A month before Donald Trump clinched the Republican nomination, one of his closest allies in Congress — House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy — made a politically explosive assertion in a private conversation on Capitol Hill with his fellow GOP leaders: that Trump could be the beneficiary of payments from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump,” McCarthy (R-Calif.) said, according to a recording of the June 15, 2016, exchange, which was listened to and verified by The Washington Post. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher is a Californian Republican known in Congress as a fervent defender of Putin and Russia.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) immediately interjected, stopping the conversation from further exploring McCarthy’s assertion, and swore the Republicans present to secrecy.

Before the conversation, McCarthy and Ryan had emerged from separate talks at the Capitol with Ukrainian Prime Minister Vladi­mir Groysman, who had described a Kremlin tactic of financing populist politicians to undercut Eastern European democratic institutions.

News had just broken the day before in The Washington Post that Russian government hackers had penetrated the computer network of the Democratic National Committee, prompting McCarthy to shift the conversation from Russian meddling in Europe to events closer to home.

Some of the lawmakers laughed at McCarthy’s comment. Then McCarthy quickly added: “Swear to God.”

Ryan instructed his Republican lieutenants to keep the conversation private, saying: “No leaks. . . . This is how we know we’re a real family here.”

The remarks remained secret for nearly a year.

Yea, it was a bad joke, alright.  Why do all roads seem to lead to Rome?

Rep. McCarthy is know for being a truth teller, often when it is quite inappropriate to do so.  If you remember, he is who squealed that the entire Benghazi bru-ha-ha flare up had been trumped up for political gain.

It’s time for Republican leaders to start thinking country over party.  A few have done that.  They are the statesmen.  The others are….well…never mind.

BTW, Rep. McCarthy is walking back is statements about as fast as a person can walk back.  Bad joke, ink wink nudge nudge.


30 Thoughts to “McCarthy speaks what no one else has the guts to say”

  1. Robin Hood

    No surprise. He leads a caucus of political whores.

    1. McCarthy sure walked back what he had said earlier. I don’t understand how anyone sleeps at night with Trump in the White House. This goes far beyond me not liking his policy.

    2. Things have gotten very quiet out there in Trump land. Perhaps his local supporters have decided maybe you and I weren’t just whistling Dixie.

  2. Starryflights

    I wouldn’t be surprised. I’m glad there will be an investigation by Mr Mueller. He is a no BS guy.

    After little more than 100 days, we already have a special counsel investigating. Must be a record.

      1. Kelly_3406

        I hear crickets!

        Some of us actually work and simply don’t have time to reply to every silly thing posted here.

        I think the special counsel may turn out to be a blessing in disguise for Trump. Hopefully Mueller will carry out a fair investigation, mostly free of politics. If he finds nothing on Trump, then this media circus will have to come to an end (although they will certainly find something else).

        But you better be careful what you ask for. As you rejoice, remember that a special counsel can investigate anything he wants. As Mueller investigates Russian involvement in the election, it is not out of the question that he could find a connection to the DNC, its big-pocket donors, and maybe even the Clinton Foundation.

        Wouldn’t it be ironic if the special counsel resulted in prosecution of Hillary Clinton after all?

      2. I am sure you would be filled with delight.

        What I cannot understand is why you continue to defend Trump. I just don’t get it. I mean, would you want him around your wife and children? Doesn’t he embarrass you?

        Sorry you feel we are silly here.

      3. Robin Hood


        Speaking of silly things posted here, your imagination is truly impressive.

      4. Kelly_3406


        I am usually very impressed by the depth and quality of discussion that takes place on this blog, even when I disagree with the argument. Not this time. This group is being influenced by the same forms of media manipulation that it accuses Fox News viewers of falling for.

        I do not particularly like Trump, but my loyalty to our Republican form of government forces me defend him. He won the election fair and square.

        Since that time, there has been a mass media propaganda effort to paint him as a stooge of the Russians. This narrative was used in an attempt to convince electors to change their votes, then selective leaks were designed to reinforce the narrative as he took office, and now there is an investigation and threats of impeachment based on Trump’s supposed “collusion” with the Russians and his efforts to cover it all up.

        This is all designed to subvert the duly elected government of the US. Given the lack of evidence, other than phone calls and people on his campaign who previously did business with Russia, I would usually expect this group to see right through the manipulation and call it out for what it is.

        However, the strong disdain held by this group for Trump makes it a receptive audience for media manipulation in this case. If any real evidence comes out, I am prepared to change my mind, but as it stands now, there is nothing to reasonably suggest anything improper going on between Trump and the Russians.

      5. Trump didn’t win the election fair and square if there the Russians were involved in manipulating our elections. He also didn’t win the election by 3 million plus votes. But all of that is irrelevant. I accept that he secured the office of the presidency by the rules set in place by our Constitution. No I don’t like it but I accept it.

        Moving past that, why wouldn’t the American public be suspicious of his dealings with the Russians? He even called out to them during a speech. The evidence is there, at every turn. Don’t you want to make sure that Russians don’t choose our leaders?

        There is plenty of evidence. It needs to be checked out.

        Then there is the position, shared by the majority of people in the United States, that Trump is simply unfit for office.
        His behavior since the election has done nothing to suggest otherwise.

        This “group” is pretty much me, Robinhood, and Starry. I can assure you that I haven’t colluded with them as to the topics here. I can also assure you that I am far from being alone in my beliefs.

        How can you change your mind if all that has been improper isn’t investigated?

      6. Richard Hertz


        I agree with everything Kelley said. I’m not a big fan of Trump, he wasn’t my first or even my second choice in the R primary. He says and tweets stupid things way too much for my liking but I thank God every day that he was elected President over Hillary Clinton.

        I also agree with Kelley that debate on issues here use to be quite informative (even when I disagreed I would still generally learn something new) but lately has degraded to the point where it just isn’t worth the effort.

        No evidence has been discovered or disclosed to show any collusion yet that doesn’t stop the group here from treating it as a proven fact. When I ask a simple question about an ‘impeachable offense’ that President Trump has committed, that President Obama did just a few months ago, jokers like RH respond with BS like this:

        “I don’t see a link to the coverage.

        You’ve got nothing. Nothing!”

        This is the sign of true low-information voter. It is common knowledge that President Obama shared top secret information with Russia in reference to ISIS on highly sensitive matters such as troop movements and groups we were working with.

      7. Robin Hood

        Richard Hertz,

        Stop whining and show documentation. Maybe you are offended because you can’t prove your claim .

      8. Richard Hertz

        Robin Hood,

        Hey sport, try the hyperlink that I provided in the comment…

      9. Robin Hood

        Richard Hertz,

        Okay, we’re going there. Your source uses the subtitle “Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias ” and that raises the question of objectivity. How can we trust them if they openly state that they have a bias of their own?

        If you want fair and balanced that carries an obligation to meet those expectations as well.

      10. Richard Hertz

        Robin Hood,

        Dude really? Here is the WP link. Did you watch the video? The contributor talks about and names the WP article about the subject which you conveniently ignore.

      11. Robin Hood

        Richard Hertz,

        The Post story is about an offer, so I’m glad you use mainstream media for something. The video is choppy, but I notice you chose not to pick up on the guest’s concern that a lesson should have been learned from trusting the Russians that Trump hasn’t followed. As for trusting the guest on the Today Show, we don’t know enough about him. That guy on CNN is a Trump surrogate and he’s been confronted about fudging on the air..

        I asked for this a couple of days ago and it’s nice that you took the trouble to dig it up. Now I can check on the Today Show guest, So thank you for that. Why do you take offense at being challenged? If you want to debate you have to get used to it.

        Now we have a basis for differentiating fact and opinion.

      12. “Liberal media bias” tells me one thing…

        Why do people like to read things that play to the echo chambers in their own minds?

      13. Well, you are the one who comes here, Dick. You have also made considerable effort to come here. I didn’t put you in moderation even though I know you changed your name and IP.

        You have only yourself to blame.

        I am just as informed as I was last year. I think perhaps its you all or perhaps your acceptance of Trump and his horrible behavior has altered you in some way. You might not like Hillary but you will not find evidence of her talking about like to grab someone by their genitals.

        Truthfully, I can’t even have a legitimate conversation with someone who finds Trump acceptable on any level. He was totally unprepared for the job of president and has done very little to learn.

      14. Richard Hertz


        I was referring to RH when speaking of low-info voters… You have always been on top of most issues discussed here if I agree with you or not.

        The only part of your comment that gives me pause, and I think we talked about this once, is when you say Truthfully, I can’t even have a legitimate conversation with someone who finds Trump acceptable on any level..

        Is that how you honestly feel? My entire family, extended family and most of my in-laws are hard core liberals. I’ve been shunned by most of them the second they find out I voted for Trump. Which is sad. I have never written off any of my family or friends for their political views. If I did I wouldn’t have any family or friends. I don’t hold opposing views against anyone and just accept that they have different beliefs than myself.

        Having a different political view than someone else is a good thing. That is the diversity that makes this country great. I don’t love my mother or brothers any less because they voted for Hillary but unfortunately that is not mutual. For some odd reason those on the ‘left’ are simply intolerant of those who do not think like them. My own mother has stopped calling me and my bothers leave the room when I walk in all because I don’t think like them politically.

      15. Robin Hood

        Richard Hertz,

        You don’t know me. I have a master’s degree and I do my homework. If you don’t want to be offended, then don’t give offense. Who can trust a guy who calls a total stranger a low information voter because he doesn’t agree with you?

      16. Richard Hertz

        Robin Hood,

        Easy now RH… I called you a low-info voter cause you didn’t know something that was common knowledge. Don’t have to know you to call you out on something elementary as that.

      17. Robin Hood

        Richard Hertz,

        Go to my comment posted below at 5:10 pm. Your “common knowledge ” turned out to be selective facts. Low information is incomplete information and that’s on you.

      18. It isn’t the opposing views—it’s Trump himself. Its very difficult for me to really express how repugnant I find him, on so many levels. For instance, I pretty much cannot stand Ted Cruz. I hate his views and what he stands for. Yet I would place him above Trump. Its the vulgarity and the arrogance. It’s his basic distain and disregard for others. Its that he lies all the time and think we are all too stupid to notice.

        I am sorry for your family issues. Perhaps you all should just agree to place the topic of politics off limits. My son is making noises I don’t like to hear. Before the election I told him just not to tell me and that we wouldn’t discuss it. I don’t think he did but if he did, I don’t want to know it.

        I don’t think that its just difference of opinion with your family. I think they would probably speak to you if you voted for McCain or Romney. Trump is just such an outlier. I think his behavior is indefensible. Most people I know think that also. I am not an anomaly, at least about Trump.

      19. Kelly_3406


        I do realize that Trump has brought much of this on himself. His abrupt firing of Comey, his tweets, and his overall lack of discipline have played right into the hands of this political enemies.

        I was hoping his learning curve would be faster. But a lack of discipline is not the same as a lack of loyalty to the US, which is what the accusation of collusion implies.

      20. Robin Hood


        That is why we have investigations. If he has nothing to hide then why does he act like he has something to hide?

      21. He has made many statements that indicate to me that he values himself, his ego, and his finances far more than the United States.

        I think when you are president, you have to value country over self.

        He absolutely is a self-wounder, time after time.

  3. Robin Hood

    Watergate went on for 900 days. That would give the investigation plenty of time to discredit not only Trump but also Pence for not flagging Flynn during the transition. And the next congressional elections are about 637 days away, so we can count on Trump to trip over himself repeatedly.

    1. The gift that keeps on giving. Oy Vey.

  4. middleman

    As I read some of the posts above, it appears that Trump was right that he could shoot someone dead in the street and get away with it, at least with some in this crowd. If this is all “liberal media” hype, why are the R’s looking into a 25th Amendment remedy? Why has even Krauthhammer jumped ship? Who’s REALLY letting their political bias shade their judgment- R’s or D’s?

  5. Robin Hood

    The following explains what makes it so difficult to have patience with some of the comments posted here by Trump supporters. In order to make the case I went back and reviewed what I suspected were alternative facts, but what I found were selective facts.

    I followed Richard’s links. As mentioned earlier, his source bills itself as a foil to liberal media. Juan Zarate is the guy quoted in the Today Show video and he criticizes the last administration for sharing information with the Russians. What Mr. Hertz failed to mention is that Zarate thought that was a lesson to be learned not to trust the Russians.

    Mr. Zarate is listed on Wikipedia as a former official of the Bush administration involved in security matters. Now a Republican like him has every right and is qualified to share his views. But Dick and his source don’t admit that Trump failed to apply any of it.

    The other point is offered by Jeffrey Lord on CNN. He mentions a Post article that was shared with us. It only mentioned an offer to share with the Russians. Then he touts what this source refers to as an unconfirmed story that an agent’s name was mistakenly given up.

    So now I’ve given up time and many keystrokes over a blame game that was haphazardly researched just so I can prove my point. What a waste just to check out a diversion!

Comments are closed.