that there was any actual collusion between the Donald Trump campaign and the Russians,” Brooks wrote.
Brooks’ explicit admission that there is no evidence to suggest the Trump campaign colluded with Russian officials to interfere in the 2016 presidential election represents a significant departure from what has been the NYTimes editorial position since the multiple ongoing investigations began.
Brooks’ skepticism echoes statements by lawmakers and officials on both sides of the aisle who have addressed the lack of evidence of collusion.
"Things are so bad that I’m going to have to give Trump the last word. On June 15 he tweeted, 'They made up a phony collusion with the Russians story, found zero proof, so now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story.' Unless there is some new revelation, that may turn out to be pretty accurate commentary."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/20/opinion/russia-investigation-trump.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top-stories&mtrref=undefined&assetType=opinion
10:30 AM 06/20/2017
NYTimes columnist David Brooks challenged the paper’s dominant narrative in a Tuesday op-ed in which he cautioned critics of President Donald Trump to show restraint in light of the absence of evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.
“There may be a giant revelation still to come. But as the Trump-Russia story has evolved, it is striking how little evidence there is that any underlying crime occurred — that there was any actual collusion between the Donald Trump campaign and the Russians,” Brooks wrote.
Brooks’ explicit admission that there is no evidence to suggest the Trump campaign colluded with Russian officials to interfere in the 2016 presidential election represents a significant departure from what has been the NYTimes editorial position since the multiple ongoing investigations began.
Brooks’ skepticism echoes statements by lawmakers and officials on both sides of the aisle who have addressed the lack of evidence of collusion.
"Things are so bad that I’m going to have to give Trump the last word. On June 15 he tweeted, 'They made up a phony collusion with the Russians story, found zero proof, so now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story.' Unless there is some new revelation, that may turn out to be pretty accurate commentary."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/20/opinion/russia-investigation-trump.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top-stories&mtrref=undefined&assetType=opinion
Re: NYT Columnist Calls It ‘Striking How Little Evidence’ There Is For Trump, Russia Collusion - Concedes Trump's Right
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: June 20, 2017 05:11PM
David Brooks is an irrelevant rightard loser you idiot.
Re: NYT Columnist Calls It ‘Striking How Little Evidence’ There Is For Trump, Russia Collusion - Concedes Trump's Right
Posted by:
dershowitz is correct
()
Date: June 20, 2017 05:14PM
How about liberal Jew Alan Dershowitz? He also said there's nothing here but partisan politics.
Re: NYT Columnist Calls It ‘Striking How Little Evidence’ There Is For Trump, Russia Collusion - Concedes Trump's Right
Posted by:
Joe Brzezinski
()
Date: June 20, 2017 05:16PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> David Brooks is an irrelevant rightard loser you
> idiot.
He's about as much of a conservative as Mika's wife Joe.
And he's certainly no fan of Trump.
-------------------------------------------------------
> David Brooks is an irrelevant rightard loser you
> idiot.
He's about as much of a conservative as Mika's wife Joe.
And he's certainly no fan of Trump.
Re: NYT Columnist Calls It ‘Striking How Little Evidence’ There Is For Trump, Russia Collusion - Concedes Trump's Right
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: June 20, 2017 05:23PM
Dershowitz just wants an embassy in Jerusalem and is giddy at Kushner being the defacto president. That Jew loved Bush too.
Re: NYT Columnist Calls It ‘Striking How Little Evidence’ There Is For Trump, Russia Collusion - Concedes Trump's Right
Posted by:
UDUXM
()
Date: June 20, 2017 05:35PM
Go fuck a goat Gerry.
Re: NYT Columnist Calls It ‘Striking How Little Evidence’ There Is For Trump, Russia Collusion - Concedes Trump's Right
Posted by:
Goatfuckerer2
()
Date: June 20, 2017 05:38PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dershowitz just wants an embassy in Jerusalem and
> is giddy at Kushner being the defacto president.
> That Jew loved Bush too.
Better a Jew than a Muslim sandnigger.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dershowitz just wants an embassy in Jerusalem and
> is giddy at Kushner being the defacto president.
> That Jew loved Bush too.
Better a Jew than a Muslim sandnigger.