As Twitchy noted in a post Wednesday, the “Gang of Eight” congressional leaders were to be briefed Thursday morning on that New York Times bombshell that Russia, through the Taliban, had placed a bounty on the lives of U.S. troops in Afghanistan and President Trump had done nothing about, being a puppet of Putin and all. We said then that the veracity of the Times’ story would be evident in how many Democrats ran to the cameras to talk about what they’d just learned.
Fox News’ Chad Pergram noted how little had been said by those briefed Thursday. Both National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien and Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe have said the confidence in the intelligence just wasn’t there to bring it to the attention of the president or vice president.
Significant how little, if anything has been said by those briefed on Russia/bounties after Gang of 8 mtg. Complete silence usually signals how serious the intelligence issues are & the sensitivity
— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) July 2, 2020
Oh they’ll have their “leakers”. Stay tuned.
— keyboard warrior (@skmoore17) July 2, 2020
“Complete silence” probably means there’s nothing juicy to leak, right @RepAdamSchiff?
— Laura (@NonsenseEnd) July 2, 2020
Wait for the leak Chad @AdamSchiff is making it up right now
— ed walsh (@Dublinboki) July 2, 2020
It means there’s nothing there to leak, which is exactly why Adam Schiff leaked that there may be something there, it was to create another shit storm which is consistent with everything else he’s done in the last four years.
— Dave Burgess (@daverburgess) July 2, 2020
It means the NYT story was bull https://t.co/hj1SEgT66C
— Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) July 2, 2020
If Schiff isn’t leaking, it definitely isn’t bad for the Trump administration.
— Anonbotski (@anonbotski) July 2, 2020
What it really shows is how dangerous the nytimes article was
— PassTheTequila (@DeezNutJobs) July 2, 2020
It doesn’t mean there’s been complete silence, though. Speaker Nancy Pelosi found her way to a podium and said that “it’s a con” to claim the intel wasn’t 100 percent there.
1) Schumer Pelosi: Force protection is a primary purpose of intelligence. It should have the same importance to the Commander-in-Chief. Any reports of threats on our troops must be pursued relentlessly.
— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) July 2, 2020
2) Schumer/Pelosi: These reports are coming to light in the context of the President being soft on Vladimir Putin when it comes to NATO, the G7, Crimea, Ukraine and the ongoing undermining of the integrity of our elections.
— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) July 2, 2020
Trump OK’d the sale of lethal weapons for Ukraine to use against Russia, something the Obama administration wouldn’t do. That’s not what we’d call soft on Russia.
3) Schumer/Pelosi: Our Armed Forces would be better served if President Trump spent more time reading his daily briefing and less time planning military parades and defending relics of the Confederacy.
— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) July 2, 2020
Pelosi on US troops/Russia:
When there are threats, we expect the President to give them that protection. That has not happened— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) July 2, 2020
Pelosi says it’s “a con” for the White House to claim that President Trump wouldn’t be briefed on intelligence when there’s not a consensus on it.
“We would practically be investigating nothing if you had to start off at 100%. So don’t buy into that” https://t.co/Nj065CIsxp pic.twitter.com/dwAQalbZEB
— CBS News (@CBSNews) July 2, 2020
Pelosi says the White House is trying to spin how credible the information was about Russia:
You got the con. The White House put on the con..that if you don’t have 100 percent intelligence, you shouldn’t know about anything— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) July 2, 2020
Pelosi also called for sanctions against Russia over the alleged bounties.
Pelosi says she is for sanctions for Russia over bounties
— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) July 2, 2020
I think people should be way more concerned about how unverified intelligence is leaking to the media.
— Heyoooooooo (@Heyooooo0000) July 2, 2020
She’s a con!
— Ben Dover (@BenDove63961272) July 2, 2020
Umm they can investigate all they wont but why would presidents be briefed on something unconfirmed? That’s how we got into a war over WMD’s that never existed. #Warmongers
— matt (@dadank1) July 2, 2020
Kind of like how you voted to start a 19 year long war on information that was not 100%? Would you rather we nuked Russia and started a new armed conflict over speculation? Let the IC do their job and you do yours please.
— dadjeans (@dadjeansfit) July 2, 2020
Ordering commemorative pens? Eating gourmet ice cream?
It takes a con to cast blame and then babble for ten minutes. Pelosi has conned California voters for quite a few decades and look at how well they are doing. Homeless people, feces in the streets. How many illegals work in your mansion Nan?
— dwolf Gritts (@DwolfGritts) July 2, 2020
Pelosi just needs to shut up, and now.
— AmericanHorse (@shadowbannedgem) July 2, 2020
If Rep. Adam Schiff pops up on the nightly offerings from CNN and MSNBC we wouldn’t be surprised.
Related:
Catherine Herridge: ‘Career intel officer’ made call not to verbally brief president on alleged Russian bounty plot https://t.co/diHjmbecCd
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) July 1, 2020
