Thread: Trey Gowdy: Whoever advised Trump on Russia should consider resigning

Trey Gowdy: Whoever advised Trump on Russia should consider resigning

by Daniel Chaitin
July 22, 2018 04:38 PM

House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy suggested Sunday that certain advisers who have consulted President Trump on Russia should consider resigning.

Nearly a week ago, Trump sparked outrage among Republicans and Democrats over his private meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki and his comments during a follow-up joint press conference during which he cast doubt on the U.S. intelligence community assessment that the Russian government led a campaign to meddle in the 2016 election. Under pressure, Trump made a rare omission of fault, saying he misspoke when he said did not see why Russia would have meddled in the U.S. electoral process. He even went so far as to say that he holds Putin personally "responsible" for meddling in the U.S. electoral process as a leader of the Russian people.

But Gowdy stressed that there should not have been any margin for error as there is "overwhelming" evidence that the Kremlin was at fault.

"The evidence is overwhelming. It can be proven beyond any evidentiary burden that Russia is not our friend and they tried to attack us in 2016," Gowdy said during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday. "So, the president either needs to rely on the people that he has chosen to advise him, or those advisers need to re-evaluate whether or not they can serve in this administration."

"But the disconnect cannot continue," he added. "The evidence is overwhelming and the president needs to say that and act like it."

Gowdy was responding to a question from guest host Brett Baier, who noted Rep. Will Hurd, R-Texas, said in a New York Times op-ed last week that Trump is being "manipulated by Putin."

Gowdy didn't dismiss the possibility.

"Well, Will has a background as a CIA officer. I defer to him on manipulation," Gowdy said. "I can tell you this, Bret, the president has access to every bit of evidence, even more than those of us on [the House Intelligence Committee]. And Will and I serve on House Intel. He has access to [Secretary of State Mike] Pompeo and [FBI Director] Chris Wray and [Director of National Intelligence] Dan Coats and [U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations] Nikki Haley."

Despite the controversy, Trump has defended his talks with Putin as being productive, and in the days that followed the White House revealed that national security adviser John Bolton — a known Russia hawk — had been asked to invite Putin to the White House for a visit in the fall.

Gowdy condemned such a move, arguing it should be reserved for tried and true allies, not an adversary like Russia.

"Those should be reserved, I think, for our allies like Great Britain, and Canada, and Australia, and those who are with us day in and day out," Gowdy said. "I think we should be very judicious in who we invite and place that in imprimatur of acceptance on — so I hope the president would keep that in mind if we are issuing invitations to foreign leaders."

Gowdy, who is not seeking re-election this year and will retire from Congress at the end of this session, was not alone in cautioning Trump about his dealings with Russia.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who has emerged as a staunch Trump ally, lamented on CBS's "Face the Nation" about how Trump appears to get "confused" by conflating Russian interference in the 2016 election and allegations of collusion between members of his campaign and the Kremlin.

“If you suggest that Russians meddled in 2016, he goes to the idea that, 'well, I didn't collude with them.' You didn't collude with the Russians, or at least I haven't seen any evidence. But Mr. President, they meddled in the elections, they stole [John] Podesta's emails, they hacked into the DNC [Democratic National Committee]. It could be us next. Harden our electoral infrastructure in 2018, Mr. President," Graham advised.

Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said Trump is "acting like someone who's compromised" by Putin.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...ider-resigning

"But the disconnect cannot continue," he added. "The evidence is overwhelming and the president needs to say that and act like it."

Why? For what purpose, Trey? Do you want a better and improved relationship with Russia or do you want WWIII over John Podesta's insecure aol.com email account? What's your end game, Trey? What's your plan? I don't think you have either one.

Furthermore, we have a little thing in our country called a Justice System. We have many laws concerning the rules of evidence. Were those rules of evidence followed? You're supposed to be an expert on prosecutions, did you forget about the rules of evidence? We have rules of convictions and appeals as well, did you forget about those? Right now, the Russian government has not been charged with any crimes, 12 people supposedly have been named in an unsigned indictment, who have never been interviewed, never questioned, their employment unverified, their computers haven't been checked, nothing, there is no hard forensic evidence against these people. None at all. You don't even have the servers and computers you're claiming they hacked!! What you have is a conjecture story, and that is all you have. The President knows that's all you have, so he's not going to push a relationship he wants to develop in a positive way off the edge of a cliff over conjecture not yet proven in a court of law, nor should he.

So, why are you trying to do that?

You sound like these wild-eyed, hair-on-fire, tin-foil hat lunatics residing in the opposition and resistance to a new and improved relationship with Russia to hurt our President and imperil our country.

So, shame on you!!!

Very disappointed in you.

I guess Rand Paul would suggest the same for those advisors who took President Reagan's comment "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" from his Berlin speech.

They are "advisors". They render opinions for the President to consider. But he is the person charged with making the decision whether or not to follow such advice.

Originally Posted by jtdc

I guess Rand Paul would suggest the same for those advisors who took President Reagan's comment "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" from his Berlin speech.

They are "advisors". They render opinions for the President to consider. But he is the person charged with making the decision whether or not to follow such advice.

Exactly. Trey supported Marco Rubio for President, that's really all anyone needs to know about Trey. Trey has a small skill set that shows off during hearings, but for the rest of it, well, obviously very limited judgment and knowledge, and obviously sad to say, he's a wild-eyed, hair-on-fire, tin-foil hat goofball. I'm very glad he's leaving Congress and going back home to apparently spend full time working with his small skill set in his wide array of hairstyles.

I'll miss his grilling style!

It's great entertainment up to a point, then he clutches and can't bring it home.