Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

ProudLib72

(17,984 posts)

3. Ah ha! That makes a little more sense now

Reply to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Reply #2)

Thu Mar 30, 2017, 11:52 PM

Mar 2017

However, Russia was still supporting one party over the other. I dislike Warner's wording because it downplays the significance of collusion. While I get that he is trying to be bipartisan in the interest of encouraging everyone to get on board with the investigation, he could have worded the statement differently so that it did not discount what intelligence has already stated.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Analysis Heres what weve learned from the Senate hearing on Russia so far [View all] Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Mar 2017 OP

Doesn't this statement go against what intelligence said? ProudLib72 Mar 2017 #1

Supposedly Rubio was targeted Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Mar 2017 #2

Ah ha! That makes a little more sense now ProudLib72 Mar 2017 #3