Spicer muddles answer when pressed on Trump and Russia investigation

>Spicer insisted the suspicions are baseless. “It was interesting if you look at last week all of a sudden these stories that keep coming out about the president and his links to Russia,” he said. “It has continued to be the same old, same old, played over and over again. The president has made clear he has no interests in Russia and yet a lot of these stories that come out with respect to that are frankly fake.”

>But a journalist at the briefing refused to let him pursue this tangent, returning to the initial question: “He doesn’t know whether he is the target of a programme?”

>Spicer replied: “I think that’s one of the issues that we have asked the House and Senate to look into.”

>Once more the press secretary pivoted to a denial of any connections between Trump and Russia. “All of the people that have been briefed on this situation have come to the same conclusion,” he said. “It’s a recycled story over and over and over again.”

>The journalist tried again: “Are you saying that there’s a possibility he is the target of a counterintelligence probe involving Russia, because you just connected those two?”

>Spicer said: “I don’t – no, no, I think what I’m saying is there is a difference between that narrative and then the narrative that has been perpetuated over and over again. The concern the president has, and why he’s asked the Senate and House intelligence committees to look into this, is to get to the bottom of what may or may not have occurred during the 2016 election.”

>The question and answer session moved on to different subjects, including an erroneous tweet that Trump issued about prisoners released from Guantánamo Bay. But just as the briefing was about to wind up, Spicer appeared to look down at the lectern, possibly at a message.

>“I just want to be really clear on one point which is there is no reason that we have to think that the president is the target of any investigation whatsoever,” he said. “There is no reason to believe that he is the target of any investigation. I think that’s a very important point to make.

>“The one question dealt with whether or not – the tweet dealt with wiretaps during the thing; the other is an investigation. They are two separate issues and there is no reason to believe there is any type of investigation with respect to the Department of Justice.”

>Trump accused Obama of wiretapping during a series of tweets fired off early on Saturday morning. On Sunday, Obama’s director of national intelligence denied that there had been any wiretapping of Trump and indicated there had not been a secret court order, though not conclusively.

>DERR THEY DON'T PAY ME ENOUGH TO ANSWER _THAT_ QUESTION, YA KNOW WHAT I MEAN GUISE? HUE HUE HUE

>>119759
>Is there a Russian connection?
>Still no
>But what if he is just an unwitting pawn in a Russian program?
>The house and senate are looking into any possibilities of foul play on either side during the 2016 election
>Everyone briefed on it so far has the same conclusion, its nothing.


>Tune in next week for another story of Russian collaboration confirmed by our 17th anonymous insider

>>119824
>>Still no
https://swalwell.house.gov/issues/protect-our-democracy
https://swalwell.house.gov/issues/russia-trump-his-administration-s-ties
https://swalwell.house.gov/issues/russia-influence-trump-his-team

>>119824
>BUT HER EMAILS

>>119828
A California politician thinks Trump and his cabinet need to resign themselves? Fascinating. Maybe next youll cite Feinstein on why guns need to be banned

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/powerpost/house-intelligence-chairman-denies-evidence-of-trump-teams-ties-to-russia/2017/02/27/66495ce8-fcfd-11e6-99b4-9e613afeb09f_story.html

With the FBI being mum on the subject until they have finished, the best we have to go by are the people briefed on the issue. Heres a recent one

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/full-clapper-no-evidence-of-collusion-between-trump-and-russia-890509379597