twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op woensdag 02-05-2018 om 16:45:54 A Rigged System - They don’t want to turn over Documents to Congress. What are they afraid of? Why so much redacting? Why such unequal “justice?” At some point I will have no choice but to use the powers granted to the Presidency and get involved! reageer retweet

quote:

White House lawyer Ty Cobb is exiting and will be replaced by Clinton impeachment attorney Emmet Flood
Cobb, who served as the White House point person in dealing with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, is stepping down, according to senior administration officials. (Washington Post).

SPOILER

He is expected to be replaced by Williams & Connolly partner Emmet T. Flood, a Republican defense lawyer who helped President Bill Clinton during impeachment proceedings and was interviewed by President Trump earlier this year.

“For several weeks, Ty Cobb has been discussing his retirement and last week he let Chief of Staff Kelly know he would retire at the end of this month,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 11-03-2018 om 14:41:04 The Failing New York Times purposely wrote a false story stating that I am unhappy with my legal team on the Russia case and am going to add another lawyer to help out. Wrong. I am VERY happy with my lawyers, John Dowd, Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow. They are doing a great job and..... reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 2 mei 2018 19:00 schreef Mike het volgende:
Als Cobb inderdaad vertrekt, dan is deze tweet ook snel verouderd. Advocaat 1 en 2 zijn dan in ieder geval weg:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 11-03-2018 om 14:41:04 The Failing New York Times purposely wrote a false story stating that I am unhappy with my legal team on the Russia case and am going to add another lawyer to help out. Wrong. I am VERY happy with my lawyers, John Dowd, Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow. They are doing a great job and..... reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 2 mei 2018 19:00 schreef Mike het volgende:
Als Cobb inderdaad vertrekt, dan is deze tweet ook snel verouderd. Advocaat 1 en 2 zijn dan in ieder geval weg:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 11-03-2018 om 14:41:04 The Failing New York Times purposely wrote a false story stating that I am unhappy with my legal team on the Russia case and am going to add another lawyer to help out. Wrong. I am VERY happy with my lawyers, John Dowd, Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow. They are doing a great job and..... reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 2 mei 2018 19:00 schreef Mike het volgende:
Als Cobb inderdaad vertrekt, dan is deze tweet ook snel verouderd. Advocaat 1 en 2 zijn dan in ieder geval weg:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 11-03-2018 om 14:41:04 The Failing New York Times purposely wrote a false story stating that I am unhappy with my legal team on the Russia case and am going to add another lawyer to help out. Wrong. I am VERY happy with my lawyers, John Dowd, Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow. They are doing a great job and..... reageer retweet

quote:

Aluminum giant’s owner EN+ Group was at risk of a delisting from LSE without Treasury reprieve

The Trump administration on Tuesday amended its Russia sanctions program, paving the way for aluminum giant United Co. Rusal to escape from the blacklist and granting the metals market a reprieve from a supply scare that rocked markets over the past month.

Facing delisting from the London Stock Exchange this week, Rusal’s owner, EN+ Group, sought the 11th-hour amnesty from the U.S. Treasury late last week by pledging that its majority shareholder and a primary target of the U.S. sanctions, Russian tycoon Oleg Deripaska, would reduce his holdings and relinquish his board seat.

The Treasury granted EN+ Group and several other companies an extension for compliance with the sanctions, buying Rusal’s owner time to implement the company’s proposed divestment plan.

Shares in aluminum giant Rusal rose sharply on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange Wednesday, although aluminum prices dipped in Asian trading hours.

SPOILER

The Russian aluminum giant surged more than 10% during the day, and was recently up 9.7%. The metal itself was down 0.2% at $2,254.5 a metric ton on the London Metals Exchange, while the benchmark aluminum contract in Shanghai was down 0.3%.

Rusal’s stock has rebounded in recent weeks and is up 75% from the record low it reached last month in the fallout from the U.S.’s initially proposed sanctions.

Aluminum, which experienced a surge in demand amid related anxiety about supply levels, has fallen 9% from its April high. Prices have whipsawed over the past several weeks as the initial sanctions in early April risked cutting off a major supplier from markets. But prices fell as the Treasury began to signal a way for Rusal to avoid sanctions.

En+ executives and their representatives have scrambled in recent days to convince White House, State Department and Treasury officials that the administration risked missing an opportunity to force Mr. Deripaska out of control if they didn’t grant an extension and the company was delisted from the London Stock Exchange, according to a person familiar with the matter. By sidelining Mr. Deripaska, who is widely believed to be a key ally of President Vladimir Putin, the U.S. hopes to weaken the Kremlin’s power structure.

Still, some Russia hawks in Congress have called for Washington to take even tougher sanction steps against Moscow to discourage Russia from a host of foreign policy actions threatening U.S. interests.

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op woensdag 02-05-2018 om 17:04:53 Rusal's head is Oleg Deripaska, a likely Trump co-conspirator. Late last year it was reported he'd step down and cash out, right when Rusal sanctions were announced. Now we hear Trump will give Rusal a pass and Deripaska won't step down. How damn transparent can these people be? https://t.co/4bbzWR1iI0 reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op woensdag 02-05-2018 om 16:45:54 A Rigged System - They don’t want to turn over Documents to Congress. What are they afraid of? Why so much redacting? Why such unequal “justice?” At some point I will have no choice but to use the powers granted to the Presidency and get involved! reageer retweet

quote:

The Department of Justice sent a letter to the leaders of the House Freedom Caucus on Monday declining their request to see the unredacted version of a memo detailing the scope of the special counsel’s Russia probe.

In the letter, obtained by the Washington Examiner, Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd writes: “Although we are working to accommodate the requests of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in a number of oversight matters, we cannot provide the requested information pertaining to the Special Counsel’s ongoing investigation consistent with longstanding principles of investigatory independence.”

Turning over the unredacted memo would “threaten the integrity” of Mueller’s investigation, the letter reads.

It would also violate Justice Department policy of “against confirming or denying information about active investigations,” wrote Boyd.

Trump-aligned Reps. Mark Meadows, of North Carolina, and Jim Jordan, of Ohio, told Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein last month in a private meeting that they wanted to see the unredacted version of the August 2017 memo that details the scope of Robert Mueller’s investigation, CNN reported late Tuesday.

The heavily-redacted and classified August 2, 2017, memo signed by Rosenstein was made public in April in court filings as part of Mueller’s ongoing criminal case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

SPOILER

In the memo, Rosenstein empowers Mueller to investigate allegations that Manafort “committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials” to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

The request from Meadows and Jordan — and subsequent denial by the Justice Department — adds new fuel Republican lawmakers’ accusations that the department is stonewalling its numerous requests for documents.

But on Tuesday, Rosenstein — a Republican who was handpicked by Trump — sent a message the Congress that he will adhere to the rule of law when it comes to demands.

"There have been people who have been making threats privately and publicly against me for quite some time and I think they should understand by now the Department of Justice is not going to be extorted," he said at an event in Washington.

In response, Meadows tweeted : "If he believes being asked to do his job is 'extortion,' then Rod Rosenstein should step aside and allow us to find a new Deputy Attorney General — preferably one who is interested in transparency."

The Washington Post reported this week Meadows and the House Freedom Caucus had drafted articles of impeachment against Rosenstein.

Earlier Wednesday, Trump threatened to “get involved” in in facilitating the turning over of documents to Congress.

"A Rigged System - They don’t want to turn over Documents to Congress," Trump tweeted . "What are they afraid of? Why so much redacting? Why such unequal 'justice?' At some point I will have no choice but to use the powers granted to the Presidency and get involved!”

Trump did not describe which committee requests he was referring to, though there have been numerous requests in the last few months.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., issued a subpoena to the Justice Department in March, seeking various documents, including on the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server and alleged abuse of surveillance powers during the 2016 election.

The Justice Department missed Goodlatte’s subpoena deadline in early April, and Trump railed against the department on Twitter , accusing them of “slow walking.”

At the time, a Republican House Judiciary Committee aide told the Washington Examiner that they were working with the Justice Department to take "immediate steps to comply with the subpoena and produce documents to the Committee."

The Justice Department last month did turn over a document requested by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, who had wanted to see the document he said prompted the FBI’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

In a statement on the deadline, April 11, Nunes thanked Rosenstein, but warned his committee's subpoenas from last year "remain in effect."

The Intelligence Committee subpoenaed the FBI on Aug. 24, 2017 for a broad range of documents, including the two-page originating document, commonly called the Electronic Communication, or EC.

]

quote:

Op woensdag 2 mei 2018 21:27 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:
De special election voor PA-07 wordt gehouden op.. 6 november. De dag van de midterms dus. Wie hem wint mag twee maanden lang Representative zijn totdat het nieuwe House geïnstalleerd is. Amerika
http://www.rollcall.com/n(...)meehan-set-for-nov-6

quote:

Op woensdag 2 mei 2018 21:32 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Maar dan wel met de oude districtindeling. Dat kan niet anders dan complete chaos worden zou je zeggen.

quote:

Op woensdag 2 mei 2018 21:32 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Maar dan wel met de oude districtindeling. Dat kan niet anders dan complete chaos worden zou je zeggen.

twitter:

Acosta twitterde op woensdag 02-05-2018 om 19:46:42 Source familiar with Cobb's departure says WH lawyer had been clashing with Trump in recent weeks: "Ty was uncomfortable with the Mueller tweets..." and was not going to be "part of a mud slinging campaign." Cobb made it clear to POTUS, legal team he "can't go down that path." reageer retweet

twitter:

kathrynw5 twitterde op woensdag 02-05-2018 om 19:23:38 Ty Cobb tells @MajorCBS: "It's been a real sacrifice for me. The president wanted me to stay. ... The bulk of the work was done. It's easier for me to leave now." reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 2 mei 2018 22:01 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Ik denk dat als je dan in het oude district woont, je twee keer mag stemmen. Maar het slaat überhaupt nergens op.

quote:

Op woensdag 2 mei 2018 20:38 schreef Monolith het volgende:
Nog wel een aardig stukje over de 2018 Senate map:
https://fivethirtyeight.c(...)me-at-a-better-time/

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 00:33 schreef Nintex het volgende:
Amerikaanse gevangenen worden vrijgelaten door Noord Korea.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 00:35 schreef wawowiewa het volgende:

[..]

Geweldig! In ruil voor ?

twitter:

nypost twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 00:28:03 North Korea has released three U.S. citizens who had been held prisoner https://t.co/lUre4ByC3X reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 00:41 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Good faith gesture

twitter:

nypost twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 00:28:03 North Korea has released three U.S. citizens who had been held prisoner https://t.co/lUre4ByC3X reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 00:42 schreef Euribob het volgende:

Stephen Colbert (The Other One) On Michelle Wolf's WHCD Speech

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 00:54 schreef Tchock het volgende:

[..]

Hij is leuk. Maar het valt me de laatste tijd wel op dat de verschillende komische late-nightshows steeds meer op elkaar gaan lijken. Seth Meyers had ook een item over de speech inclusief sommige van dezelfde grappen en hij sprak als ex-host van het CD.

twitter:

FoxNews twitterde op zondag 29-04-2018 om 05:23:00 President @realDonaldTrump: "In all fairness, @kanyewest gets it." https://t.co/tG4Iamabxa reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 03:49 schreef OMG het volgende:
Ze moeten bij Rachel Maddow nu de hoek om, want de lijst van figuren die vertrokken / ontslagen zijn past niet meer op 1 muur;

[ afbeelding ]

Hoe lang tot dat de rest vol is? Een weekje?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 04:36 schreef Szura het volgende:
Twitteraccount Michael Avenatti
[ afbeelding ]

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 04:15:02 Michael Avenatti on @TheLastWord about Giuliani’s revelation: “I am absolutely speechless at this revelation... This is an outrage what has gone on here. The American people have been lied to about this agreement.” reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 04:20:02 Michael Avenatti to @TheLastWord: “I sincerely hope that we have not reached a place in this nation, and I don’t think this to be overstated… [that the president can] stand aboard Air Force One on audio and video and lie to the American people.” reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 04:25:25 Avenatti tells @TheLastWord he hopes Giuliani is not suggesting the Cohen reimbursement took place over several months to avoid $10K+ payments to avoid reporting those payments: “That’s a serious, serious problem. It’s a violation of federal law. It’s a criminal act to do that.” reageer retweet

twitter:

mkraju twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 01:11:04 Michael Caputo, just interviewed by Bob Mueller’s team, told me: “It’s clear they are still really focused on Russia collusion. ... They know more about the Trump campaign than anyone who ever worked there.” He didn’t want to discuss specifics reageer retweet

twitter:

mkraju twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 01:11:19 He added: ”The Senate and the House are net fishing,” Caputo said. “The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate.” reageer retweet

RUDY GIULIANI FULL ONE-ON-ONE INTERVIEW WITH SEAN HANNITY (5/2/2018)

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 03:15:20 Rudy Giuliani just said on Fox that Trump fired Comey because Comey wouldn't tell Trump that he wasn't a target of the FBI's investigation. reageer retweet

twitter:

maddow twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 04:35:05 Oh dear, oh jeez, this is not a good thing for the President's lawyer to admit... https://t.co/1B4WNxZfWM reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 05:11:08 Why does he say "funneled" but I hear "laundered"Oh because I'm a lawyer https://t.co/aAfAgzwSLG reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 05:37:02 Ainsley Earnhardt, a truly great person, just wrote a wonderful book, “The Light Within Me,” which is doing really well. She is very special and so is her new book...bring it to number one! reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 05:45:24 Our great financial team is in China trying to negotiate a level playing field on trade! I look forward to being with President Xi in the not too distant future. We will always have a good (great) relationship! reageer retweet

twitter:

costareports twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 05:33:50 Giuliani tells me he just spoke w / POTUS. Tonight by phone. President "very pleased," Giuliani says. He says they discussed his revelation of the reimbursements long in advance. Does not expect to be fired. Insists his remarks on FNC were approved by Trump. Story TK. reageer retweet

twitter:

RogueSNRadvisor twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 04:50:43 Trump tomorrow: reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 07:34 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Het hele interview met Avenatti:

EXCLUSIVE: Avenatti Responds To Rudy Claiming Trump Repaid Stormy Hush Money | The Last Word | MSNBC

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 08:10 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Guiliani heeft dat gat nog wel een paar meter dieper gegraven, inderdaad. Wow.

quote:

According to a person close to the president, Mr. Trump reimbursed Mr. Cohen for the payment, a determination made in recent weeks by the president’s lawyers after examining banking records. The lawyers determined that campaign funds had not been used for the payment, the person said.

The lawyers also concluded that the funds did not come from a third party or the Trump Organization, the person said. While the disclosure may be embarrassing for the president, his lawyers believe the payment did not violate campaign finance laws, the person said.

Another person familiar with the payment to Mr. Cohen from Mr. Trump said the money was reimbursed in a series of payments, not in a lump sum.

But such a payment from the candidate — even if it was made through a lawyer — would have to be disclosed to the Federal Election Commission as an in-kind contribution to the campaign and as an expenditure by the campaign, if it was for the purpose of influencing the election.

Mr. Trump’s campaign did not disclose the reimbursement to Mr. Cohen on its commission reports.

The crucial question in determining whether the reimbursement to Mr. Cohen violated campaign finance laws might be whether the payment was specifically intended to help Mr. Trump’s campaign.

Paul S. Ryan, an official at the government watchdog group Common Cause, argued that “all the facts indicate that the payment was to influence the election.”

Mr. Ryan asserted that Mr. Giuliani’s admission could allow prosecutors to make the case that Mr. Trump “knowingly caused his campaign committee to file an incomplete disclosure report with the F.E.C.”

“Until tonight, it would have been tough to prove that because Donald Trump had denied knowing about the payment,” Mr. Ryan said. “But his reimbursement amounts to knowledge.”

While most violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act’s disclosure provisions are misdemeanors, a knowing and willful violation could be a felony.

But Mr. Giuliani’s comments could cloud Mr. Avenatti’s legal argument that his client should be formally released from the hush agreement she signed. When the president told reporters he knew nothing about the deal, he helped Ms. Clifford’s case that the hush agreement was not binding if Mr. Trump did not know about it and did not sign it.

Though far from bringing clarity to the question, Mr. Giuliani obscured it further — now two lawyers for the president are providing two very different versions of events.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 08:32 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Trump is nu echt compleet fucked lijkt me.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 03:49 schreef OMG het volgende:
Ze moeten bij Rachel Maddow nu de hoek om, want de lijst van figuren die vertrokken / ontslagen zijn past niet meer op 1 muur;

[ afbeelding ]

Hoe lang tot dat de rest vol is? Een weekje?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 08:32 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Trump is nu echt compleet fucked lijkt me.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 08:34 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Hoe vaak hebben we dat nu al wel niet gezegd? Zolang 40% van de bevolking letterlijk ongeacht alles achter hem blijft staan, zit Trump waar hij zit.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 08:44 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

60 % is dan tegen trump.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 08:27 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Ik ben benieuwd wat Melania gaat doen. Voorlopig staat Trump droog denk ik.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 03:56 schreef wawowiewa het volgende:

[..]

Dit is niet zo gek, Het is gewoon zeer moeilijk om mensen met het denkniveau van Donald Trump te vinden. Tja dan probeer je het maar even met iemand die iets van in de buurt komt en dan valt dat in de praktijk altijd tegen.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 08:45 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Maar dat is al maanden zo en verandert niet.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 09:22 schreef Ulx het volgende:
De commentaren op Breitbart zijn trouwens hi-la-risch. Pijnlijk lachwekkend.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 09:27 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Laat me raden. "BUT Clinton!!"

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 09:31 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Uiteraard. Obama had trouwens een homovriendje en ook Benghazi is langsgeweest.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 09:16 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Op gegeven moment krijg je een omslagpunt. De GOP wordt nu afgerekend op de onmacht van de president om met mensen SAMEN TE WERKEN, of het nu om democraten gaat als om republikeinen, maakt niet uit. Dan lijkt het me voor de hand liggend dat de republikeinen zijn solitaire gedrag straks zat zijn. Ze willen namelijk een president die ook de partij beschermt. Trump heeft de republikeinse partij opgetrokken, maar trekt die nu naar de afgrond.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 09:34 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Ben daar niet zo zeker van eerlijk gezegd. Je zou zeggen dat er voor een omslagpunt al genoeg gebeurd is. Ik denk dat er tot in de lengte der dagen ongeveer 30/35% van de mensen achter Trump zullen staan. In ieder geval zolang Fox News bestaat.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 09:42 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Fox is anders aardig bezig om Trump onder de bus te smijten. Trump moet die lui maar eens ontslaan.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:03 schreef Mike het volgende:
Volgens deze poll is de steun voor Trump onder zwarte mensen verdubbeld in de afgelopen week. Kanye-effect?

https://polling.reuters.c(...)1-20180501/type/week

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:03 schreef Mike het volgende:
Volgens deze poll is de steun voor Trump onder zwarte mensen verdubbeld in de afgelopen week. Kanye-effect?

https://polling.reuters.c(...)1-20180501/type/week

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:26 schreef Pietverdriet het volgende:

Clinton

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 08:44 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

60 % is dan tegen trump.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:28 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Precies wat deze topicreeks is, zwart-wit als de pest. Of je bent voor, of je bent tegen. Neutraal is absoluut niet mogelijk

Trump is overigens hierdoor helemaal niet fucked. Iets wat 10 jaar gebeurd is, nog voordat ie politieke ambities had, glijdt met alle gemak van hem af. Nobody cares behalve een paar paniekerige en wanhopige door Trump geobsedeerde nietszeggende triestelingen.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:30 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Dat zijn "advocaten" Trump steeds meer in de problemen brengen is je blijkbaar even ontgaan?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:30 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Dat zijn "advocaten" Trump steeds meer in de problemen brengen is je blijkbaar even ontgaan?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:32 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dat zie je verkeerd. Trump laat zich niet uit de penarie halen. Subtiel verschil.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:28 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Precies wat deze topicreeks is, zwart-wit als de pest. Of je bent voor, of je bent tegen. Neutraal is absoluut niet mogelijk

Trump is overigens hierdoor helemaal niet fucked. Iets wat 10 jaar gebeurd is, nog voordat ie politieke ambities had, glijdt met alle gemak van hem af. Nobody cares behalve een paar paniekerige en wanhopige door Trump geobsedeerde nietszeggende triestelingen.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:28 schreef Refragmental het volgende:
een paar paniekerige en wanhopige door Trump geobsedeerde nietszeggende triestelingen.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:03 schreef Mike het volgende:
Volgens deze poll is de steun voor Trump onder zwarte mensen verdubbeld in de afgelopen week. Kanye-effect?

https://polling.reuters.c(...)1-20180501/type/week

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:28 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

Trump is overigens hierdoor helemaal niet fucked.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:36 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Nou nou nou nou.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:38 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Ik denk niet dat hij nu kan ontkomen aan een gesprekje met de rechter in de zaak Stormy. Omdat er niks aan de hand is hoeft dat trouwens geen issue te zijn.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:40 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Tja, als je werkelijk je dag in dag uit druk maakt om Trump en je je iedere dag moet ventileren op een forum.... ieder zijn ding, maar dat is simpelweg een ongezonde obsessie wat mij betreft.

Laat het los, ga lekker naar buiten, geniet van de zon. Is gezonder

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:32 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dat zie je verkeerd. Trump laat zich niet uit de penarie halen. Subtiel verschil.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:40 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Tja, als je werkelijk je dag in dag uit druk maakt om Trump en je je iedere dag moet ventileren op een forum.... ieder zijn ding, maar dat is simpelweg een ongezonde obsessie wat mij betreft.

Laat het los, ga lekker naar buiten, geniet van de zon. Is gezonder

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:47 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Het is wel duidelijk dat het 1 grote clusterfuck van "only the best people" is

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:48 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Maar toch kun je je niet aan de drang onttrekken om zo af en toe te komen vertellen hoe kut je het hier wel niet vind. Over obsessies gesproken.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:52 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

In pompom's wereld is "zo af en toe", gelijk aan een obsessie.
Juist

Veel plezier verder. Ik wacht wel op belangrijk nieuws, zoals het OIG rapport wat deze maand zou komen.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:58 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Mooi. Ga ik weer verder wachten op belangrijk "Uranium 1"- en Pizzanieuws.

SPOILER

De rol vvan HRC in de Benghazi affaire!

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 10:28 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Precies wat deze topicreeks is, zwart-wit als de pest. Of je bent voor, of je bent tegen. Neutraal is absoluut niet mogelijk

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:33 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Het maakt volgens mij ook niet echt uit waar het geld vandaan kwam. Die 130K is nog steeds een contributie aan de campagne. Of Cohen, Trump, de Trump Foundation, Trump BV of Sinterklaas dat betaalde, dat maakt toch niks uit?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:39 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Logischerwijs maakt dat wel uit, als Trump het immers privé betaalt is het geen campagnegeld.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:43 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Nee, de Campagne en de Persoon Trump zijn verschillende entiteiten. Anders zou iedereen met 100 miljard op zijn rekening het presidentschap wel kopen.
Verder werd er vlak voor de verkiezing betaald met als doel de kansen van Trump te vergroten ---> Bijdrage aan de campagne.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:39 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Logischerwijs maakt dat wel uit, als Trump het immers privé betaalt is het geen campagnegeld.

quote:

“He fired Comey because Comey would not, among other things, say that he wasn’t a target of the investigation,” Giuliani, who recently joined Trump’s legal team, told Fox News’s Sean Hannity.

“He’s entitled to that. Hillary Clinton got that and he couldn’t get that,” said Giuliani. “So he fired him and he said, ‘I’m free of this guy.’ ”

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:48 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:
Ik lees trouwens dat Guliani ook obstruction of justice verder heeft bekrachtigd

[..]

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:49 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Ja. Dit is de echte bombshell als je het mij vraagt. Stormy zal allemaal wel wezen maar dit speelt recht in Muellers hand.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:55 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

Ik vraag me af wat hun idee hierachter is. Geloven ze dat Comey ontslaan om deze reden géén OoJ is, en ze er dus mee weg kunnen komen? Waarom zou je dit in hemelsnaam toegeven?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:55 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

Ik vraag me af wat hun idee hierachter is. Geloven ze dat Comey ontslaan om deze reden géén OoJ is, en ze er dus mee weg kunnen komen? Waarom zou je dit in hemelsnaam toegeven?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:44 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

Het is een groot probleem om een bijdrage te doen uit campagnegelden aan dingen die niet met de campagne te maken hebben, zoals het afkopen van een affaire.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 12:15 schreef nostra het volgende:

[..]

Het is juist andersom: het is een bijdrage aan de campagne uit niet-campagnegelden (privévermogen) en daarmee, vanuit de campagne gezien, een bijdrage in natura. Mits aangetoond kan worden dat die NDA is gesloten om Trumps positie als kandidaat niet te schaden.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 12:12 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Weet niet of dat de bedoeling was.

Giuliani zat bij Hannity. Bevriend volk dus. Dan let je minder op de woorden dan bij een kritische interviewer. En het is sowieso een amateuristische flapuit.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:58 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Omdat ze geen keus hebben. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 12:21 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Ik vind hem een brabbelende kabouter..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 12:24 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Hoezo? Giuliani is geniaal. Toen hij twee weken terug begon verklaarde hij dat hij het Rusland Onderzoek wel even naar de achtergrond zou verplaatsen. En Lo & Behold. Het is hem gelukt. En hoe!

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 12:15 schreef nostra het volgende:

[..]

Het is juist andersom: het is een bijdrage aan de campagne uit niet-campagnegelden (privévermogen) en daarmee, vanuit de campagne gezien, een bijdrage in natura. Mits aangetoond kan worden dat die NDA is gesloten om Trumps positie als kandidaat niet te schaden.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 12:46:09 Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer, not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign, from which he entered into, through reimbursement, a private contract between two parties, known as a non-disclosure agreement, or NDA. These agreements are..... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 12:54:38 ...very common among celebrities and people of wealth. In this case it is in full force and effect and will be used in Arbitration for damages against Ms. Clifford (Daniels). The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair,...... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 13:00:14 ...despite already having signed a detailed letter admitting that there was no affair. Prior to its violation by Ms. Clifford and her attorney, this was a private agreement. Money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll in this transaction. reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:08 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 12:46:09 Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer, not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign, from which he entered into, through reimbursement, a private contract between two parties, known as a non-disclosure agreement, or NDA. These agreements are..... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 12:54:38 ...very common among celebrities and people of wealth. In this case it is in full force and effect and will be used in Arbitration for damages against Ms. Clifford (Daniels). The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair,...... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 13:00:14 ...despite already having signed a detailed letter admitting that there was no affair. Prior to its violation by Ms. Clifford and her attorney, this was a private agreement. Money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll in this transaction. reageer retweet

Hoezo in full-force? Is niet iemand vergeten zijn handtekening te zetten?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:14 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Hij geeft toe dat hij 130k betaalde voor iets dat niet waar was.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:13 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Avenatti zit nu bij Morning Joe.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:08 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 12:46:09 Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer, not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign, from which he entered into, through reimbursement, a private contract between two parties, known as a non-disclosure agreement, or NDA. These agreements are..... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 12:54:38 ...very common among celebrities and people of wealth. In this case it is in full force and effect and will be used in Arbitration for damages against Ms. Clifford (Daniels). The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair,...... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 13:00:14 ...despite already having signed a detailed letter admitting that there was no affair. Prior to its violation by Ms. Clifford and her attorney, this was a private agreement. Money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll in this transaction. reageer retweet

Hoezo in full-force? Is niet iemand vergeten zijn handtekening te zetten?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:16 schreef DeParo het volgende:
Ik vind het zo totaal oninteressant dit hele gedoe .

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:17 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Roll?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:16 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Hij kan er beter een slaapzak neerleggen, hij bivakkeert zo vaak daar bij NBC..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:18 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

[ afbeelding ]

dat weten we DeParo, dat weten we..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:18 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Is dat zo? Volgens mij zag ik hem gisteren bij CNN.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:22 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Hij heeft het drukker met de pers dan met de zaak. Het lijkt mij er op dat hij zijn zaakjes wél op orde heeft..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:16 schreef DeParo het volgende:
Ik vind het zo totaal oninteressant dit hele gedoe .

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:29 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Of die een pornoster geneukt heeft is dan ook het minst interessante van dit alles, hoe Trump en zijn handlangers er na mee om zijn gegaan is juist wel interessant maar dat zal voor een fanboy zoals jij wel iets lastiger te accepteren zijn

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:24 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Het lijkt me niet onwaarschijnlijk dat hij zijn optreden in de pers deels als deel van de zaak ziet. En zoals we zien heeft dat kennelijk heeft dat effect.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:30 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Hij heeft haar niet geneukt. Hij heeft haar 130K gegeven opdat ze niet zou jokken.

Had hij bij mij trouwens ook mogen doen. Geef me 130K en ik zal niet liegen over Trump.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:32 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

ik was eerst!!

twitter:

tedlieu twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 06:57:34 4 possible felonies from Rudy Giuliani admission:1. $130k payment to Stormy was in-kind coordinated contribution above limits2. Cohen was a straw donor used to cover up true source of contribution3. False statements on financial disclosures4. False statements on banking forms https://t.co/KysAF3X4te reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:37 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

tedlieu twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 06:57:34 4 possible felonies from Rudy Giuliani admission:1. $130k payment to Stormy was in-kind coordinated contribution above limits2. Cohen was a straw donor used to cover up true source of contribution3. False statements on financial disclosures4. False statements on banking forms https://t.co/KysAF3X4te reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:35 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Jij mag wat mij betreft ook 130K van Trump krijgen hoor.

Ik zie het niet als een Zero-Sum game.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:41 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Vooral die laatste twee zijn wel een big deal in de V.S.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:36 schreef DeParo het volgende:
Stormy Daniels lijkt me wel van het onbetrouwbare type. Beetje 130K aannemen en nu alsnog uit de school klappen. Zal wel een boek aankomen naast die ongetwijfeld lekker betaalde optredens op teleivisie. Haar dochter zal over twintig jaar wel trots zijn.

twitter:

tedlieu twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 06:33:06 Here's a fun fact: campaign finance law violations over $25k are felonies. The in kind contribution of $130k to Stormy Daniels was over that line. The reimbursement constitutes a separate crime of covering up the true source of a contribution. Also likely banking law violations. https://t.co/H5wydrGL05 reageer retweet

twitter:

ThePaulSRyan twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 04:00:22 Giuliani’s statement that @realDonaldTrump reimbursed Cohen for the $130k payment to @StormyDaniels puts Trump on the hook for criminal violation of campaign finance laws. Violation is only criminal if knowing and willful. Trump reimbursement=Trump knowledge. reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:36 schreef DeParo het volgende:
Stormy Daniels lijkt me wel van het onbetrouwbare type. Beetje 130K aannemen en nu alsnog uit de school klappen. Zal wel een boek aankomen naast die ongetwijfeld lekker betaalde optredens op teleivisie. Haar dochter zal over twintig jaar wel trots zijn.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:47 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Voor iemand die dit totaal oninteressant zegt te vinden heb je wel een duidelijke mening over iemand waarvan Trump zegt dat ze 130k heeft gekregen om geen leugens te verkondigen.

Toch heerlijk die hypocrisie van de trumpanzees.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:49 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Je vond het toch niet interessant? Waarom moet je dan alsnog je mening komen geven?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:50 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Ik mag ook een mening hebben over onderwerpen die ik niet interessant vind.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:50 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Ik snap dat je het leukt vindt om mij een label aan te praten maar ik ben geen aanhanger of fan van Trump. Toch klopt het wat ik zeg. Deze mevrouw doet dit ook alleen maar omdat ze er denkt meer geld mee te kunnen verdienen. Het tekent de hedendaagse mentaliteit bij veel Amerikanen spijtig genoeg. Dus wat dat betreft.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:52 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Ik zei toch niet dat dat niet mocht?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:52 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Maar wat heeft haar dochter er dan mee te maken?

twitter:

MichaelAvenatti twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 13:50:51 Whatever happens @foxandfriends, please do not stop helping our case week in and week out by having Mr. Trump and Mr. Giuliani appear and make damaging stmts. You are truly THE BEST; where can we send the gift basket? #basta reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:53 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Ze is toch een moeder.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:55 schreef Barbusse het volgende:
Die Avenatti loopt zo wel binnen zeg. Of hij deze zaak nu wint of niet, hij hoeft zich geen zorgen te maken over gebrek aan clienten lijkt me

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:55 schreef Barbusse het volgende:
Die Avenatti loopt zo wel binnen zeg. Of hij deze zaak nu wint of niet, hij hoeft zich geen zorgen te maken over gebrek aan clienten lijkt me

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:56 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Ja? Maar waarom zou haar dochter pas over 20 jaar trots zijn op haar moeder?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:59 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Niet trots dus. Zou ik zeggen. Als je de dochter bent van de vrouw die zich door de President betaald liet volblaffen, sorry dat ik het zeg, maar deze mensen mogen ook wel wat meer aan andere mensen in hun omgeving denken. Het is niet dat ze verkracht is of iets in die richting.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:55 schreef Barbusse het volgende:
Die Avenatti loopt zo wel binnen zeg. Of hij deze zaak nu wint of niet, hij hoeft zich geen zorgen te maken over gebrek aan clienten lijkt me

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:55 schreef Barbusse het volgende:
Die Avenatti loopt zo wel binnen zeg. Of hij deze zaak nu wint of niet, hij hoeft zich geen zorgen te maken over gebrek aan clienten lijkt me

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:59 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Niet trots dus. Zou ik zeggen. Als je de dochter bent van de vrouw die zich door de President betaald liet volblaffen, sorry dat ik het zeg, maar deze mensen mogen ook wel wat meer aan andere mensen in hun omgeving denken. Het is niet dat ze verkracht is of iets in die richting.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:56 schreef Mike het volgende:

[..]

Hij gaf bij Real Time tussen de regels aan dat hij dit ziet als een springplank naar de politiek toe.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:01 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Ah. Ik voel we dat langzaam richting "Daniels is pornoster, dus niet betrouwbaar" aan het gaan zijn

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:02 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Betaald? Zeg je nu dat Trump een hoerenloper is?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:50 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Ik snap dat je het leuk vindt om mij een label aan te praten maar ik ben geen aanhanger of fan van Trump. Toch klopt het wat ik zeg. Deze mevrouw doet dit ook alleen maar omdat ze er denkt meer geld mee te kunnen verdienen. Het tekent de hedendaagse mentaliteit bij veel Amerikanen spijtig genoeg. Dus wat dat betreft.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:01 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Ah. Ik voel we dat langzaam richting "Daniels is pornoster, dus niet betrouwbaar" aan het gaan zijn

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:03 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Ja het is wel grappig dat je steeds blijft herhalen geen fan te zijn van Trump maar gezien je PoHi is dat nogal lastig te verdedigen, bij elk beetje kritiek op Trump reageer je als een hersendode elzies namelijk en doe je dit soort zaken af als oninteressant ook al heb je dan wel weer een hele uitgesproken mening over Stormy en vind je het zelfs nodig om in navolging van je oranje held haar dochter er bij te slepen

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:02 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Betaald? Zeg je nu dat Trump een hoerenloper is?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:03 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Nee. Maar het is haar keuze geweest om seks te hebben met Trump. Ze is niet gedwongen. Ik vind het vooral een zwaktebod om dan uit financieel gewin even op tv te vertellen hoe en wat. Je hebt nota bene die 130K geaccepteerd. Ga dan niet zielig lopen te doen. Sowieso al sneu dat je die 130K accepteert overigens.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:05 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Als Stormy Daniels een hoer is dan is Trump een hoerenloper.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:05 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Trump is ook niet gedwongen. Hij had het verhaal beter in de krant kunnen laten komen.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:05 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Maar ze verklaarde er geen geld voor te hebben gekregen.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:06 schreef Chewie het volgende:
Maar je je hebt waarschijnlijk wel gelijk dat ze dit doet voor geldelijk gewin maar dat zou ik ook doen als ik in haar positie zat, zeker met zo'n compleet idiote tegenstander als Trump en zijn "advocaten" team

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:08 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:
Wat ik mij ook afvraag, deze hele afkoopregeling kwam eigenlijk pas tot stand vlak voor de verkiezingen, om te zorgen dat het geen negatieve invloed zou hebben.

Maar Stormy Daniels is vast niet de enige, dus hoeveel andere vrouwen heeft Cohen nog een zwijgcontract laten tekenen en hoeveel geld ging daarmee gemoeid?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:07 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Behalve die 130K dan.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:08 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:
Wat ik mij ook afvraag, deze hele afkoopregeling kwam eigenlijk pas tot stand vlak voor de verkiezingen, om te zorgen dat het geen negatieve invloed zou hebben.

Maar Stormy Daniels is vast niet de enige, dus hoeveel andere vrouwen heeft Cohen nog een zwijgcontract laten tekenen en hoeveel geld ging daarmee gemoeid?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:03 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Nee. Maar het is haar keuze geweest om seks te hebben met Trump. Ze is niet gedwongen. Ik vind het vooral een zwaktebod om dan uit financieel gewin even op tv te vertellen hoe en wat. Je hebt nota bene die 130K geaccepteerd. Ga dan niet zielig lopen te doen. Sowieso al sneu dat je die 130K accepteert overigens.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:12 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dat was niet vanwege de neukpartij.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:14 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Volgens mij had het van alles te maken met die neukpartij wat dat betreft. Die Stormy Daniels Hoopt nu natuurlijk dat Trump af moet treden. Wordt ze de nieuwe Monica Lewinsky dat wordt cashen.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:13 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

weet je wat sneu is? Dat je als getrouwde man je vrouw die net een kind heeft gebaard bedriegt met een PORNOACTRICE! En dat je later er KEIHARD over hebt gelogen als PRESIDENT van de Verenigde Staten. Mét de wetenschap dat hij dit bedrag misschien wel uit de campagne kas heeft getrokken. #MAGA, me zolen!

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:14 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Late betaling dan.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:13 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Zodra Stormy de zaak wint, en dat gaat ze doen, komen die wel tevoorschijn.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:15 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Melania......its you?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:17 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
Vladimir Vladimirovich

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:22 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:
Ik vind het wel heel sneu dat DeParo alleen maar Stormy Daniels als persoon loopt af te kraken terwijl hij geen woord rept over het moreel laakbare gedrag van Trump zelf.

Sterker nog, doe je dat wel, krijg je zo'n sneue oneliner als: "Melania...its you?" terug.

Zo komt het echt over alsof hij geen kwaad woord over Trump wil zeggen, maar vooral over zijn tegenstanders. Nogal opzichtig, als je het mij vraagt.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:22 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:
Ik vind het wel heel sneu dat DeParo alleen maar Stormy Daniels als persoon loopt af te kraken terwijl hij geen woord rept over het moreel laakbare gedrag van Trump zelf.

Sterker nog, doe je dat wel, krijg je zo'n sneue oneliner als: "Melania...its you?" terug.

Zo komt het echt over alsof hij geen kwaad woord over Trump wil zeggen, maar vooral over zijn tegenstanders. Nogal opzichtig, als je het mij vraagt.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:25 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Voor hetzelfde is hij door Trump ingehuurd om hier te trollen, en iedereen WEET dat Trump TOTALE loyaliteit eist.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:23 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Waarom zou ik Trump afkraken? Doen jullie toch al.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:27 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

En jij niet. Daar heeft Dustpuppy een goed punt.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:23 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Waarom zou ik Trump afkraken? Doen jullie toch al.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:29 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Omdat het aan zou tonen dat je in ieder geval in staat bent tot objectief mensen op hun gedrag te beoordelen. Nu kom je over als puur pro-Trump.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:26 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Het meest grappige is in dit topic dat jij echt denkt dat ik door Rusland of de Trump-campagne ben ingehuurd om hier een beetje Trump te lopen verdedigen . I wont accept 130K.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:30 schreef Chewie het volgende:
Wel bijzonder dat je zoveel reacties plaatst over iets waarvan je zegt het totaal oninteressant te vinden

Maar ja gezien je laatste reacties en je blijvende ontkenning fan te zijn van Trump, schaam je je blijkbaar dood dat je fan van die oranje gek bent.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:30 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Een troll ben je, dat weten we al. Trollen zijn meestal erg zwakke figuren, jij bent een hardnekkige intrigant die al meerdere keren door andere users en MODS hier op is gewezen. Dat je hier steeds maar mee doorgaat MOET dus een reden hebben.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 11-03-2018 om 14:41:04 The Failing New York Times purposely wrote a false story stating that I am unhappy with my legal team on the Russia case and am going to add another lawyer to help out. Wrong. I am VERY happy with my lawyers, John Dowd, Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow. They are doing a great job and..... reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:30 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Ah. Kan ik dan hetzelfde over jou bijvoorbeeld zeggen. Want enige objectiviteit is hier dan sowieso wel lastig te vinden.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:34 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Elke vraag hierna beantwoord je met een jij-bak of een whataboutism zo ongeveer.

Ben jij compleet niet in staat om iets slechts over die man te zeggen of...?

quote:

twitter:

ThePaulSRyan twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 04:00:22 Giuliani’s statement that @realDonaldTrump reimbursed Cohen for the $130k payment to @StormyDaniels puts Trump on the hook for criminal violation of campaign finance laws. Violation is only criminal if knowing and willful. Trump reimbursement=Trump knowledge. reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 13:08 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 12:46:09 Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer, not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign, from which he entered into, through reimbursement, a private contract between two parties, known as a non-disclosure agreement, or NDA. These agreements are..... reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:30 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Zoals je wel gemerkt heb schaam ik me zelden voor mijn standpunten .

twitter:

colbertlateshow twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 06:21:13 .@MichaelAvenatti has brought receipts! This is the image of the incoming wire payment from Michael Cohen to Stormy Daniels. #LSSC https://t.co/JpAuLp59rr reageer retweet

twitter:

abbydphillip twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 14:41:57 In a gaggle of reporters at the WH just now, Sarah Sanders refused to answer multiple questions about why she and the president made statements about the Daniels case that we now know to be untrue. Sanders insisted she couldn't comment because of ongoing litigation. reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:52 schreef Chewie het volgende:

[..]

Trump is dan ook geen standpunt

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:36 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Nogmaals. Hetzelfde geldt toch precies voor jou . Kijk eens in de spiegel man haha beetje mij afvallen omdat ik niet genoeg kritiek op Trump heb terwijl andersom schijnbaar geen enkel probleem is, als je me dat nu weet uit te leggen, geef ik je een portie kritiek op Trump en co.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:59 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Dat is echt de grootste onzin, er zijn genoeg mensen hier (waaronder ik) die bijvoorbeeld zowel Trump als Clinton kut vonden, ook snappen dat Stormy een profiteur is etc. etc.

Maar daar kan ik jou echt totaal niet op betrappen.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:06 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Wat ieder in zijn vrije tijd doet moet hij zelf weten, normaal gesproken moreel verwerpelijk als je getrouwd bent en vader als je het mij vraagt, maar het is jouw keuze.

twitter:

CNNTonight twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 06:07:12 "Mr. Trump will not serve out his term." Stormy Daniels' lawyer responds to Rudy Giuliani's statement, where he said President Trump repaid his personal attorney Michael Cohen the $130,000 given to his client as hush money. https://t.co/nUPNc92ePF https://t.co/lMDef2mpzV reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:50 schreef speknek het volgende:

"Retainer" = ik heb er wel voor betaald, maar het was eigenlijk een soort lumpsum en ik heb geen idee waar het voor gebruikt werd. Daarom stond mijn handtekening er ook niet onder, maar Cohen had wel tekenrecht, ofzo.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:02 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Godver, weer een topic verparoot.

twitter:

colbertlateshow twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 06:22:34 .@StephenAtHome is curious to know from @MichaelAvenatti how many other NDA’s President Trump might have out there. #LSSC https://t.co/BxEtu1FgaQ reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:01 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Dan heb je die posts aardig verstopt. Maar omdat je het zo lief vraagt:

[..]

Maar ik kan me er niet druk om maken want ze doen het bijna allemaal. Jacques Chiraq stond bekend dat hij elke avond een ander meisje in het Elysee had. Dus wat dat betreft.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:06 schreef Ulx het volgende:
O ja, Avenatti denkt dat er meer vrouwen met NDA's zijn.

twitter:

colbertlateshow twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 06:22:34 .@StephenAtHome is curious to know from @MichaelAvenatti how many other NDA’s President Trump might have out there. #LSSC https://t.co/BxEtu1FgaQ reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:04 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

ik waarschuwde je er al voor.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 15:05:58 Michael Avenatti responds to Trump's tweets: "Whoever the attorney is that wrote those two tweets is an absolute moron." (via CNN) https://t.co/kYORVYhXK9 reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:07 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Ok we zijn er bijna. In algemene termen praten is makkelijk, maar daar vroeg ik niet om.

Probeer nu eens Trump bij naam te noemen in een negatieve context?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:06 schreef Ulx het volgende:
O ja, Avenatti denkt dat er meer vrouwen met NDA's zijn.

twitter:

colbertlateshow twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 06:22:34 .@StephenAtHome is curious to know from @MichaelAvenatti how many other NDA’s President Trump might have out there. #LSSC https://t.co/BxEtu1FgaQ reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:08 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Waarom? Ik zie echt niet in waarom ik dat zou moeten doen. En waarom het geen enkel probleem is voor jou om exact het tegenovergestelde te doen. Volslagen hypocriet.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:07 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Ik zeg het je, 9/11, ik zeg het je Klappernoot, Illuminati, complot.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:09 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Dat dacht ik al.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:09 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:04 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Dan was het laatste wat ik zou doen, hier voor betalen.. mijn krabbel staat niet onder het contract, dan hoef ik er ook niet voor op te draaien. Mijn baas zou zich eerst tien keer knijpen, een kolderiek horlepiepje maken en fluks alle facturen aanpassen als hij hier mee weg zou kunnen komen..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:14 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
Het valt me wel op dat Nintex en refragmental slim genoeg zijn om dit deel van de topicreeks even links te laten liggen. Er valt namelijk weinig eer voor ze te halen hier na de slip of the tongue van Giuliani op Fox News..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:14 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
de slip of the tongue van Giuliani op Fox News..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:20 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Zeg maar rustig het gooien van een brandbom. Nu breekt de pleuris zo vreselijk uit. Die financiële overtredingen zijn ook op staatsniveau strafbaar. Cohen is de sjaak. Trump gaat de sjaak worden.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:20 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Zeg maar rustig het gooien van een brandbom. Nu breekt de pleuris zo vreselijk uit. Die financiële overtredingen zijn ook op staatsniveau strafbaar. Cohen is de sjaak.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:26 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Cohen zeker. Trump wordt vooralsnog door een naïeve groep gesjeesde vastgoedproleten en had-je-me-maars in het zadel gehouden. maar geduld wordt beloond. Hoe langer Mueller blijft onderzoeken, hoe linker het wordt voor deze president.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:02 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Godver, weer een topic verparoot.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:28 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Maar als Cohen door de staat NY wordt aangepakt is er geen gratie mogelijkheid. Hoe loyaal zal hij dan blijven?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:29 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Hij gaat zingen als een lentevogeltje, dat staat vast.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:28 schreef brokjespoes het volgende:

[..]

Iedereen (OK, bijna iedereen, you know who you are)... toe nou!

Wanneer ik als hoogbejaarde miauw iets kan, dan kan iedereen het hoor!

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:16 schreef speknek het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

[..]

Ik snap niet zo goed wat je bedoelt. Trump geeft zijn maffia advocaat een berg geld om mensen af te kopen zonder dat hij van de deals af wil weten zodat hij plausible deniability heeft. Dat is hoe dat meestal gaat. Cohen is gewoon Trumps bag man.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:29 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Maar waarover?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:33 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

het gevaar bij die methode is de oncontroleerbaarheid. Als je als client niet weet wat je juridisch specialist gaat doen (en die kosten bakken met geld) dan ben je óf zo doortrapt dat het je geen hol uit maakt óf dommer dan het paard van Christus.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:35 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Mag het trouwens wel, boedhoudkundig gezien?

"Hier is een zak met geld, zie maar."

quote:

Fourteen climate researchers, including six from U.S. universities, have been selected for French President Emmanuel Macron’s “Make Our Planet Great Again” initiative. The scientists applied to move to France to carry out climate science projects in the country’s top research laboratories.

The selected researchers include some of America’s brightest scientific talents: Alexey Fedorov, a Yale professor and Guggenheim fellow, and James Clark, a Duke University climate expert, according to a press release Wednesday from France’s Ministry of Higher Education and Research.

Researchers hailing from universities in several other countries, including Canada and Saudi Arabia, also were selected.

The applicants’ projects, covering a range of topics including Arctic climate change and improving air quality, are expected to last three to five years. Each researcher will receive at least $600,000 in funding, according to the statement, which noted that Germany is now jointly supporting the initiative.

SPOILER

Macron first introduced “Make Our Planet Great Again” last year, after President Donald Trump announced plans to pull the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement. Macron urged climate scientists and others around the world to apply for an opportunity to work in France.

Trump’s “decision is unfortunate but it only reinforced our determination,” Macron said in a message on the initiative’s website. “France has always led fights for human rights. Today, more than ever, we are determined to lead (and win!) this battle on climate change.”

Macron reiterated his commitment to fighting climate change in an address to the U.S. Congress last week.

“What is the meaning of our life, really, if we work and live destroying the planet, sacrificing the future of our children?” he asked lawmakers during his visit to Washington.

The first group of 18 scientists selected for the program was announced in December. That group included 13 researchers from U.S. universities, including Camille Parmesan, a professor at the University of Texas and U.K.’s University of Plymouth who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for her work as a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“The impact of Trump on climate science has been far greater than what the public believe it has,” Parmesan told The Guardian of her decision to move to France to continue her research. “He has not only slashed funding, but he’s gone on the attack in any way he can with his powers as the president.”

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:38 schreef brokjespoes het volgende:
U.S. Climate Scientists Flee For France To ‘Make Our Planet Great Again’ (HuffPo)

[..]

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:39 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

altijd merkwaardig dat ze een vliegtuig pakken om het klimaat te verbeteren..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:40 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Hoe anders? Een zeilboot?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:40 schreef OllieA het volgende:
Goh, ik dacht dat er nieuwe ontwikkelingen waren, maar jullie zijn weer eens aan het slowchatten met DeParo.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:39 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
altijd merkwaardig dat ze een vliegtuig pakken om het klimaat te verbeteren..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:48 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:
Ik lees trouwens dat Guliani ook obstruction of justice verder heeft bekrachtigd

[..]

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 11:55 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

Ik vraag me af wat hun idee hierachter is. Geloven ze dat Comey ontslaan om deze reden géén OoJ is, en ze er dus mee weg kunnen komen? Waarom zou je dit in hemelsnaam toegeven?

quote:

"He fired Comey because Comey would not, among other things, say that he wasn’t a target of the investigation,” Giuliani, who recently joined Trump’s legal team, told Fox News’s Sean Hannity.

“He’s entitled to that. Hillary Clinton got that and he couldn’t get that,” Giuliani said. “So he fired him and he said, ‘I’m free of this guy.’ ”;

twitter:

OfficialJonZal twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 04:47:28 “Rudy, you’re prepared for this Hannity appearance, yes?”“Absolutely, Mr. President.”CUT TO: Giuliani sits down at Hannity’s desk.HANNITY’s DIRECTOR: “ And we’re live in three … two … one …”GIULIANI: https://t.co/Z7Q8vXL2WN reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:40 schreef OllieA het volgende:
Goh, ik dacht dat er nieuwe ontwikkelingen waren, maar jullie zijn weer eens aan het slowchatten met DeParo.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:39 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

altijd merkwaardig dat ze een vliegtuig pakken om het klimaat te verbeteren..

quote:

Giuliani noted the political reason for the payment. “Imagine if that came out of October 15, 2016, in the middle of the last debate with Hillary Clinton…” he said. “Cohen made it go away. He did his job.”

quote:

In a conversation with BuzzFeed News, Giuliani later said that Cohen, Trump's longtime personal lawyer, “had complained to some people” after the 2016 election that he’d not been fully paid by Trump. At some point — Giuliani said he did not know when or where specifically — Cohen met with Trump and told him of his complaint. Giuliani said that Trump told Cohen, “We’ll cover your expenses,” and agreed to pay him $35,000 a month “out of his personal funds” over the course of a year-long period that began in the first few months of 2017 and has since ended.

“It clearly was a payment to reimburse expenses,” Giuliani said — adding the caveat, “I’m almost certain that there wasn’t an itemized bill.”

“This is like petty cash [to Trump],” Giuliani said. In addition to repaying the $130,000, the arrangement gave Cohen “enough left over for him to profit in [2017].” If Trump paid Cohen $35,000 a month for a year, as Giuliani said, that would be a total of $420,000.

BuzzFeed

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 13:41:48 Remember how Cohen "complained to friends" he was never reimbursed for the 130K? Turns out he was paid *over 400K* by Trump and those complaints were a planted story to mislead American voters and confirm Trump's claim he knew nothing of the 130K. Was Trump in on *that* lie too? reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 16:14 schreef Re het volgende:

[..]

hij maakt het er niet echt veel beter op bij F&F

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 15:14 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
Het valt me wel op dat Nintex en refragmental slim genoeg zijn om dit deel van de topicreeks even links te laten liggen. Er valt namelijk weinig eer voor ze te halen hier na de slip of the tongue van Giuliani op Fox News..

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 16:21 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Het is me niet helemaal duidelijk waar we nou staan. Is de strategie nou om te beweren dat er geen campagnegelden zijn gespendeerd of dat het spenderen van campagnegelden gerechtvaardigd was omdat het een politiek relevante betaling zou betreffen?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 16:27 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

De strategie is dat Cohen de zwijgsom uit eigen zak heeft betaald en dat Trump hem achteraf heeft terugbetaald.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 16:30 schreef Ulx het volgende:
The Game Theory of a Trump Subpoena

Verhelderend stuk.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 16:21 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Het is me niet helemaal duidelijk waar we nou staan. Is de strategie nou om te beweren dat er geen campagnegelden zijn gespendeerd of dat het spenderen van campagnegelden gerechtvaardigd was omdat het een politiek relevante betaling zou betreffen?

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 16:28 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

En dat het daardoor niet gezien kan worden als een bijdrafe aan de campagne.

Veel succes met dat smoesje.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 16:45:13 "Perhaps the most blatantly false denial came from Cohen's lawyer and spokesman, David Schwartz, who back in March denied that Trump ever reimbursed Cohen. He said it with '100 percent' certainty. Now Guiliani says Trump did in fact 'repay' Cohen."https://t.co/Qf4P7C7E3L reageer retweet

twitter:

mkraju twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 14:24:16 In a matter of 48 hours, we’ve learned the president of the United States deceived the American public about his health in the 2016 campaign and about engaging in a scheme to pay off a porn star to silence her during the campaign reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 16:40:40 Republicans impeached Clinton 3 presidents ago and I've never heard anyone in the GOP apologize for it or say that the supposed "standard" they used to impeach the POTUS no longer applies. Now tell me how what we learned of Trump's campaign lies over the last day isn't FAR WORSE. https://t.co/OLhlZjgbeN reageer retweet

quote:

The New York Times heeft duidelijk weten te profiteren van de aanhoudende kritiek van president Donald Trump op het Amerikaanse mediabedrijf. Het concern boekte over het eerste kwartaal een twee derde hoger winst van 21,9 miljoen dollar.

De zogeheten ''Trump bump" was vooral te merken bij het aantal digitale abonnementen. Ten opzicht van een jaar eerder groeide dit aantal met 139.000 tot een totaal van 2,8 miljoen.

Bijna 100.000 nieuwkomers waren nieuwsconsumenten. De overige groei was te danken aan onlinekruiswoordpuzzels en -kookrecepten.

De totale omzet steeg van 399 miljoen dollar naar 414 miljoen dollar, waarbij de omzet uit abonnees steeg met 7,5 procent. Abonnementen zijn goed voor bijna twee derde van de opbrengsten.

Tegenover de aanwas van abonnees stond de aanhoudende daling van advertentie-inkomsten. Dit zal volgens het bedrijf het hele jaar aanhouden. Ook verwacht het bedrijf dat de kosten zullen stijgen.

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 17:44:35 Trump lawyer Giuliani has established—as a red line Mueller can't cross—any inquiry into Ivanka Trump's knowledge of topics falling under the Special Counsel's purview. The nation must now have an *extensive* conversation about what Ivanka may know and why Trump needs to hide it. https://t.co/8zbyMsSoR3 reageer retweet

twitter:

MichaelAvenatti twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 17:49:53 Rudy Giuliani - the only “ambulance” I have ever chased in my career is the one you are driving right now in a desperate attempt to save this presidency. Any time you would like to compare our legal careers and cases over the last 15 yrs, I would be happy to. #sirens #basta reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 17:14 schreef brokjespoes het volgende:
"...the failing New York Times..."

Winst New York Times explodeert onder aanvallen Trump (NU.nl)

[..]

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 14:06 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Wat ieder in zijn vrije tijd doet moet hij zelf weten, normaal gesproken moreel verwerpelijk als je getrouwd bent en vader als je het mij vraagt, maar het is jouw keuze.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 18:48 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

pssst niet doorvertellen hoor, maar het gaat niet om de seks, maar om het afkopen met welk geld. Niet draaien aub.

twitter:

tedlieu twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 18:27:34 This is the 4th version of this story.-Stormy Daniels is fake news-Not fake but no money was paid-Money was paid but Trump didn't reimburse-Actually, Trump reimbursedWhy all the lies? Why should the American people believe you now @realDonaldTrump? https://t.co/vd3fdCW0Vd reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 18:49:29 This spring marks 4yrs since the Phoenix VA crisis. We won't forget what happened to our GREAT VETS. Choice is vital, but the program needs work & is running out of $. Congress must fix Choice Program by Memorial Day so VETS can get the care they deserve. I will sign immediately! reageer retweet

quote:

Three high-ranking officials at the Environmental Protection Agency have resigned this week amid the storm of scandals plaguing agency chief Scott Pruitt.

Liz Bowman, the EPA’s top spokeswoman, submitted a resignation earlier this week and will take a job as director of communications for Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), The Washington Examiner reported Thursday. Bloomberg also confirmed she’s stepping down.

“I leave extremely grateful for the opportunity to serve the Trump Administration and Administrator Pruitt,” Bowman wrote in her April 30 resignation letter, according to the Examiner. Her last day agency is May 11.

News of Bowman’s departure comes just two days after the resignation of two of Pruitt’s other top aides: Albert “Kell” Kelly, who was in charge of overhauling the agency’s cleanup of America’s most contaminated sites, and Pasquale “Nino” Perrotta, the head of Pruitt’s controversial round-the-clock security detail. Perrotta stepped down ahead of planned testimony before the House Oversight Committee.

The resignations add to the chaos that has engulfed the EPA since Pruitt’s whirlwind of corruption accusations and ethical scandals began in late March.

SPOILER

Kelly, a former banking executive, was banned for life from that industry in 2016 as The Intercept reported. Almost immediately thereafter, Pruitt appointed him to lead the EPA’s effort to prioritize and streamline the Superfund program.

In a statement Tuesday, Pruitt praised Kelly for the “tremendous impact” he had on the program and said he “will be sorely missed.”

“He has helped EPA professionals find solutions to moving languished sites down the path to clean up including San Jacinto in Texas, Portland Harbor in Oregon and West Lake in St. Louis,” Pruitt said. “Additionally, Kell has been instrumental in organizing EPA’s effort to eradicate lead poisoning across the country within the decade.”

Kelly has been closely involved with Pruitt’s ongoing scandals. Last month, he canceled a trip to a West Virginia coal town contaminated with toxic chemicals to stay behind in Washington and help the administrator deal with the fallout from the controversies. Last week, Reps. Don Beyer and Gerald Connolly, both Virginia Democrats, called on the EPA’s inspector general to investigate why Pruitt hired Kelly despite his complete lack of experience in toxic cleanup. The former banker became a magnet for criticism himself after reports emerged that Kelly owned at least $75,000 in fossil fuel stocks, including in a company responsible for contaminating a Louisiana bayou.

Superfund has been a top priority of Pruitt’s since he took over as agency chief last year. He’s called it “absolutely essential,” repeatedly stressed that it’s part of EPA’s core mission and pointed his finger at the Obama administration for not doing enough to clean up toxic waste sites.

Pruitt touted the agency’s work on Superfund during a pair of congressional hearings last week. “We have removed over three times the number of polluted sites of contaminated communities across the country as compared to the previous administration for 2017,” he said.

The Associated Press fact-checked the claim and concluded Pruitt “is taking credit for work largely completed when Barack Obama was president.”

Reacting to news of Kelly and Perotta’s departures, Beyer called on Pruitt to also step down.

“The exodus of Pruitt’s closest aides shows just how toxic his reign at EPA has become,” Beyer said in a statement. “The EPA needs new leadership from public servants committed to its mission of protecting the environment and putting Americans’ public health first.”

quote:

Federal investigators have wiretapped the phone lines of Michael Cohen, the longtime personal lawyer for President Donald Trump who is under investigation for a payment he made to an adult film star who alleged she had an affair with Trump, according to two people with knowledge of the legal proceedings involving Cohen.

It is not clear how long the wiretap has been authorized, but NBC News has learned it was in place in the weeks leading up to the raids on Cohen's offices, hotel room, and home in early April, according to one person with direct knowledge.

At least one phone call between a phone line associated with Cohen and the White House was intercepted, the person said.

Previously, federal prosecutors in New York have said in court filings that they have conducted covert searches on multiple e-mail accounts maintained by Cohen.

Spokespeople for the U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI in New York declined comment.

[..]

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 19:17 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Feds tapped Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's phones

At least one phone call between a phone line associated with Cohen and the White House was intercepted, a source said.

[..]

quote:

Special counsel Robert Mueller is focusing intensely on alleged interactions between former top Trump campaign official Rick Gates and political operative Roger Stone, one of President Donald Trump's closest confidants, according to sources with direct knowledge of the matter.

Stone, a longtime advisor to Trump, is apparently one of the top subjects of the Mueller investigation into potential collusion between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign, sources told CNBC on condition of anonymity.

The questions have been largely about what was discussed at meetings, including dinners, between Stone and Gates, before and during the campaign, said the sources, who have knowledge of the substance of the recent interviews.

In February, Gates pleaded guilty to two counts stemming from the Russia investigation, and he is cooperating with Mueller's probe.

SPOILER

The new developments indicate that Mueller's team is interested in Stone beyond his interactions with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange during the campaign.

An attorney for Stone, Robert Buschel, did not deny the relationship between his client and Gates, but sought to downplay its importance.

"Roger Stone did not have any substantive or meaningful interaction with Rick Gates during or leading up to the 2016 campaign," Buschel told CNBC in a statement.

An attorney for Gates declined to comment. A spokesman for the special counsel's office did not return requests for comment.

The link between Gates and Stone goes back to their work at what had been one of the most powerful lobbying firms in Washington, D.C., which was founded by Stone along with former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort. The special counsel's probe has yielded two indictments against Manafort, who is accused of several crimes, including bank fraud and conspiracy against the United States.

Gates joined the firm as an intern more three decades ago, and it is unclear how much work he did with Stone at the time.

The firm, called Black, Manafort, Stone and Kelly, was known for its work to help improve the image of controversial politicians, including Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, Mobutu Sese Seko of the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the Russian-aligned former president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych.

Gates joined the Trump campaign in the spring of 2016 and became Manafort's deputy. It was there where he became close to many of Trump's close confidants. He remained with the campaign even after Manafort's ouster. Gates then worked on Trump's inaugural committee and co-founded the pro-Trump nonprofit group America First Policies.

In March, Gates was pulled into the Mueller inquiry when the special counsel's office filed a motion that claimed the former campaign aide had contact with a former agent of the Russian intelligence service in 2016. This came after Gates pleaded guilty to lying and conspiring against the United States, which could lead to possibly six years in prison. A sentencing date has yet to be announced.

For Stone, this is another potential hurdle in an ongoing investigation that continues to focus on him, amongst others.

Sam Nunberg, a former Trump campaign advisor, also said he was asked about Stone's involvement with Wikileaks during his interview before Mueller's grand jury in March.

"Roger is certainly a subject," Nunberg said. "The fact that Roger hasn't been called in and the special counsel continues to ask questions about Roger's possible activities during the election shows that at the very least he's a subject."

Stone allegedly met with Assange, the Wikileaks founder, in August 2016. In an email leaked to The Wall Street Journal, Stone said, "I dined with my new pal Julian Assange last nite."

Stone has denied that he has met with the Wikileaks founder and said the email was in jest.

During the 2016 campaign, Wikileaks published emails allegedly stolen from the Democratic National Committee's servers by a Russia-linked hacker known as "Guccifer 2.0."

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 19:27 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Ik zit te wachten op de tweets van Het Oranje Fiasco die ze schuimbekkend gaat schrijven.

quote:

It appears China has stopped buying soybeans from the US altogether because of trade fight (CNBC)

• "Whatever they're buying is non-U.S.," Soren Schroder, CEO of New York-based Bunge, the world's largest oilseeds processor, told Bloomberg in a phone interview.
• China canceled a net 62,690 metric tons of U.S. soybean purchases in the two weeks ended April 19, the Bloomberg article pointed out, citing USDA data for the current marketing year.
• The country is the second largest market for U.S. agricultural exports, and soybeans have historically have been one of the top products sold to the Asian giant, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service.

China is apparently no longer buying U.S. soybeans amid the rise in trade tensions, Bloomberg reported Wednesday.

"Whatever they're buying is non-U.S.," Soren Schroder, CEO of New York-based Bunge, the world's largest oilseeds processor, told the news outlet in a phone interview. "They're buying beans in Canada, in Brazil, mostly Brazil, but very deliberately not buying anything from the U.S."

A Bunge representative did not immediately respond to a CNBC request for comment.

China canceled a net 62,690 metric tons of U.S. soybean purchases in the two weeks ended April 19, the Bloomberg article pointed out, citing USDA data for the current marketing year.

Soybean futures fell 1 percent Wednesday, but are up 8 percent on the year.

In response to the Trump administration's proposed tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese imports, China's Ministry of Commerce announced duties in early April on 106 U.S. products, including soybeans. No effective date was announced at the time.

China is the second-largest market for U.S. agricultural exports, and soybeans have historically been one of the top products sold to the Asian country, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 19:50 schreef FlipjeHolland het volgende:
Dat zo'n stuk stront als Trump gewoon de ene leugen na andere kan blijven verspreiden zonder enige consequenties.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 19:17 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Feds tapped Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's phones

At least one phone call between a phone line associated with Cohen and the White House was intercepted, a source said.

[..]

quote:

It is not clear how long the wiretap has been authorized, but NBC News has learned it was in place in the weeks leading up to the raids on Cohen's offices, hotel room, and home in early April, according to one person with direct knowledge.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 21:05:21 Neither Don McGahn nor Emmet Flood knew that Trump reimbursed Michael Cohen for the Stormy Daniels payment until Giuliani said it on live TV, WaPo reports. https://t.co/zo6UWr7HJn reageer retweet

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 21:13:13 The below is offered in support of my earlier point that the White House Counsel's Office is in chaos and ineffectual. It's now clear Trump has been lying to his White House attorneys about issues relating to Cohen. We'll soon learn he's been lying to them about much, much else. https://t.co/oyAovZdgXL reageer retweet

quote:

Rudy Giuliani called for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to intervene in the Michael Cohen case and put the people behind the probe “under investigation” in a phone call with The Hill on Thursday.

“I am waiting for the Attorney General to step in, in his role as defender of justice, and put these people under investigation,” Giuliani said, reacting to an NBC News report that phones belonging to Cohen, President Trump’s longtime personal attorney, had been tapped by investigators.

The former New York City mayor argued that the reported wiretapping of Cohen, if true, was a blatant transgression of attorney-client privilege.

Giuliani, who joined President Trump’s personal legal team about two weeks ago, predicted that Trump would share his anger at the reported wiretapping, though he said he had not yet spoken to the president about it.

When he does so, Giuliani predicted, “He is going to say to me, ‘Isn’t there an attorney-client privilege?’ And I am going to tell him, ‘No, the Department of Justice seems to want to trample all over the Constitution of the United States.’ ”

Giuliani’s explosive comments further heighten the stakes in the legal battles in which Trump is enmeshed.

SPOILER

It is extraordinary, by any measure, for a member of the president’s personal legal team to suggest that the attorney general should intervene in an investigation that affects the president.

But Giuliani said that a wiretapping of Cohen would amount to “gross misconduct” by the government. He further alleged that “this case has been surrounded by numerous acts” that fit that description.

Giuliani added sarcastically, “And they don’t even notify us? I mean, he’s only the president of the United States.”

The NBC News report stated that it was "not clear how long the wiretap has been authorized” on Cohen but that it was “in place in the weeks leading up to the raids on Cohen's offices, hotel room, and home in early April.”

NBC cited “one person with direct knowledge” of the matter.

Sessions's deputy at the Justice Department, Rod Rosenstein, reportedly signed off on the Cohen raid after prosecutors in New York received a criminal referral from special counsel Robert Mueller

The NBC report also stated that “at least one phone call between a phone line associated with Cohen and the White House was intercepted” by law enforcement.

Before the furor over the wiretap erupted Thursday, Giuliani dropped a bombshell by telling Sean Hannity of Fox News Channel on Wednesday evening that the president reimbursed Cohen for the $130,000 that the attorney paid to adult actress Stormy Daniels a short time before the 2016 presidential election.

Trump had told reporters onboard Air Force One last month that he was not aware of the payments to Daniels and that he did not know where Cohen had gotten the money.

Trump is battling on several legal fronts, including the Cohen matter, the ongoing Russia investigation led by special counsel Robert Mueller and accusations of sexual misconduct from women.

Giuliani reiterated in his phone call with The Hill that Trump was aware in general terms that the former New York City mayor was going to put out the version of events he presented on “Hannity” — though not exactly when he would do so.

As if to push back against those who suggested that he had committed a gaffe, Giuliani said he had spoken to the president “several times” since his Wednesday evening Fox News appearance.

Asked if Trump was content with his performance, Giuliani responded: “Yep.”

Giuliani also hit back at criticism — including from fired FBI Director James Comey — about his use of the term “stormtroopers” in relation to the FBI raids last month on Cohen’s home, office and hotel room.

On Twitter, Comey wrote: “I know the New York FBI. There are no “stormtroopers” there; just a group of people devoted to the rule of law and the truth. Our country would be better off if our leaders tried to be like them, rather than comparing them to Nazis.”

Giuliani countered that he had not made a Nazi comparison, arguing, “there are stormtroopers all over.”

But, he added, “If you don’t like it, don’t act that way.”

quote:

Special counsel Robert Mueller on Thursday filed a request for 70 blank subpoenas in the Eastern District of Virginia on Thursday, where former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort is facing charges including tax fraud and failing to report foreign bank accounts.

The two-page filing reveals that each subpoena recipient must appear in the Alexandria, Va., courthouse on July 10 to testify in the case.

quote:

House Chaplain Pat Conroy is rescinding his resignation, opting to stay in his position through the end of this Congress, he wrote in a letter to House leaders Thursday.

Conroy’s decision follows a firestorm of controversy after he was forced to retire at the request of Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).

SPOILER

May 3, 2018
The Honorable Paul Ryan,
Speaker, House of Representatives
H-232 The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515

RE: Immediate retraction of resignation as Chaplain of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Dear Speaker Ryan:

As you know, by letter of April 15, 2018, I tendered my resignation of the position of Chaplain of the United States House of Representatives (hereinafter "House Chaplain") to you, effective May 24, 2018. At this time, and upon advice of counsel, I hereby retract and rescind said resignation for the reasons that follow.

I was elected as House Chaplain on May 25, 2011, and I have honorably served in that role since that time. I was re-elected House Chaplain in every succeeding Congress. I have never been disciplined, nor reprimanded, nor have I ever heard a complaint about my ministry during my time as House Chaplain. It is my desire to continue to serve as House Chaplain in this 115th United States Congress to the end of my current two-year term, and beyond,· unless my services are officially terminated (however that is properly done) or I am not re-elected to the position by the membership of the House.

While you never spoke with me in person, nor did you send me any correspondence, on Friday, April 13th, 2018, your Chief of Staff, Jonathan Burks, came to me and informed me that you were asking for my letter of resignation. I inquired as to whether or not it was "for cause," and Mr. Burks mentioned dismissively something like "maybe it's time that we had a Chaplain that wasn't a Catholic." He also mentioned my November prayer and an interview with the National Journal Daily.

At that point, I thought that I had little choice but to resign, as my assumption was that you had the absolute prerogative and authority to end my term as House Chaplain.
Recently, on April 27, you publicly indicated that my "pastoral services" to some Members were lacking and that I did not offer adequate "spiritual counseling" to others. This is not the reason that Mr. Burks gave me when asking for my "resignation." In fact, no such criticism has ever been leveled against me during my tenure as House Chaplain. At the very least, if it were, I could have attempted to correct such "faults." In retracting my resignation I wish to do just that.

I also write this letter because I do not wish to have my "resignation" be construed as a "constructive termination." You may wish to outright "fire" me, if you have the authority to do so, but should you wish to terminate my services, it will be without my offer of resignation, as you requested.

Since soon after I submitted my letter of April 15 I chose to remain silent about this matter despite numerous requests from the media. There has been much said in conjecture about my leaving the Chaplain's Office, much of it damaging to the reputation of the House and the integrity of the Office of the Chaplain.

Had I known of any failure in providing my ministry to the House, I would have attempted to make the appropriate adjustments, but in no case would I have agreed to submit a letter of resignation without being given that opportunity. Therefore, I wish to serve the remainder of my term as House Chaplain, unless terminated "for cause." Please be guided accordingly and kindly provide confirmation of your recognition of this letter and my retraction of resignation no later than May 12, 2018. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Patrick J. Conroy, S.J.
Chaplain

CC: The Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader
The Honorable Karen Haas, Clerk of the House Daniel G.P. Marchese, Esq.

twitter:

SethAbramson twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 22:31:54 2/ So it appears that Paul Ryan fired the House Chaplain *for cause*, but the cause was... he's Catholic??? JFC! reageer retweet

twitter:

justinsink twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 23:05:58 whoa: NBC is correcting its wiretap story on MSNBC right now, saying it was not a wiretap on Cohen phone. Says it was instead a log of phone calls known as a "pen register," so couldn't listen in reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 23:20 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Correctie:

twitter:

justinsink twitterde op donderdag 03-05-2018 om 23:05:58 whoa: NBC is correcting its wiretap story on MSNBC right now, saying it was not a wiretap on Cohen phone. Says it was instead a log of phone calls known as a "pen register," so couldn't listen in reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 23:24 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Zucht.... slordig!

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 16:21 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

[..]

Ik post hier al weken zo niet maanden nauwelijks meer. Heeft niks met eer te maken, maar eerder met het feit dat het altijd uitmondt in een 20 vs 1 circlejerkfest. Zonder uitzondering. Al leg je tig keer uit niet pro-Trump te zijn, al zeg je vaak genoeg kritische dingen over Trump... dan nog krijg je zo'n acties als Dustpuppy net deed, er wordt praktisch ge-eist dat je iets kritisch zegt over Trump.
Als je niet zeer uitgesproken anti-Trump bent dan moet je je constant en continue verantwoorden tegenover een bepaalde kliek hier... diezelfde kliek die constant "russische troll dit", "trumpanzee dat" roept zonder enige gevolgen of commentaar van anderen.

Vind het knap dat DeParo het nog zolang volhoudt en zo netjes blijft tegenover jullie constante ge-etter en geklier.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 19:54 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dit gaat wel consequenties hebben. Hoe dan ook.

quote:

Jared Kushner’s ethics disclosure filing misstated the financials on two Brooklyn loans, the latest in a long series of errors and omissions on the form.

A Kushner representative confirmed the errors, attributing them to data entry and accounting mistakes. The representative said the figures will be revised in the next annual filing, which is due soon.

The form has been updated at least 40 times since Kushner first submitted it in March 2017. Each update can contain multiple revisions.

SPOILER

The newly revealed errors center on a pair of loans that Kushner Companies made to projects at 215 Moore Street in Bushwick and 9 DeKalb Avenue in downtown Brooklyn.

Kushner’s disclosure suggests that these loans could have generated more income from interest in a roughly yearlong period than the entire value of the loans themselves.



A Kushner representative said the correct income ranges are $50,001–$100,000 on the 9 DeKalb loan and $15,001–$50,000 on the 215 Moore loan.

The loans were part of a push by Kushner Companies, announced in 2016, to get into the business of lending money to other developers. The company has now exited from both of those loans. The lender on the 215 Moore project in Bushwick is now Bank of Internet, as we previously reported.

It’s still not clear whether Kushner Companies had undisclosed partners in its lending program. The loan to 215 Moore was for more than $30 million. But Kushner’s disclosure on the loan gives a value of just $100,000 to $250,000. Kushner’s representative told ProPublica that the value represents Kushner’s share.

A separate form that Kushner filed to get security clearance has also been marked by numerous omissions and revisions, most famously involving his meetings with foreign contacts, including Russian officials.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 23:30 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
@Refragmental... ik kan pas sinds kort plaatsen waar je het onlangs over had ... dat is QAnon ... kunnen we allebij vaststellen dat je weer bezig was of wellicht bent met onzin?

Er is geen bizar grote pedokring van democrats van duizenden die opgerold gaat worden ... het antwoord op fout zijn bij pizzagate is niet om pizzagate^10 te verzinnen, maar terug te komen naar de realiteit.

Wat kunnen we doen om een gelijk beeld te krijgen van de werkelijkheid zonder dat jij je uniekheid verliest? Althans, dit veronderstelt mijn gelijk, maar ik zie niet hoe we een ander referentiekader kunnen kiezen, aangezien ik over de grote dingen geen ongelijk heb gehad en jij wel.

quote:

Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 23:53 schreef Fir3fly het volgende:

[..]

Misschien kunnen we het nog een keertje over Seth Rich hebben.

quote:

After a week of Russian propaganda, I was questioning everything (PBS)

One day this past fall on my morning commute from D.C. to Virginia, I tuned the radio to 105.5 FM, expecting to hear my usual bluegrass. But instead of fiddles and guitar, I heard a voice in Russian-accented English announce: “This is Radio Sputnik.”

I had no idea then what Radio Sputnik was. What came to mind was Sputnik 1, the first artificial satellite, which triggered the Space Race between the U.S. and Soviet Union during the Cold War. The beach-ball sized satellite, once launched, didn’t do much besides orbit the Earth beeping, but it played on American fears and anxieties about being technologically behind, serving as powerful Soviet propaganda.

Enter Radio Sputnik. Like its sister outlet RT, Sputnik is a Russian government-funded media outlet, widely seen by Russia experts as a vehicle to disseminate disinformation for the Kremlin, and, like its space-dwelling namesake, to make the West look bad. While RT is television, Sputnik lives on the radio, a wire service and website. Both RT and Sputnik are under the banner of the news agency “Rossiya Segodnya,” which means “Russia Today,” and which was created in December 2013 by presidential decree by Vladimir Putin.

Both outlets, according to Ben Nimmo, an information defense fellow with the Atlantic Council, a Washington think tank, put out propaganda intended to polarize and confuse, and “attack the facts rather than report them.”

For a recent example, see Sputnik’s coverage since the April 7 chemical attack in Douma, Syria. While Western powers say Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s government forces were behind the attack, Sputnik has pushed a narrative that the attack was faked, orchestrated by the humanitarian search-and-rescue group the White Helmets. According to Sputnik, the White Helmets, which was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2017, is a Western-funded construct, and had turned an ordinary instance of dust and smoke inhalation into a chemical attack. Sputnik’s main source for this coverage was a 9/11 truther.

(Snopes, the fact-checking site, said that images being used to discredit the White Helmets are stills from a movie set. According to the Washington Post, statements by medics saying that children in Douma suffered from asthma attacks instead of a chemical attack may have been coerced.)

“The whole point is to make you doubt, to induce paralysis,” Nimmo said. When compared to the better-known RT, he said, Sputnik is “much more regressive and much more pernicious.”

SPOILER

Today, Sputnik operates in 34 countries in more than 30 languages, including, as of this past summer, on an FM station (and now an AM) in Washington, D.C. When Sputnik launched stateside, the investigations into Russia’s supposed interference in the U.S. election were accelerating, and the media outlet was greeted with critical coverage. The Washington Post editorial board accused Russia of “weaponizing information.”

By fall, the FBI was investigating claims from Sputnik’s former White House reporter, Andrew Feinberg, that he was fired for not asking the White House questions about a Fox News story that said Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich leaked information to Wikileaks before he was killed. The story was roundly debunked. (The FBI declined to comment to the NewsHour on Sputnik, and Sputnik said Feinberg was fired for performance-related issues.) In February, Sputnik’s U.S. provider was forced to register as a foreign agent with the U.S. Department of Justice.

And yet, through all the criticism, Sputnik has quietly continued to put out the same information — or disinformation — as it had before. Because its provider is now a foreign agent, Sputnik is now required to disclose that it is funded by the Russian government. But while it does this on air, I never saw such a disclosure online. And so Sputnik stories like the one alleging that the chemical attack in Syria was a fake can easily spread, until they appear on the lips of a congressional candidate, are published on mainstream sites like Britain’s The Independent, and get covered by major outlets, including CBS and Newsweek.

Sputnik, for its part, claims that it is “telling the untold” stories the Western and mainstream media ignores.

To better understand the organization, I put myself on a weeklong Radio Sputnik-only diet. I also spent a day in its newsroom, speaking with employees, including one who was fired soon after he began speaking with me. What I found was a stranger picture than I anticipated, one in which I began to understand how persuasive disinformation could be.

Inside Radio Sputnik
Over the last month, questioning the chemical attack in Douma dominated the news at Sputnik. But when I visited the Sputnik offices, in early April, the story in question was the poisoning of the Skripals, an ex-Russian spy and his daughter who had been exposed to a nerve agent, which the Western world said was the work of the Kremlin.

Before my visit, I called Andrew Feinberg, the fired Sputnik White House reporter, to ask about some of the claims he’d made in a Politico story about his former employer. In the piece, he’d said his editor asked him to question the White House about “alternate versions” to who was behind the sarin gas attack of April 2017. He also said he was asked in his hiring interview what he would do if asked to write something untrue. (That editor later told me the first allegation was true, the second false.) When I told Feinberg, who is now working as a reporter for a trade publication, that I was going to visit Sputnik, he laughed bitterly and asked: “Do you have a flask?”

Once inside Sputnik’s K Street studio, I sat in on the taping of the main morning show, “Fault Lines,” which is something like a mix of the old TV series “Crossfire” and the conspiracy theory site Infowars. The show is hosted by Lee Stranahan, the former Breitbart reporter who the New York Times said had upended an Idaho town with his exaggerated reporting on a juvenile sex crime, and Garland Nixon, a self-professed Bernie Sanders supporter, former cop and board member of the ACLU. (Stranahan told me he stands by his Idaho reporting.) They pride themselves on coming from two different sides of the aisle, though over a month of listening to them, I rarely heard them disagree.

After the show ended, Nixon and Stranahan sidebarred with each other about the Skripals: how the father and daughter had recently woken up after the attack, how that wasn’t possible after a nerve agent poisoning, and how that must mean the West was lying about what really happened. Questioning the West’s Skripal narrative had been the focus of an earlier part of their show that morning, before they put on actor Danny Glover to talk about his activism, and a Howard University professor and political scientist to talk about demonstrations over housing issues at the university.

It is this mix of legitimate news — often including topics undercovered by the mainstream media — along with conspiracy theories and disinformation that makes propaganda so effective, said Peter Pomerantsev, a Soviet-born British journalist who spent years working for Russian channels and specializes in studying Russian propaganda. He wrote a book about the experience called “Nothing is True and Everything is Possible” and is today a visiting senior fellow at the London School of Economics. “It’s about embedding yourself as much as possible in social media communities,” Pomerantsev said. “And then it can spread the story it wants to spread, whether it’s about Ukraine or the White Helmets.”

Or about the Skripals. Online, Sputnik raised a number of different theories about how the poisoning “actually happened.” Some of these theories were also raised to me while in the newsroom, especially the idea that if the Skripals really had been exposed to a nerve agent, they never would have woken up. This was argued to me so persuasively that I found myself Googling it in the bathroom.

While at Sputnik’s offices, I also sat down with Mindia Gavasheli, a Russian national who runs Sputnik’s D.C. newsroom. He told me he began his career as a TV correspondent at age 18, before RT hired him as a producer. Later, he was tapped to oversee Sputnik’s U.S. project.

When asked about claims of propaganda, Gavasheli defended the media outlet as putting out a necessary, alternate point of view.

“I probably wouldn’t hire someone who is saying the same thing as the mainstream media. Because ‘Russia is a terrible place’ is a mainstream thing,” he said. “I don’t see anything wrong with reflecting the interests … of the Russia side too.”

Gavasheli denied to me that Feinberg was ever told to ask the White House about Seth Rich. He said that in fact he’d banned his newsroom from covering the Seth Rich story, because he realized from the get-go that it seemed fishy. When presented with a conspiratorial Seth Rich story that still lived on Sputnik’s site, Gavasheli said “op-eds” like that piece were written from Moscow, and that his team didn’t write or edit them.

He said the same for an article on Sputnik’s site that pushed a fake story about German chancellor Angela Merkel taking a selfie with a Brussels bomber. The man was actually a Syrian refugee.

Gavasheli and other Sputnik journalists pointed me instead to their work on undercovered issues: examining police violence in the U.S., the idea of single-payer health care, and how issues with the U.S. voting system disproportionately affect poorer areas. They defended story after story that critiqued, mocked, or proffered unproven theories about the West, especially on foreign policy, as more than well-deserved. Russia watchers have a word for this: “whataboutism,” meaning efforts to discredit the West in general instead of refuting individual arguments. Sputnik calls it telling the untold.

‘Between two angry elephants’
When I sat down with Lee Stranahan, the former Breitbart reporter, who calls himself a “political futurist,” he shrugged off the idea that Sputnik was Russian propaganda by employing some whataboutism of his own.

“When you work for Sputnik, you get called a traitor and a Putin puppet … But why does no one bring up the coup we fomented?” he said, referring to Russian allegations that the U.S. fomented a coup in Ukraine.

Stranahan also argued that Russia — and Russian media — is being unfairly vilified by the U.S. He brought up the July 2016 hacking of Democratic National Committee emails, which were released by Wikileaks and claimed by a persona called Guccifer 2.0. U.S. intelligence blamed the leaks on Russia, and the Daily Beast reported that Guccifer was a Russian intelligence officer. But Stranahan said that narrative didn’t add up, and to prove it, showed me what he said were Twitter direct messages between himself and Guccifer.

If Guccifer was Russian, he said, “What you wouldn’t need to do is create a fake persona, do a Twitter page, do a WordPress page, which is infamously prone to hacking.”

“Russia has turned into a fake adversary,” he said. “I’m 100 percent happy to be working here.”
In general, the Sputnik newsroom is full of journalists with politics outside the mainstream. Sputnik has hired journalists of Stranahan’s right-wing, and sometimes conspiratorial, persuasion, as well as a number of journalists on the far left. One of Sputnik’s main shows, “By Any Means Necessary,” is hosted by Eugene Puryear, a former Green party candidate for Washington D.C.’s City Council.

On Sputnik’s newswire side, a female American journalist told me that after working in the Middle East for years, she began to see how reporters from different countries could approach the same story differently, such as the Palestinian conflict. “There are objective facts but what context do you tell those in?” she said. “We provide a different context or background.”

She defended Sputnik, which she joined after moving back to the states. But she said working there had become more difficult as the Russia investigations progressed, and since Sputnik’s U.S. provider had to register as a foreign agent.

“We’re getting squeezed,” she said. “There’s a saying in Persian, ‘Don’t get between two elephants. We’re between two angry elephants.’”

Before I left Sputnik’s offices, another of its wire reporters, John Stanton, who covered the Pentagon, handed me a written note. It was innocuous — the note asked me to pass along a hello to someone at the NewsHour he knew — but after I left he emailed me to say more.

“I’d exercise caution in relying on the credibility of what you hear/read from Sputnik,” he wrote. “Just to give you a sense of the climate here,” he said, he was accused by Sputnik’s director of communications after I left of “passing along information.”

Five days later, Stanton was fired.

“I’m relieved,” he told me over the phone after he was let go. “It was taking years off my life.”

‘Pushing a wet noodle’
When we met in person after his firing, Stanton said he initially took the job at Sputnik because of his interest in Russia and because he needed the paycheck. Before Sputnik, he had worked for years as a freelance journalist, writing for a number of fringe national security websites. He said he only started believing that Sputnik was a propaganda site after about a month of working there.

He stayed at Sputnik for nearly two years, during which time he kept notes on his assignments and observations. He told me he kept these notes as “insider research” for a client he did not want to publicly name. He insisted he did not take the job at Sputnik for that reason.

While there, Stanton said he wrote many legitimate stories about Department of Defense contracts and U.S. troop movements. He also said he got the opportunity to interview senior-level sources at the Pentagon, which he hadn’t gotten to do before. Once the Russia investigations heated up, though, that all dried up, he said.

But Stanton said he increasingly saw evidence of Sputnik’s efforts at disinformation. He showed me emails in which an editor asked him to look into a story, put out by the Syrian foreign ministry, that said the U.S. and UK had supplied “chemical warfare agents” to terrorists in Syria. The chemical warfare agents were actually tear gas, and there was no evidence of how it had made its way there. “They wanted to build that up to more than it ever was,” he said. According to the emails, Stanton pushed back and the editor backed down.

Stanton also said there was stock language added to any story he wrote about Crimea, such as text that said more than 95 percent of Crimean voters supported the move to rejoin Russia in a 2014 referendum. Many countries question the legitimacy of those results. And Stanton said stories that reflected negatively on Putin, or positive LGBTQ stories, were a “no-go,” meaning pitches he sent on those topics were not approved.

Sputnik did not respond to request for comment about these claims, and said it did not comment on personnel matters.

“They mix real with unreal, use dubious sources,” Stanton said. But trying to pin down what he really found problematic, he said, “was like pushing a wet noodle.” What he meant is that proving disinformation can be impossibly slippery.

‘If you can persuade a person, you don’t need to kill him’
The roots of the word “disinformation,” defined as false or misleading information intended to deceive, go back to the Russian word, “dezinformatsiya,” which in the 1920s was the title of an entire department of the precursor of the KGB. The head of that unit, Colonel Rolf Wagenbreth, is quoted as having said: “Our friends in Moscow call it ‘dezinformatsiya.’ Our enemies in America call it ‘active measures,’ and I, dear friends, call it ‘my favorite pastime.’”

The Soviet Union’s disinformation strategy relied in part on media manipulation, including via radio, though also on covert operations, even assassinations, according to a CIA history of the time. Some of the country’s most famed disinformation campaigns included planting stories that said Western politicians had supported the Nazis, that the U.S. supported apartheid and that the U.S. had created HIV/AIDS as a bioweapon (more on that later). Some of these fake stories persist today, such as that fluoride was a government plot to control the mind, and that the CIA assassinated JFK and Martin Luther King, Jr. (Both are favorites on the site Infowars.)

For years, the U.S. ignored or did not know how to respond to Soviet disinformation campaigns. By the 1980s, though, the U.S. was using Russia’s brand of disinformation effectively, such as to undercut Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. At the same time, American media outlets willingly put on television people like Vladimir Posner, a silky smooth apologist for the worst of Soviet foreign policy. He showed up again and again on shows like “Nightline” and “The Phil Donahue Show.”

Russia excelled at disinformation during the Cold War, and it has continued to under Putin, who has cracked down on the country’s independent media and harnessed technology to make the Russian perspective available around the world. Dmitry Kiselyov, perhaps Russia’s best-known propagandist, has famously said that: “If you can persuade a person, you don’t need to kill him.” And Vladislav Surkov, a Russian businessman in Putin’s inner circle, is known for having applied his background in avant-garde theater to Russian politics, to create the feeling that no one knows quite what is real, including during the 2014 annexation of Crimea. It has been argued that the popularity of Putin itself is largely a media creation.

According to Pomerantsev, the British journalist who worked for Russian channels, and now studies propaganda at the London School of Economics, Russia’s information warfare strategy today combines learnings from psychological warfare, dirty PR, and brainwashing from cults. TV and radio have long served as two important disinformation mediums. As the efforts of Russian bots during the U.S. presidential campaign demonstrated, the internet has only made all of that easier.

Working at Sputnik
Days after Stanton was fired, and after we met, he published a long document of his observations of working at Sputnik on Cryptome, an online publication that’s been the source of major leaks and controversy (such as in revealing the supposed identity of the CIA analyst who tracked down Osama bin Laden).

“I did so because I wanted a relatively safe place on the [World Wide Web] to store the document in case my home computers get nailed,” Stanton told me in an email of his decision to publish on Cryptome.

The document begins with Stanton’s musings on how governments today can control and exploit free flows of information online, and ends with the admission that he had been performing insider research on his employer since soon after he arrived. He implied that he felt it was his duty. “Even as the United States of America continues to find its way forward,” he wrote, “it remains — and will remain — the greatest country on the planet.”

Initially Sputnik would not answer questions about Stanton’s firing. But then Beverly Hunt, Sputnik’s director of communications, called me to make sure I had seen Stanton’s document on Cryptome. She followed up by sending me a screengrab of the final page, with the line about “insider research” circled — evidence of his betrayal.

How Radio Sputnik made me doubt the truth
As one last attempt to better understand Sputnik, I put myself on a weeklong Sputnik media diet. As best I could, I consumed news only from its website, radio station and social media platforms.

According to Russia watchers like Pomerantsev, Sputnik dominates the news in countries with weaker independent media. In Serbia, for example, Pomerantsev said Sputnik is influential in part because the local news is so low quality, and international media like the BBC doesn’t exist. “So it’s almost seen as your go-to newswire there,” he said. “In our kind of Western markets, Sputnik is pretty trashy. But in other countries, it’s taken seriously.”

And in other countries Sputnik’s coverage has had meaningful impacts on the political process, such as on the German election last September, which Pomerantsev and several other scholars examined for a study for the London School of Economics. The study showed that Sputnik’s coverage during the election leaned heavily toward the right-wing party, Alternative for Germany (AfD), which ultimately did well in the polls.

“Radio Sputnik [Germany] heavily criticized [Angela] Merkel and repeated anti-migration themes throughout the campaign, including a public poll that showed that ‘lands with more migration are more prone to terrorism,’” the study wrote. “The channel also provided a platform for AfD party quotations such as, ‘rape is increasing due to Merkel’s policy.’”

Ben Nimmo, the Atlantic Council information defense fellow, said that kind of coverage fit with the “broad pattern of Kremlin operations [of disinformation]: to polarize people.”

“To have an alleged news network which is fanning the prejudices of the far right and the far left and playing to those two bases and appealing to them by attacking the center — that’s entirely in character,” Nimmo said.

Coverage on Sputnik’s English language site and D.C. radio program seemed intended to polarize, but also, as Nimmo had described, to distract and confuse.

Day 1 of the diet was April 10, the first of two days Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg spent testifying before Congress about Facebook’s role in sharing user data that may have helped Donald Trump win the presidency. While I saw later that his testimony had dominated headlines, there was no mention of it on Sputnik’s site for most of the day. Instead, Sputnik led with a story about Google’s supposed search manipulation, claiming it had favored Hillary Clinton in the election.

Meanwhile, on the radio, Nixon and Stranahan were busy talking about the Skripals, saying that the British government was not happy the Skripals had woken up after being poisoned. Stranahan called the Skripal poisoning a “false flag” attack by Western government — false flag being a favored conspiracy theory term for a secret operation intended to deceive. Over the next few days, I counted more than a dozen uses of the phrase “false flag” on the outlet. The phrase often served to morph factual news stories into a murky morass.

On Day 2, I turned on breaking news alerts on my phone from Sputnik. I was alerted that the U.S. was “using ‘fabrications and lies’ as excuse to target Syria,” in a story that relied on Syria’s own state news agency. I was also told that “soil examination in Douma didn’t show any poisonous substances,” according to the Russian ministry of defense, even though the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons hadn’t released its findings yet. When I visited Sputnik’s Instagram page, I found mostly dog photos, workout life hacks and a positive video of Putin for International Women’s Day.

Day 3, I turned on 105.5 FM on my way to work, and Nixon and Stranahan were starting to cast their doubts on the validity of the chemical weapons attack in Syria. They recalled the Nayirah testimony of 1990, in which the Kuwaiti ambassador’s daughter gave false testimony of human rights abuses by Iraqi soldiers to bolster support for the Persian Gulf War.

I broke my media diet then to look up the Nayirah testimony. I briefly entertained the possibility that the West could have distorted what happened in Douma to build support for a U.S. strike there. I even found myself researching more theories about what happened to the Skripals. It didn’t matter that later I would see how the facts had been twisted. It was in moments like these, listening to Sputnik, that I could see how you’d begin to believe that everything was possible.

The great irony
The ultimate goal of media outlets like RT and Sputnik, Russia experts told me, was to get one of their stories to spread widely and gain acceptance, first to a site like Breitbart, then Fox, and even to the mouth of the president, or to a mainstream media outlet like the Washington Post. Or, more efficiently, to move directly to a member of the president’s staff, as in a false Sputnik story about a NATO base terror attack in August 2016, which was quoted by Trump’s campaign chair Paul Manafort.

Thomas Rid, a political scientist who studies information in conflict, said that it’s easier today than ever for Sputnik to accomplish that kind of “conveyor belt” of disinformation.

“I think it’s important to see it in historical continuity,” Rid said. “Putin himself is familiar with these measures in the Cold War. But back then, in the mid ‘80s, when disinformation in the Cold War was at its peak, it was really hard to place a story in the American mainstream.”

Rid cited the major KGB disinformation campaign of the time: “Operation INFEKTION,” which was the conspiracy theory that HIV/AIDS was a U.S.-made bioweapon to kill Africans. After Russia started the rumor, it slowly but eventually made its way into American media coverage. In today’s era of so-called “fake news” and distrust of the mainstream media, propaganda spreads much faster, Rid said.

Last week, Sputnik’s homepage was pushing an interview with a young Syrian boy and his father from Douma who said there was no chemical attack — that it was all a set-up. According to the Intercept, that interview was recorded not in Douma, but at a Syrian army facility with Russian military advisors present. But efforts to debunk the interview were too late, as the boy’s interview already appeared in the pages of Metro UK, and its video on Sputnik has since racked up more than 30,000 views on YouTube. This week, Sputnik is alleging that Western journalists “poisoned” witnesses in Douma.

“It’s not that Russian disinformation has changed fundamentally. It’s that we have changed fundamentally,” Rid said. “Today we as a society are practically asking for these disinformation operations.”

Years ago, Russian anthropologist Alexei Yurchak coined the term “hypernormalization” to talk about how the Soviets were such masters of propaganda and disinformation that eventually it became impossible for its own people to see beyond it. The U.S. is a more open society whose First Amendment allows its citizens to question and call out false narratives. The great irony is that the First Amendment also allows Sputnik to say what it wants, even to spread confusion and distrust. And it’s working.