TOTAL INCOMPETENCE

[hollodero]

(06-14-2017, 05:26 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: For a counter-intelligence investigation, the community will brief officials on what they see as relevant to them to do their job.
If Sessions was at all a part of the focus (which may have been because of his meetings) or if the IC did not deem it necessary to divulge the information to him, then they wouldn't have. He also would not have received any briefings prior to his confirmation by the Senate. This is why I say it is completely feasible for him to have never received a briefing on the matter.

Sure... but I feel you can't reduce the Russian interference topic to the ongoing investigation. At all the hearings senators state it in drastic words in opening statements, Comey did the same thing - they warned about Russia and said it's a huge deal and everyone needs to be aware of their past and possible future deeds and how dangerous it is.
I have a hard time believing that it was said, ah, the Attorney General doesn't need any kind of specific details on that one. It just doesn't make sense to me.

(06-14-2017, 05:26 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: That being said, it would also not surprise me if he did receive information on it and ignored it. If that is the case and it is found out, then this will be an interesting turn of events.

That's where my money's at, for said reasons.

(06-14-2017, 05:26 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: They don't acknowledge it because Trump won't, and Trump won't because his ego is too fragile. Look at the big deals he made out of crowd size and the popular election result. The mentions of these things in the media made him feel inferior, they damaged his ego, and so he had to push back. The idea that Russia interfered in the election cheapens his win in his mind and so he must push back against it. Even though we know Russia interfered, and that it wasn't a huge impact on the election results by all accounts, this is still how it affects him.

That's an interesting point, I never saw it like that, although it's quite an obvious take.
Only thing slightly opposing it: Trump did some times talk about interference, immedately adding that it could have been anyone, Russia, China, anyone, he wouldn't know. So it seems to me there's some added interest in protecting Russia in the public perception by making it appear like it's just one of a huge range of possibilities that they're behind it. As if that wasn't settled at all.


(I have to add, though I'm generally very opposed to conspiracies, in this case I can't quite see the more harmless explanations for Trump's extremely odd Russia policies. But I try to keep that out of my logic when making arguments. Just logically speaking, the more grim explanations can't be ruled out with certainty, that I think is safe to say.)