A Joy Reid Tweetstorm You Should Read

Comments

1
Please excuse my ignorance but does Ms Reid write elsewhere? I mean outside twitter. I can do the googles but if anyone would be kind enough to point the way, I'd appreciate.
2
the best part of this will be when putin hangs him out to dry anyway. russia is getting every concession it could possibly as for, but ultimately they want chaos in the west.

and they'll get it!
3
Oh crap. That Joy Reid. MSNBC Reid. How embarrassing. I need coffee. Carry on...
4
Since you were already thinking about our convenience, why didn't you just copy Joy's tweets into a bulleted list?
5
There may be collusion with Russia, and perhaps Putin is blackmailing Trump, but this is just begging the question.
6
I heard that Donald Trump was Secretary of State, he transferred control of 20 percent of America's uranium production to Russia in exchange for contributions to a private slush fund masked as a charitable foundation.

Oh wait...
7
I'm apparently a total asshole but begging a question is not the same as raising a question.
8
What else will he give Putin? The Baltics. Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia are all Nato members but were once occupied by the USSR/Russia.
Lithuania fought a ten year guerilla war against the Russians after WWII and jumped at the chance to regain its independence as the Soviet Union crumbled. Putin is still pissed about that.
The Baltic countries have become modern Western democracies and full members of the EU but in Putin's mind they should still be Russian occupied. Remember that Russia is still fighting in Eastern Ukraine and took over Crimea so taking over democracies and getting away with it was already in the Putin playbook.
9
@6, even if that were true (it's not true), it would be peanuts compared to what we already know about the Trump campaign's relationship with Russia and subsequent attempts to cover it up, let alone what we don't even know yet. It speaks volumes that the best a desperate Trumpster can do is try to deflect with half-truths about someone who lost the election and hasn't worked for the government since 2012.

In case you care: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact…
10
How will reading this change anything?
11
@6 Nice try. Snopes is one of many: http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-ur…
12
@7,

You're not a total asshole, but it's one of those malleable aspects of language that's changing due to popular use. Literally everyone recognizes this by now.
14
The State Department under Clinton did transfer 20% of US uranium extraction rights to Russia, and while it is reported that Clinton did not personally sign off on the deal or need to, it is not a stretch to say that since she was in charge of the department, its actions are by nature her responsibility.

Need some actual evidence about the deal being done to funnel money to the Clinton Foundation, however. Just like people need to find some factual evidence to support narratives on Trump collusion with Russia. Neither "side" gets to just make extraordinary claims without evidence.

@7: Well no, of course not. Does that even need to be said?

But she also is not really even raising a question. She is making a statement in the form of a question.
15
@12 nice, literally everyone!
16
Obstruction of justice is a crime, so there's already been a crime committed during the coverup.
17
At some point last year MSNBC decided to become the fact free (but left) version of Fox News. Sad...just sad to see what it's come to at this point.

But I suppose for entertainment purposes they rate up there with The Young Turks.
18
@17: Really? Ratings show otherwise.
19
Yes. Why is this not obvious to congress, and are they ok with the Russians being in bed with the US. Now this bull about the Paris accord, from the second biggest emitter.
The wheels are turning so slowly to end this nightmare. And trump just continues on his merry way.
20

>the only political capital the Democrats have left is a rehash of 50 year old John Birch Society conspiracy theory

Lol
21
@14 - Did you actually read the Snopes explanation? The State Department was one of NINE departments that had to sign off on it, headed by the Treasury Department, not State. Not only is there no one evidence that Clinton influenced the State Department's decision, but there's absolutely nothing indicating she tried to influence the other eight departments.
22
i'll just say this once so pay attention: Putin. Russia. Kushner. Trump.
are we clear? have we established The FACT yet? all the shadows are coming to light, keep up SHEeple, we are wise.
23
@21: I don't see how that is relevant. I never said Hillary Clinton personally sold uranium to Putin, I said her State Department signed off on it, and as an executive/manager that makes her partly responsible. Call it 1/9th responsible, if you must.

That is how leadership works.
24
But Trump is so erratic and impulsive, I can't imagine that Putin is really all that proud of his new toy. Is Trump even sane enough to be blackmailed effectively? Isn't he too credulous to require coercion?
25
@23. Yes you are so right. Official government business performed in the daylight according to appropriate rules and regulations for the furtherance of US interests is exactly the same as private deals done to avoid government oversight to further the private interests and line the pockets of trump, his family, and friends....

You are right. That is how leadership works!