Former Top Obama official backtracks on all claims she made about Russian Collusion
Former Top Obama official backtracks on all claims she made about Russian Collusion
Evelyn Farkas, a former Obama administration official who previously encouraged congressional staffers to gather evidence of alleged collusion between President Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia and said she "knew" there was additional such information out there, admitted she did not know such information existed in a 2017 interview with congressional investigators.
Transcripts from dozens of such interviews were released Thursday by the House Intelligence Committee.
Farkas, who previously served as the deputy assistant secretary of Defense for Russia/Ukraine/Eurasia, said on MSNBC in 2017 that she "was urging my former colleagues, and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill... Get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before President Obama leaves the administration, because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior people that left. So it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy."
Former Obama defense official admitted under oath that she lied on MSNBC about having Trump-Russia collusion evidence
Evelyn Farkas, a former Obama administration official who previously encouraged congressional staffers to gather evidence of alleged collusion between President Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia and said she "knew" there was additional such information out there, admitted she did not know such information existed in a 2017 interview with congressional investigators.
I assume the implication is to insinuate deception by Farkas. Hence the emphasis of double quotations of “knew”.
If there's any controversy, it's caused by the ambiguous nature of certain phrases in the English language. Most are familiar with the sentence, "I knew you were going to say/do that!" I know that to be true. Everybody knows that.
That's because in English we use some form of the word know to mean having a strong belief or expecting something to happen. It's imprecise but that's the way things are, you know. Trey Gowdy did nothing but play a stupid game of semantics, word trickery, to protect the reputation of a POTUS who will not, and has not, released his tax statements as did all his recent predecessors.
Example of an episode of people who knew and when they knew it: When Reagan Sent In the Marines: The Invasion of Lebanon
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...rgo&f=false
“Ahmed Zaki al-Yamani, the Saudi oil minister, made clear King Faisal planned to use oil as a political weapon after discussions with Sadat. All future American appeals to King Faisal were referred directly to Sadat. “We knew that a war was coming,” Yamani said in outlining the embargo.”
Here’s the transcripts
"Why don't we go back to that sentence that I just asked you about. It says 'the Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about their staff dealing with Russians," Gowdy said. "Well, how would you know what the U.S. government knew at that point? You didn't work for it, did you?""I didn't [work for the government]" Farkas acknowledged.
"Then how did you know?" Gowdy responded.
"I didn't know anything," Farkas said.
Image Source: Transcript screenshot
Gowdy pressed even further.
"Did you have information connecting the Trump campaign to the hack of the DNC?" Gowdy asked later in the hearing.
"No," Farkas admitted.
"So when you say, 'We knew,' the reality is you knew nothing," Gowdy asked later during the deposition.
"Correct," Farkas responded.
Why is Gowdy asking Farkas, "Did you have information connecting the Trump campaign to the hack of the DNC?" As far as I can tell, she never claimed to possess any such information. She said that; she didn't admit (a word meaning she said it with reluctance) anything. There is backtracking or lying. And what does the DNC hack to do with what she said on MSNBC?
This is another example of s hit reporting by Fox News.
Another example of recent right-wing bullshit is when Snopes made an incorrect claim that Babylon Bee violated Facebook standards. The mistake was quickly rectified, but PJ Media stated that Facebook claimed the whole thing was a “mistake” by Snopes. https://pjmedia.com/faith/paula-bol...heckers-n101513
The inference was that Snopes practiced deception, but nobody was deceived. Paula Boylard/PJM made the nasty insinuation from her deliberate quotation marks. That’s typical for right-wing liars.
Originally posted by Ayelewis
I assume the implication is to insinuate deception by Farkas. Hence the emphasis of double quotations of “knew”.
If there's any controversy, it's caused by the ambiguous nature of certain phrases in the English language. Most are familiar with the sentence, "I [b]knew you were going to say/do that!" I know that to be true. Everybody knows that.That's because in English we use some form of the word know to mean having a strong belief or expecting something to happen. It's imprecise but that's the way things are, you know. Trey Gowdy did nothing but play a stupid game of semantics, word trickery, to protect the reputation of a POTUS who will not, and has not, released his tax statements as did all his recent predecessors.
Example of an episode of people who knew and when they knew it: When Reagan Sent In the Marines: The Invasion of Lebanon
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...rgo&f=false
“Ahmed Zaki al-Yamani, the Saudi oil minister, made clear King Faisal planned to use oil as a political weapon after discussions with Sadat. All future American appeals to King Faisal were referred directly to Sadat. “We knew that a war was coming,” Yamani said in outlining the embargo.”
Here’s the transcripts
Why is Gowdy asking Farkas, "Did you have information connecting the Trump campaign to the hack of the DNC?" As far as I can tell, she never claimed to possess any such information. She said that; she didn't admit (a word meaning she said it with reluctance) anything. There is backtracking or lying. And what does the DNC hack to do with what she said on MSNBC?
This is another example of s hit reporting by Fox News.
Another example of recent right-wing bullshit is when Snopes made an incorrect claim that Babylon Bee violated Facebook standards. The mistake was quickly rectified, but PJ Media stated that Facebook claimed the whole thing was a “mistake” by Snopes. https://pjmedia.com/faith/paula-bol...heckers-n101513
The inference was that Snopes practiced deception, but nobody was deceived. Paula Boylard/PJM made the nasty insinuation from her deliberate quotation marks. That’s typical for right-wing liars. [/B]
Thanks for posting the transcript. I didn't know she lied that terribly and got her ass handed to her by Gowdy.
That's very shocking.
Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Lewis doesn't know how to read apparently,
Originally posted by Surtur
I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he can read, he just didn't like what he read and is attempting to gain entrance to the mental gymnastic olympics and thought this would be good training
I'm unsure what his motives are behind all the other stuff he was talking about but what I took away from his post was the transcript. He took the time to post it for us so I could finally read it. And boy does that clearly show how much of a giant and terrible liar Farkas is. The being under oath stuff and not wanting criminal charges for perjury sure is strong stuff.