Tell me, is this true?

Gotta love it. The Mueller Investigation & Report were in their entirety a political witch hunt and political hit job all by sworn Trump enemies with no basis in fact. That they followed on the heels of the completely corrupt "investigation" into the Hillary "matter" only underscores the deep-state bias in effect. That they were later followed by a completely corrupt and partisan Impeachment Investigation & Trial underscores the fact that the deep state is as visible as an iceberg.

The day these folks want the American people to know the truth and judge for themselves will be the day there is a sudden total collapse of that deep state. Ain't gonna happen. But you know all of this.

 

You've made it perfectly clear what and who you care about. Downplay the corrupt and traitorous intent of the Lincoln Project all you want, and I will expose the corrupt and traitorous intent of the Lincoln Project all I want.

That's the way the game is played, until someone finally gets the upper hand and silences the other, which the Progressive Leftist Dems are always about with their MSM and other Media Content Controllers. They are the ones that follow the models of the totalitarian regimes like Communist China.

Now, go ahead and show your true colors by continuing to tell others to "shut up." Siding with Biden and the Dems is siding with the deepest of corruption in our political system. And suggesting that a rumor should rule until it's finally been stamped out is part of that corruption.

 

Pentagon says ‘no corroborating’ evidence to stand up NYT report on Russian bounties

DOD says no corroborating evidence. NYT 'bombshell' report is more fake news.
Honestly NYT is corrupt, if a drunk accosted you or a propagandist for some stupid cause, you would not give them the time of day. Why then those who are tabloid Fake News

Jesus has good advice here
Matthew 15:14
12 Then His disciples came and said to Him, “Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?”

13 But He answered and said, “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted.

14 Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.”

 

What If Trump Has Been a Russian Asset Since 1987?

This fake news site demonstrates that democrats can have no limits thinking Trump has been working with the Russians from the 1980's as a deep plant by Putin. This is in alignment of the mindset of Hillary , Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi, all the democrats 'best' people. You cannot reason with fanatics and strongly deluded people, or pretenders, what you can do is disempower them. To me they are a bunch of lying hypocrites who if they had there way, would ruin and tear apart the country more so than they have already.

 

WHITE HOUSE - The White House is on the defensive about President Donald Trump not being briefed on reports that a Russian military intelligence unit offered bounties to Taliban militants in Afghanistan to kill U.S. soldiers.

"Intelligence is verified before it reaches the president of the United States. And in this case, it was not verified,’’ White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Monday when reporters asked why the president was not informed.

The New York Times reported Monday night that according to two officials, the information was in the president’s daily brief in late February, days after Trump ousted Joseph Maguire as his acting director of national intelligence.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman issued a statement late Monday saying the Defense Department "continues to evaluate intelligence" about Russian malign activity against the United States and coalition forces in Afghanistan, but that so far it has "no corroborating evidence to validate recent allegations found in open-source reports."

White House Defends Trump Not Being Briefed on Russia 'Bounty' for US Soldiers

 

Not quite as much as you seem to imagine. I snipped the rest, since you ranted yet said nothing of substance whatsoever. Anyone that wants is free to go back and read it.

I'll just point out something truly laughable:

Lest it go unnoticed, in true rumormonger fashion, you got the accusation backward in the OP. Putin is rumored to pay, he isn't (or wasn't) rumored to collect. Brilliant. But maybe the subversive "Twitter" ad got the rumor wrong.

 

Multiple top government agencies released statements on Monday pushing back against the credibility of a recent New York Times report that claimed that President Donald Trump was briefed about a secret Russian military group that had allegedly offered bounties to militant fighters in Afghanistan for killing U.S. soldiers.


Multiple Government Agencies Dispute NYT Report On Russian Putting Bounties On U.S. Troops

 

The Department of Defense is the latest in the Trump administration to denounce a New York Times report alleging that Russian military spies had placed bounties with the Taliban for the death of U.S. troops.

“The Department of Defense continues to evaluate intelligence that Russian GRU operatives were engaged in malign activity against United States and coalition forces in Afghanistan. To date, DOD has no corroborating evidence to validate the recent allegations found in open-source reports. Regardless, we always take the safety and security of our forces in Afghanistan – and around the world – most seriously and therefore continuously adopt measures to prevent harm from potential threats,” Chief Pentagon Spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said in a late Monday night statement provided to American Military News.

Pentagon says 'no corroborating evidence' of Russian bounties on US troops as media claims increase

 

The NYT, a former newspaper, has a long history of lying even before Mexican plutocrat Carlos Slim propped it up. Why Slim hates Trump is incomprehensible but it may do with the fact that Trump worked for his money while Slim stole his when his personal friend former Mexican President Carlos Salinas, whose son is an international sex trafficker, sold Slim the Mexican government telephone company for next to nothing. The NYT propped up Stalin and said that there was no famine in the Ukraine and they propped up Castro and said that he wasn't a communist.

Actually, veterinarians are saying that it is cruelty to dumb animals to use the NYT to line the floors of rooms for dogs or the bottoms of bird cages for the family parrot. It must be the toxic combination of cheap paper, cheap ink, and cheap lies.

 

I see, so the "anonymous sources" that the NY Times always cites for their stories isn't? I'd be more inclined to take the word of a man who was actually on the ground in Afghanistan than some "anonymous source" that was in actuality the musings of some cub reporter sitting in his cubicle at the NYT building

 

Source: BBC News.

What are we to make of the reports that have surfaced in the past few days that Russian military intelligence agents were offering money to Taliban fighters to kill US and possibly other Western service personnel? How true are these reports? Can they be substantiated? And what is their real significance?

For a start, we have a triple denial from all of the main parties involved. The Russian government has dismissed the story out of hand. So too have the Taliban.

And US President Donald Trump has vehemently denied any knowledge of the matter - with White House sources telling the US press that the subject never reached as high as the president or vice-president because there was no consensus in the intelligence community about the veracity of the reports.

• The Afghan war: The short and long story
• What could peace look like?

However, serious US news outlets are carrying a range of reports quoting a variety of sources, suggesting that an intelligence assessment that Russian agents were offering bounties to the Taliban for the killing of US or coalition troops had been around since March; that significant amounts of cash had been seized in US raids; and that some US personnel may indeed have been killed as a result.

These sources also indicate that the intelligence assessment was indeed briefed at the highest levels, including mention at the president's own daily intelligence briefing.

Mr Trump's critics - not least the Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden - have seized upon these reports to highlight once again their view that Mr Trump is not up to defending US interests.

But perhaps more interestingly, even some key Republicans are raising questions - Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming asking the inevitable question of who did know about the assessment and when did they know it?

Payback?
Why, though, might Russia promote such action? Potentially, it has multiple motives.

Russia maintains close links with the Taliban for good reason. It sees the US involvement in Afghanistan winding down. It is deeply concerned about the rise of Islamist fundamentalism in the region spreading in its direction. And it sees the Taliban as one potential bulwark against this.

Moscow is believed to have supported key Taliban leaders with arms and money. And while it also maintains links with the Afghan government and in broad terms supports the putative Afghan peace deal, it is effectively hedging its bets, fearful of future Afghan instability.



Media captionIs peace with the Taliban possible?
But Russia is also waging a "grey" or undeclared war against the West. This has many elements: cyber-attacks; disinformation campaigns; electoral interference; the funding of extremists in Western countries and so on.

At times, this has even resulted in direct action: for example the use of nerve agent in the bungled assassination attempt on a former Russian intelligence officer in the British cathedral city of Salisbury, and a full-scale assault by Russian military contractors on a US position in Syria during which US air strikes are reported to have killed significant numbers of Russians.

Russia under President Vladimir Putin has smarted from every perceived indignity suffered since the fall of the Soviet Union. It was, of course, US support for Afghan irregular fighters that contributed to Moscow's forced withdrawal from Afghanistan in the 1980s.

And there are suggestions that some in the Russian hierarchy might not be averse to paying the Americans back for both past and more recent setbacks.

Ambiguity
This episode also throws a stark light on the current state of US-Russia relations. US policy towards Moscow is suffering from a kind of schizophrenia.

On the one hand, the US is wary of Russian nuclear modernisation and suspicious of its broader plans in the Middle East and elsewhere; but on the other, this administration is strangely accepting of Russian denials, for example concerning its alleged intrusion into the US election campaign.

Much of this ambiguity is down to the person of President Trump himself, whom many see as rather admiring of strong, dictatorial leaders.

And to this extent, the handling of this intelligence report casts another light on the whole foreign policy process within the Trump administration.

It will add weight to those critics from both the Democratic side of politics and more hardline Republicans, like the former National Security Adviser John Bolton, who argue in their different ways that there is no strategic direction, no joined up thinking, and no leadership from the top.

• Who are the Taliban?
• Afghanistan: Country profile

This is a delicate story at the best of times and it is not going to go away. If even partly true and if any deaths can be ascribed to the paying of bounties by the Russians, it would mark a new low point in US-Russia relations since the Cold War ended.

The fact that it comes in the midst of a re-election campaign where Mr Trump is having to deal with plunging popularity amidst the Covid-19 pandemic and the Black Lives Matter demonstrations gives it an added edge.

For there is a factor here that Washington's friends and enemies alike have to contend with: there is at least the possibility now that President Trump could lose his re-election bid. Even beyond the dramatic medical, social and economic impact of the pandemic, there is a lot going on now.

The Russians and the Chinese are seeking to assert themselves as regional powers, though Beijing's ambitions may go further. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is considering the possible annexation of territory in the West Bank.

The UK's government is seeking to realise what it sees as the benefits of Brexit and to rebrand its foreign policy under the banner of "Global Britain".

For the next few months, all of these actors are going to have to factor into their plans the likely response of two US administrations: the one that is there now, and another which may take over in January.

And a Biden administration will be much more likely to call out Russia if the Afghan bounties story is ultimately revealed to be true.

 

Kayleigh McEnany answers questions surrounding Russia bounty report

Briefing starts at 21:52.

Kayleigh does a good job of demonstrating what we're up against with a Progressive Leftist Dem Media and Deep State.

From the Comments section:

These Reporters are NUTS!!!! I'm sorry you have to go through this Every Day!!!!! I love the way you OWN them!!!! God Bless you and yours!!!​

 

Ridiculous and disappointing. That’s not even the level of hearsay. He says it without any indication whatsoever of his source, if there even is one other than his handlers.

 

Pence denies it. Case closed. The NYT is a DNC mouthpiece owned in part by Mexican plutocrat Carlos Slim, globalist Trump hater. Pelosi, abortionist leader, has no credibility. She has about the same intelligence as the White House. She is just too old and too blood soaked.

 

It's the Dems from Obama to the Clintons to Biden who had a close relationship to Russia. Pence is not a liar.