US Politics - Trump cancels summit having to do with North Korea

US Officials: Info suggests Trump associates may have coordinated with Russians

Washington (CNN)The FBI has information that indicates associates of President Donald Trump communicated with suspected Russian operatives to possibly coordinate the release of information damaging to Hillary Clinton's campaign, US officials told CNN.

This is partly what FBI Director James Comey was referring to when he made a bombshell announcement Monday before Congress that the FBI is investigating the Trump campaign's ties to Russia, according to one source.

The FBI is now reviewing that information, which includes human intelligence, travel, business and phone records and accounts of in-person meetings, according to those U.S. officials. The information is raising the suspicions of FBI counterintelligence investigators that the coordination may have taken place, though officials cautioned that the information was not conclusive and that the investigation is ongoing.

In his statement on Monday Comey said the FBI began looking into possible coordination between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives because the bureau had gathered "a credible allegation of wrongdoing or reasonable basis to believe an American may be acting as an agent of a foreign power."

The White House did not comment and the FBI declined to comment.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer maintained Monday after Comey's testimony that there was no evidence to suggest any collusion took place.

"Investigating it and having proof of it are two different things," Spicer said.

One law enforcement official said the information in hand suggests "people connected to the campaign were in contact and it appeared they were giving the thumbs up to release information when it was ready." But other U.S. officials who spoke to CNN say it's premature to draw that inference from the information gathered so far since it's largely circumstantial.

The FBI cannot yet prove that collusion took place, but the information suggesting collusion is now a large focus of the investigation, the officials said.

twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/844886082663698436

twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/844900763570786307

During the 2016 campaign, 70% of the Trump statements reviewed by PolitiFact were false, 4% were entirely true, 11% mostly true. Voters were not deceived: nearly two-thirds said that Trump was not trustworthy, including nearly a third of the people who voted for him anyway. Dishonesty in a candidate, far from being disqualifying, became a badge of "disruption."

Now that he is the President, however, he speaks on behalf of the country, and his words have a vastly different weight. The prospect of a hastily tweeted insult provoking a nuclear-armed rival gives new urgency to the helpful suggestion "Delete your account." For a leader who condemns the media so viciously, Trump consumes it voraciously, and what he takes in has become a matter of global significance, most recently when he accused President Obama of outsourcing illegal surveillance to British intelligence. If he believes accusations leveled by a pundit on Fox News, whom the network's own anchors dismiss as uninformed, it reveals a great deal about the sources and standards of evidence the President lives by.

Trust is a transaction between leaders and those they lead. Throughout our history, the deeply held beliefs of various Presidents have taken the nation into war, delayed the pursuit of peace, alienated allies, appeased enemies. At other times, presidential beliefs have conquered the continent, freed the slaves, taken us to the moon because the President firmly believed we could get there. As citizens, it is vital that we be able to believe our President; it is also vital that we know what he believes, and why. This President has made both a severe challenge.

Nancy Gibbs, EDITOR

Preezy wrote:He's going to go down in history as the worst President in the history of the US, he wants a legacy but he'll just be regarded as a stain that will be rarely mentioned.

Delicious

DML wrote:Pretty sure he's going to get impeached. His tactics won't work for much longer.

Memento Mori wrote:

DML wrote:Pretty sure he's going to get impeached. His tactics won't work for much longer.

Why would the republicans impeach him any time soon?

Alvin Flummux wrote:Incidental Trump communications interception where the target is someone else =/= Trump woz wire raped by Obummer.

captain red dog wrote:

Alvin Flummux wrote:Incidental Trump communications interception where the target is someone else =/= Trump woz wire raped by Obummer.

It is a little bit concerning though the amount of redirect there has been on this story from the intelligence community. Non-committal answers initially, then a flat out denial, then a muted rolling back to an admission that there was a tap but not on Trump. If that was any other presidential candidate there would be an outcry.

DML wrote:

captain red dog wrote:

Alvin Flummux wrote:Incidental Trump communications interception where the target is someone else =/= Trump woz wire raped by Obummer.

It is a little bit concerning though the amount of redirect there has been on this story from the intelligence community. Non-committal answers initially, then a flat out denial, then a muted rolling back to an admission that there was a tap but not on Trump. If that was any other presidential candidate there would be an outcry.

I couldn't give a strawberry float. If someone goes as low as Trump goes - it's time for the dirty tactics to come out. Take him to task.

twitter.com/stevekopack/status/844995773838315520

Trump could fold. This would involve making some public declaration that the Republicans needed to go back to the drawing board on health care or move on to other priorities. While this might allow Trump to save some face, it would nevertheless be a costly play. He’d concede defeat on one of his signature priorities, his reputation as a dealmaker would take a hit, and The House Freedom Caucus would feel as though they had a notch in their belt. It would be embarrassing — and if the past is any guide, Trump wouldn’t handle his embarrassment very well.

Trump could raise, going “all-in” on the bill and doing everything he could to secure passage. This would probably involve making further compromises with the House Freedom Caucus — pushing the bill further to the right and perhaps making it even less popular — and then threatening moderate Republican who dared to defect from the bill. It just might work to get the bill across the finish line in the House. Then again, it might not, and Trump would have wasted more political capital without getting anywhere. Or the bill could pass the House and then die in the Senate, putting House Republicans in a position where they’d taken a roll call vote on an extremely unpopular bill and had nothing to show for it. Or perhaps the bill eventually would pass the Senate and become law, only for Republicans to discover that the public wasn’t bluffing when they told pollsters that they hated the bill, hurting Trump’s approval rating and costing Republicans dozens of seats at the midterms. Republicans might face another round of political backlash, furthermore, once millions of Americans discovered they were no longer able to afford their health insurance or their policies didn’t cover as much as they used to.

Finally, Trump could call — which would mean distancing himself from the bill without a clear plan for what came next. He wouldn’t officially declare the Republicans’ health care efforts dead; in fact, he and Press Secretary Sean Spicer would stubbornly resist the “FAKE NEWS” narrative that the bill had failed. But he’d largely stop lobbying Republicans on behalf of the bill, instead telling House Speaker Paul Ryan to figure things out for himself. The risks here are obvious enough. Trump — who remains popular with rank-and-file GOP voters and members of Congress — is the best salesmen Republicans have. Without his working on its behalf, the GOP bill would probably become even more unpopular. But Ryan might not have an exit strategy and relations between the White House and Capitol Hill could fray. The whole process could play out for months, exerting a continuous drag on Trump’s popularity, as the Democrats’ health care bill did to President Obama.

Preezy wrote:Not sure I'd put much stock in 538's polls these days after they completely botched the election. They're still a decent commentary site though, obviously.

Cuttooth wrote:

Preezy wrote:Not sure I'd put much stock in 538's polls these days after they completely botched the election. They're still a decent commentary site though, obviously.

They were one of the few places that gave Trump any kind of chance.

Photek wrote:

Cuttooth wrote:

Preezy wrote:Not sure I'd put much stock in 538's polls these days after they completely botched the election. They're still a decent commentary site though, obviously.

They were one of the few places that gave Trump any kind of chance.

The Night of the Election they had Hillary at a 91% chance of winning, they have completely lost all credibility.