Rogers and Coats say WaPo is lying, Trump never asked Coats to intervene

[jc456]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

 

[bendog]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

 

[jc456]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

 

[2aguy]

What else is new...

Unnamed sources of course.

Everything you hear from msm that doesn't name actual people is LIES. They should be prosecuted:

"A little over two weeks ago, the Post reported that sources inside and outside the Trump administration claimed that Donald Trump had asked director of national intelligence Dan Coats and CIA director Mike Pompeo to publicly state that the probes into Russian interference had nothing to do with him. Today, sources now say that Trump also asked in the same meeting for the two men to “intervene” with then-FBI director James Comey to get him to back down on the probe..."


WaPo: Trump asked Coats to intervene with the FBI on Russia probe; Update: Rogers, Coats deny - Hot Air

Thanks Koshergirl....I got on the computer at 3:17 today...thinking that by now the FBI agents would have escorted President Trump to a federal holding cell, based on the testimony of the two guys testifying today.....and with the release of Comey's prepared statement where he states....states....that he did reassure Trump that he was not under investigation......

And here I sit....and not one left wing sack of crap on U.S.message has posted about Trump's arrest and execution.....not one post.....


Waiting.......Waiting .......waiting....

 

[2aguy]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

Did you not listen to the fucking testimony.....the one guy said he has never been asked to do anything like that...ever....he just said he would not discuss what he spoke to Trump about in open session........

You guys........the russia thing, the obstruction thing....

Slipping through your fingers.............And Comey.........bring tissues...you will be crying all day....

 

[jc456]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

Did you not listen to the fucking testimony.....the one guy said he has never been asked to do anything like that...ever....he just said he would not discuss what he spoke to Trump about in open session........

You guys........the russia thing, the obstruction thing....

Slipping through your fingers.............And Comey.........bring tissues...you will be crying all day....

you meant that at someone else right?

 

[jc456]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

Did you not listen to the fucking testimony.....the one guy said he has never been asked to do anything like that...ever....he just said he would not discuss what he spoke to Trump about in open session........

You guys........the russia thing, the obstruction thing....

Slipping through your fingers.............And Comey.........bring tissues...you will be crying all day....

dude, you should ask these left whack jobs in here what the russians did. I'm still waiting on that answer.

 

[Care4all]

Wapo and CNN are looking sad with this garbage

But HOT AIR looks good???
It's understandable because all u have is hot air.

The National Enquirer has more integrity than CNN and the Washington Compost.

Well the Enquirer did get that Edwards thing right.

And they got the Monika Lewinski thing right.

FYI- that was the Drudge Report with the scoop, not the Enquirer

 

[2aguy]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

Did you not listen to the fucking testimony.....the one guy said he has never been asked to do anything like that...ever....he just said he would not discuss what he spoke to Trump about in open session........

You guys........the russia thing, the obstruction thing....

Slipping through your fingers.............And Comey.........bring tissues...you will be crying all day....

you meant that at someone else right?

Yeah...sorry.....there are so many left wing nutters here who are dreaming about Trump in jail....it is hard not to post in the wrong thread....

 

[bendog]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

The ruskies hacked the election. US intelligence is unanimous. That is supposedly what the Senate is investigating - how they did, where, and when and what we might do in response. You can cry fake news or whatever the fuck but it happened. (and I'm not surprised at the fake news criest or the ruskies)

The question Coats and Rodgers ducked was whether Trump asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation

But Coats and Rogers refuse to answer whether Trump asked them to intervene. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) sharply questioned the intelligence chiefs and told them, “I actually think if what is being said to the media is untrue, then it is unfair to the president of the United States, and if it is true, then it is something the American people deserve to know and we as an oversight committee need to know in order to conduct our job." Rubio then pressed Coats and Rogers on whether Trump had ever asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation. The two men refused to answer. "I just hate to keep repeating this," Coats said. "I am willing to come before the committee and tell you what I know and what I don’t know. What I’m not willing to do is share what I think is confidential information."
Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

And you cannot us He in a topic sentence in English ... and possibly any other language either.

 

[jc456]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

The ruskies hacked the election. US intelligence is unanimous. That is supposedly what the Senate is investigating - how they did, where, and when and what we might do in response. You can cry fake news or whatever the fuck but it happened. (and I'm not surprised at the fake news criest or the ruskies)

The question Coats and Rodgers ducked was whether Trump asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation

But Coats and Rogers refuse to answer whether Trump asked them to intervene. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) sharply questioned the intelligence chiefs and told them, “I actually think if what is being said to the media is untrue, then it is unfair to the president of the United States, and if it is true, then it is something the American people deserve to know and we as an oversight committee need to know in order to conduct our job." Rubio then pressed Coats and Rogers on whether Trump had ever asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation. The two men refused to answer. "I just hate to keep repeating this," Coats said. "I am willing to come before the committee and tell you what I know and what I don’t know. What I’m not willing to do is share what I think is confidential information."
Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

And you cannot us He in a topic sentence in English ... and possibly any other language either.

they hacked what? what did they get? what did they do? I want specifics dude. hack tells me nothing.

 

[2aguy]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

The ruskies hacked the election. US intelligence is unanimous. That is supposedly what the Senate is investigating - how they did, where, and when and what we might do in response. You can cry fake news or whatever the fuck but it happened. (and I'm not surprised at the fake news criest or the ruskies)

The question Coats and Rodgers ducked was whether Trump asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation

But Coats and Rogers refuse to answer whether Trump asked them to intervene. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) sharply questioned the intelligence chiefs and told them, “I actually think if what is being said to the media is untrue, then it is unfair to the president of the United States, and if it is true, then it is something the American people deserve to know and we as an oversight committee need to know in order to conduct our job." Rubio then pressed Coats and Rogers on whether Trump had ever asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation. The two men refused to answer. "I just hate to keep repeating this," Coats said. "I am willing to come before the committee and tell you what I know and what I don’t know. What I’m not willing to do is share what I think is confidential information."
Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

And you cannot us He in a topic sentence in English ... and possibly any other language either.

And you ignored what he said.......he had never been influenced in any way........you forgot where he said that....and of course you forgot the part where he said he would answer those questions in a closed session.......


Please.....genius......tell us what "Hacked the Election" actually means.........in detail...what did the Russians do......what did they achieve....tell us what the Intelligence agencies have stated over and over again....

 

[2aguy]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

The ruskies hacked the election. US intelligence is unanimous. That is supposedly what the Senate is investigating - how they did, where, and when and what we might do in response. You can cry fake news or whatever the fuck but it happened. (and I'm not surprised at the fake news criest or the ruskies)

The question Coats and Rodgers ducked was whether Trump asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation

But Coats and Rogers refuse to answer whether Trump asked them to intervene. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) sharply questioned the intelligence chiefs and told them, “I actually think if what is being said to the media is untrue, then it is unfair to the president of the United States, and if it is true, then it is something the American people deserve to know and we as an oversight committee need to know in order to conduct our job." Rubio then pressed Coats and Rogers on whether Trump had ever asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation. The two men refused to answer. "I just hate to keep repeating this," Coats said. "I am willing to come before the committee and tell you what I know and what I don’t know. What I’m not willing to do is share what I think is confidential information."
Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

And you cannot us He in a topic sentence in English ... and possibly any other language either.

Hey...shithead.....you forgot to quote this from your link....but thanks for lying to us...

Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

Coats "never felt pressure" to intervene in the Russia probe. The intelligence chief responded to a report in the Washington Post, which wrote Tuesday that Coats had told associates in March that the president asked him if he could intercede with then-FBI Director James Comey to encourage him to ease up on the FBI's investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

“My response to that was in my time of service, which is in interacting with the president of the United States or anybody in his administration, I have never been pressured, I have never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation,” Coats said, recounting his reaction to a request for comment from the Post.

 

[2aguy]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

The ruskies hacked the election. US intelligence is unanimous. That is supposedly what the Senate is investigating - how they did, where, and when and what we might do in response. You can cry fake news or whatever the fuck but it happened. (and I'm not surprised at the fake news criest or the ruskies)

The question Coats and Rodgers ducked was whether Trump asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation

But Coats and Rogers refuse to answer whether Trump asked them to intervene. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) sharply questioned the intelligence chiefs and told them, “I actually think if what is being said to the media is untrue, then it is unfair to the president of the United States, and if it is true, then it is something the American people deserve to know and we as an oversight committee need to know in order to conduct our job." Rubio then pressed Coats and Rogers on whether Trump had ever asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation. The two men refused to answer. "I just hate to keep repeating this," Coats said. "I am willing to come before the committee and tell you what I know and what I don’t know. What I’m not willing to do is share what I think is confidential information."
Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

And you cannot us He in a topic sentence in English ... and possibly any other language either.

And more from your own link......moron....

Coats suggested he is open to discussing private conversations he may have had with the president but not in a public setting. “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for me to address that in a public session,” he said.

 

[2aguy]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

The ruskies hacked the election. US intelligence is unanimous. That is supposedly what the Senate is investigating - how they did, where, and when and what we might do in response. You can cry fake news or whatever the fuck but it happened. (and I'm not surprised at the fake news criest or the ruskies)

The question Coats and Rodgers ducked was whether Trump asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation

But Coats and Rogers refuse to answer whether Trump asked them to intervene. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) sharply questioned the intelligence chiefs and told them, “I actually think if what is being said to the media is untrue, then it is unfair to the president of the United States, and if it is true, then it is something the American people deserve to know and we as an oversight committee need to know in order to conduct our job." Rubio then pressed Coats and Rogers on whether Trump had ever asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation. The two men refused to answer. "I just hate to keep repeating this," Coats said. "I am willing to come before the committee and tell you what I know and what I don’t know. What I’m not willing to do is share what I think is confidential information."
Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

And you cannot us He in a topic sentence in English ... and possibly any other language either.

You are a lying piece of crap.....as I just demonstrated with your posts vs. what the men actually said.....

 

[bendog]

I didn't expect them to answer, btw. Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that. What was interesting to me was Coats saying he didn't know if he had a legal basis to not answer. I suppose the Senate could subpoena him and hold him in contempt if he refused, but I don't think that's going to happen. The FBI is doing the criminal investigation, and they can't duck that. The Senate is in theory investigating the Russian interference in the election.

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

The ruskies hacked the election. US intelligence is unanimous. That is supposedly what the Senate is investigating - how they did, where, and when and what we might do in response. You can cry fake news or whatever the fuck but it happened. (and I'm not surprised at the fake news criest or the ruskies)

The question Coats and Rodgers ducked was whether Trump asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation

But Coats and Rogers refuse to answer whether Trump asked them to intervene. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) sharply questioned the intelligence chiefs and told them, “I actually think if what is being said to the media is untrue, then it is unfair to the president of the United States, and if it is true, then it is something the American people deserve to know and we as an oversight committee need to know in order to conduct our job." Rubio then pressed Coats and Rogers on whether Trump had ever asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation. The two men refused to answer. "I just hate to keep repeating this," Coats said. "I am willing to come before the committee and tell you what I know and what I don’t know. What I’m not willing to do is share what I think is confidential information."
Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

And you cannot us He in a topic sentence in English ... and possibly any other language either.

And more from your own link......moron....

Coats suggested he is open to discussing private conversations he may have had with the president but not in a public setting. “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for me to address that in a public session,” he said.

go fuck yourself trumpot

 

[koshergrl]

Wapo and CNN are looking sad with this garbage

But HOT AIR looks good???
It's understandable because all u have is hot air.

Hot Air sure does look good.
Do you have a point? Because you didn't actually counter anything or provide any information. You just did the boring ad hom thing. Which will get you ignored.

 

[2aguy]

what did russia do that he'd have to do that? you haven't stated that yet.

I'm really not being a smartass but you can't use the pronoun "he" without first establishing the person it refers to. I really don't understand the question. My point was the FBI and Senate investigations are different. So while Rogers and Coats avoiding answering the question, when they chose to answer questions they thought helped their boss, is interesting, I don't see that Rogers and Coats did anything the Senate can hurt them over.

your quote:
Their ducking the question about whether Trump asked them to sway the Russia probe shows to any thinking person that Trump did just that, but we already knew that

'he' referencing your inference of Trump and us not answering you. So, please share with us what exactly the russians did.

The ruskies hacked the election. US intelligence is unanimous. That is supposedly what the Senate is investigating - how they did, where, and when and what we might do in response. You can cry fake news or whatever the fuck but it happened. (and I'm not surprised at the fake news criest or the ruskies)

The question Coats and Rodgers ducked was whether Trump asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation

But Coats and Rogers refuse to answer whether Trump asked them to intervene. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) sharply questioned the intelligence chiefs and told them, “I actually think if what is being said to the media is untrue, then it is unfair to the president of the United States, and if it is true, then it is something the American people deserve to know and we as an oversight committee need to know in order to conduct our job." Rubio then pressed Coats and Rogers on whether Trump had ever asked them to intervene in the FBI investigation. The two men refused to answer. "I just hate to keep repeating this," Coats said. "I am willing to come before the committee and tell you what I know and what I don’t know. What I’m not willing to do is share what I think is confidential information."
Key moments from intel chiefs' testimony on Trump and Russia

And you cannot us He in a topic sentence in English ... and possibly any other language either.

And more from your own link......moron....

Coats suggested he is open to discussing private conversations he may have had with the president but not in a public setting. “I don’t believe that it’s appropriate for me to address that in a public session,” he said.

go fuck yourself trumpot

You lied in your post.....you took quotes out of context, I posted the actual, relevant statemenst by the men......and now you have nothing........moro...

 

[koshergrl]

Their problem will be that they can't duck the FBI unless Trump invokes Exec Privilidge. And even then if there's a legit question that Trump obstructed justice in obstructing an investigation, it's gonna be tough for them to wiggle out.

There is no legit question. He didn't obstruct justice or an investigation. Unlike the Clintons and Obamas have done as a matter of POLICY.

typical leftist regressive..no matter how many times reality slaps you, you are going to continue to cling to fantasy.

 

[koshergrl]

Wapo and CNN are looking sad with this garbage

But HOT AIR looks good???
It's understandable because all u have is hot air.

in this case, yes. Cause they are correct
“In the three-plus years that I have been director of the national security agency, I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate and to the best of my recollection during that same period of service I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so,” NSA Director Mike Rogers told the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Dan Coats, who oversees the nation’s intelligence apparatus, echoed those comments. “I have never felt pressured to interfere or intervene in shaping intelligence in any way,” he said.

And Comey with his big fat stupid mouth should be slapped behind bars for a few years just for being a stupid twat.