General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNewly revealed email from tRump transition could be the smoking gun
A key aide in the tRump transition appeared to write in an email that tRump should seek to ease sanctions on Russia because that country had helped tRump win the election.
The aide, K. T. McFarland, currently the nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to Singapore, wrote on December 29 that sanctions imposed by the Obama administration were undesirable, according to a report by the New York Times. McFarland explained that tRump was seeking to improve relations with Russia which has just thrown the U.S.A. election to him.
Taken on its face, the email appears to describe a quid pro quo transaction where relaxed sanctions were exchanged for Russias help in winning the presidency.
<snip>
Overall, the emails obtained by the New York Times show the effort to influence U.S. foreign policy with Russia prior to [tRumps] inauguration extended far beyond Gen. Michael Flynn. - ThinkProgress
Blue Owl
(50,491 posts)ffr
(22,671 posts)Sorry, I missed that in my read and edit.
Fixed. Thx.
Yonnie3
(17,480 posts)shraby
(21,946 posts)magicarpet
(14,167 posts)It incorrectly says Obama's inauguration.
It was Obama's resignation at the end of his 8 year term.
leanforward
(1,077 posts)L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)uponit7771
(90,359 posts)leanforward
(1,077 posts)should ". to Obama's inauguration ." read "Trump's inauguration"?
To me, in the context above, is there a misprint?
Note: in the past year, this is the first time I have spelled the fool's name in the white house correctly.
ffr
(22,671 posts)Just carelessness on the author's behalf.
greeny2323
(590 posts)That is really not the most reasonable interpretation of Mcfarland's email.
And here is the fuller quote from the email. Scroll down a bit:
Link to tweet
Squinch
(51,000 posts)It's damning either way.
I'm not saying the email isn't damning. It shows they were consumed with Russia, while all this time they were saying they had no communications.
But she's claiming that Obama is boxing them in because if they object to the sanctions it might make people wonder if there was a quid pro quo.
She's not claiming in this email that she knows Russia helped them win the election.
Squinch
(51,000 posts)in the longer version because it adds the part about releasing something that catches Russia red-handed.
This means they acknowledge that there was some "red-handed" Russian thing to release.
I think the point of the "tit for tat" escalation line is that Obama is creating that "tit for tat" scenario and that makes it hard for Donald to pay the Russians back for their favor.
The interpretation these tweets are pushing doesn't make sense. It's not what is being said.
She's surmising that Obama might be gaming them and holding back evidence until after Trump responds.
Squinch
(51,000 posts)the election to Trump.
Squinch
(51,000 posts)holding back evidence, that means they know evidence exists.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)I don't know what that person meant exactly. But it's not good for Trump.
But those people are paranoid, if they think Obama passed sanctions against Russia to box Trump in. They think everyone is like they are. I doubt Obama would play around with U S foreign policy just for the sake of irritating Trump or trying to damage his Presidency. Obama's a pretty ethical person, as well as a patriot. He was also on the way out, wrapping things up, and looking forward to his freedom.