Mama Bobo Bumble. Bumper me back. This can be short single single topic because its bugging me, as I read this the news from watching trumps. Porters, or at least Republicans last and people on the left they're saying the same ridiculous thing over and over again and they're saying A version of this and the version is it appears in this- is the important part, Or it seems or is suggests, or a hints assumes you see, that you should know that whatever comes after it, gonna be BS, but the common story, on the entire laughed and much of the right is it the press, and seemed to believe Putin over his own intelligence agencies.

Nothing like that happened. The least not my movie, here's what did happen. There was the press conference where President Trump asked the question said That burden was very strong in his denial now disaster. Like he believed him. When you say someone is very strong. Their denial. Your car in the same year, don't believe it right. That's what that means. Means in this time and place I'm not Gonna call him a liar, but I'm going to call him a liar, I'm just gonna. Do it the deplored diplomatic way? I too, how to, and he made a very strong denial very strong so I'm allowing him to kneel keep face, but clearly calling him a liar: do you know you say when you believe somebody. You say

He said he didn't do it and I believe him How many times have you heard president say food? says he didn't do it. That's not believing him. That's exactly what you say when you don't, leave somebody he said. Even do it right. If you don't believe it, you say you don't believe it do. You think that the president is shy about saying whether he believes or doesn't leave something have you ever seen a situation where this president President Tromp was shy or hesitant to say what he believed know if he believe Putin he had frightened tell you you would like it.

Earlier, you didn't tell you that. Has he said directly, I believe my until agencies, when they say the Russia was meddling Et Cetera. Yes, he said that a number of times he is said a number of times. He believes it. What does the press do the enemy press, the enemy press conflates lad with? Therefore, Putin got you elected that part, our president resists quite strongly. Now there are two possibilities: one russian involvement did elected, in other words, there was enough of a difference that that it puts him over the top. The other possibility is that it didn't so two possibilities. Russian interference did help prudent present trump or it did not because it just wasn't a good level of interference, not did make enough difference in both cases. What is the proper smart?

elegant way, for the president to respond. Only one smart way, we're going to get rid of this asshole. Only one the smart way to respond, you should say Russia did not have any involvement and that my presidency is legitimate. Do you know why? Because what you want you being the public is for the president's presidency to be seen as legitimate There would be nothing more damaging for the presidency United States to say nothing, It would be more damaging than to say you know you got a point. There. I've been listening to my intelligence people. I don't think I did with that election- come on That would be the worst thing anybody could say, but because he can't say that

You know people I always at his ego. Is it because Putin own some keeping I'm there's only one thing you can say If there's only one thing you can say which is in fact the election. Therefore, I will again in that The only thing you can say. If you say, anything else you not doing a good job for the country, you're not doing a good job for yourself you are ruining, possibly the entire planet earth by deal. Generalizing, the government of the biggest military on the planet What would be the biggest mistake this president could make to say here. I think my presidency was a little bit illegitimate. That's a good point there, making. So when you see the The president attacking him for what appears to be, or seems as if or

you suggesting that good news, more believable that his own intelligence agencies, nothing like that's happening, not even close, because if he were he'd be saying stuff like while I believe food and I dont believe my intelligence agencies. Do you believe that this presidency holds back. On his opinion, if you believe that you would certainly say it s, one thing weaken depend on ah height now he has said the president that the chain of costly for the servers and apparently is not one physical server, its physical servers in the cloud a chain of custody, was not done right and therefore, on the narrow question of whether,

whether Russia hacked into that particular set of servers? He said there is some question, because the chain of custody essentially wasn't there, that the F b I didn't look at the base service now some people, antechambers of don't say that you do not understand this in the cloud of actual server and by the way they gave him a perfect copy. It's a mirror copy. You don't need that the original thing well, it was court. What corps in the world takes a copy? No court accepts a copy, especially if there's a chain of custody problem going on it. So the present has accurately criticized accurately criticise one little gap in credibility for his, for the intelligent

services. They do have a history of sometimes not be incredible: weapons of mass destruction being among them and possibly the whole thing with Peter struck. We don't know how to ask him turn out, but

when the present criticise is one area that is clearly and unambiguously a point of non credibility and the information he uses to do that is in the public domain. Nobody is questioning the facts of it. That's pretty believable and also its exactly what you should do if you're trying to defend the credibility of the presidency- and I tell you- I wouldn't care- if this were Hillary Clinton or any other president, you don't want your president criticising the credibility of their own administration as in whether or not the raven legally elected. That would be the worst

doubles, the stupidest thing anybody ever deeper than the political or any other arena. It would be a catastrophic mistake, and so he is his critics of the ones on the left, you figure or maybe just taking the opportunity for whatever attack they can. But the people on the right are the ones I am most disappointed with. So the Republicans who have said he yep it looks like that president has taken the side of Putin Year Idiots so that the people on the right who say that the president of people that would otherwise back the president to say that he suggested that Putin, ISM you know isn't doing any kind of cyber attacks is just a lie. The president has, he has quite

one very specific clave about these servers and said: there's a lack credibility there. He has not questioned the basic premise that all of the big countries are trying to cyber cyber mess with all of the other big countries. There isn't the slightest chance. He believes Russia has done nothing in terms of cyber attacks. There is a good chance, he believes, or he would like you to believe that Russia didn't have any important effect of a thousand been demonstrated. So I'm gonna leave it there, but I'm very I've just shocked that the news is continually getting away both sides by the way, I think Fox NEWS to say the same thing that see them saying on this topic that he seems to have suggested there. Putin,

the little more reliable. Nothing like that happened, he what you did act diplomatically and he did defend the integrity of the election. Those things he did, but those are those are both good things being done. Automatic is good and defending the credibility of the election, If if there is a possibility that there were something go around there, the main difference, even if that's true, you should defend the credibility of the office, one shrimp, because you can't change the past. That's all I want to say about that and I think I'm done first it unless I get mad about something else.