It is currently Sat Dec 15, 2018 2:24 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 5:19 pm 
Bishop

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:45 pm
Posts: 487
No wonder Trump is going berserk trying to investigate the investigation. The walls are closing in.

Looks like Don Jr. is guilty of at least attempting to collude with not only Russia, but also Israel/Saudi Arabia.

Trump Jr. and Other Aides Met With Gulf Emissary Offering Help to Win Election

The morons on this forum will likely scoff at the fact that this is actually illegal, and they'll probably wail and moan about how there is no definitive proof of collusion. But what we do know beyond a doubt now is that Trump Jr. at least attempted to collude with Russia and now two other countries.

I guess it really did take the whole world to bring Hillary down. :lol:

I just can't get over the fact that the amount of evidence for illegal activity on the Trump side doesn't even faze the same people who see conspiracy and illegality in virtually every little thing Hillary supposedly did.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:02 pm 
Founder & Visionary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 13078
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
This reminds me of the accusation that George Bush, Sr. met with Iranian officials in 1980 and struck a deal to keep the hostages on ice past the election so that Carter wouldn't be re-elected.

If one believes in the Trump/Russia collusion, is it reasonable to also believe in the Reagan/Iran collusion?

_________________
"Imagine if the Honor Code Office resources were all syphoned to the Counseling Center instead."

--Meadowchik, 12-07-2018


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:06 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 6:50 am
Posts: 11169
Location: Your mother's purse
Hawkeye wrote:
I just can't get over the fact that the amount of evidence for illegal activity on the Trump side doesn't even faze the same people who see conspiracy and illegality in virtually every little thing Hillary supposedly did.

Funny how you claim there is evidence when there is none and when there is evidence you claim "supposedly".

Point is, Hillary Clinton list all by herself, it's real dude...she list the election, it wasn't stolen, no fraud, no crime, no "manipulation" just people voting, freely voting.

Dude, you got nothing...nothing but that hair-fire, yo.

_________________
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:08 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 6:50 am
Posts: 11169
Location: Your mother's purse
Dr. Shades wrote:
This reminds me of the accusation that George Bush, Sr. met with Iranian officials in 1980 and struck a deal to keep the hostages on ice past the election so that Carter wouldn't be re-elected.

If one believes in the Trump/Russia collusion, is it reasonable to also believe in the Reagan/Iran collusion?

Absolutely reasonable...most sure losers in an election resolve the loss with some sort of tin foil theory....and proven or not that theory has no impact on reality...Reagan served 2 terms.

_________________
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:37 pm 
Bishop

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:45 pm
Posts: 487
subgenius wrote:
Funny how you claim there is evidence when there is none and when there is evidence you claim "supposedly".

The evidence is everywhere, beginning with the fact that virtually everyone in the administration has been caught lying about their ties to Russia, and Donald Jr got busted in an email saying he was willing to collude with Russia when he met with them thinking he was going to get some dirt on Hillary. This is indisputable and you just spin, bob and weave like the typical moron.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:38 pm 
Bishop

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:45 pm
Posts: 487
Dr. Shades wrote:
This reminds me of the accusation that George Bush, Sr. met with Iranian officials in 1980 and struck a deal to keep the hostages on ice past the election so that Carter wouldn't be re-elected.

If one believes in the Trump/Russia collusion, is it reasonable to also believe in the Reagan/Iran collusion?


No, because there is evidence to support the Trump collusion. And now we find out Don Jr. met with Israeli and Saudia Arabians to seek help with the campaign. Something that is absolutely illegal.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:50 pm 
Bishop

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:45 pm
Posts: 487
Trump Says There’s No Evidence of Collusion. There Is So Much Evidence Already.

You might know that a man ran into a building with a gun, then a person was shot in the building, and then the man ran out. All this would be evidence he committed the murder, while perhaps falling short of proof. Proof is a very high standard to meet. But evidence of collusion? There’s simply no question that there is evidence. Lots and lots of it.

Paul Manafort’s lawyers adopted a version of the Trumpian defense, that the Mueller probe is a fishing expedition for unrelated crimes. The Department of Justice answered this with a legal filing specifically affirming that he is investigating whether Manafort “committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 election.”

What do we know about Manafort? We know he ran the campaign of a pro-Russian candidate on behalf of Russia previously; that he had taken on massive debt to a foreign patron, Oleg Deripaska; that Deripaska was working on behalf of the Russian government’s foreign policy; that Manafort accepted his position as Trump’s campaign manager for free; and that he hoped his work for Trump would help him “get whole” with Deripaska.

Does that prove Trump’s campaign manager was working with Russia? No, but it certainly counts as evidence.

Want more evidence? Okay. Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos met with a Russian agent who told him he had dirt on Hillary Clinton, later boasted that Russia had obtained damaging Clinton emails, and lied to the FBI about his contacts with Russia. That would also qualify as evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Peter W. Smith, a veteran Republican political operative, attempted to obtain stolen Clinton emails and told the people he contacted in pursuit of these emails he was working on behalf of the Trump campaign. When one of the cybersecurity experts he contacted warned Smith that his work might involve collusion with Russia, it did not dissuade him at all. That also seems like evidence.

Trump confidant Roger Stone reportedly knew about stolen Clinton emails, emailed with the person who had the stolen material, publicly flaunted his advance knowledge of these emails, and also spoke regularly with Donald Trump during the period when he had this knowledge. It is a virtual certainty Stone colluded with Russia on the email hack, and highly probable he made Trump an accessory after the fact.

Then of course there is the 2016 Trump Tower meeting. I would argue that the publicly available information pertaining to that episode amounts to proof of Trump campaign collusion with Russia. You have a Russian agent dangling Russian assistance in the election (“part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump”), and the offer of help being accepted (“if it’s what you say I love it”). It doesn’t even matter to what degree or even whether the offer was actually followed through. If you take a meeting to plan a crime, and the crime later happens and you benefit, you are an accessory to the crime whether or not you participated after the meeting.

But even if you don’t consider the Trump Tower meeting to be absolute proof of collusion, it is certainly evidence of collusion. It was, after all, a meeting held for the express purpose of furthering cooperation — or, as it were, collusion — between the Trump campaign and Russia. And there is no reason to believe that the publicly available evidence of this meeting — which Trump and his family have lied about, repeatedly — contains the entire extent of the information about it.

The report from Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee reports that, on June 6, 2016, Donald Trump Jr. made two phone calls with Emin Agalarov. In between those two calls — which, based on emails he exchanged around that time with Rob Goldstone, indicate Trump successfully arranged the meeting during the calls — Donald Jr. made another call. Phone records show the call, at 4:27 p.m., was to a blocked phone number. Corey Lewandowski told the House Intelligence Committee that Donald Trump had a blocked phone number. “Despite the [Democratic] Minority’s repeated efforts to obtain home or cell phone records for then-candidate Trump to determine whether the blocked call was Trump Jr.’s father,” Democrats report, “the Majority was unwilling to pursue the matter.”

This has not attracted nearly enough attention. There is clear forensic evidence to show that Donald Trump, Jr. called somebody, quite likely his father, while he was rushing to set up the Trump Tower meeting. House Republicans blocked an effort to prove that Donald Trump was the person he called.

Trump’s own rhetoric after the meeting provides more evidence he was briefed on the Russian offer to provide dirt on Clinton. Trump promised to deliver a “major speech” within a few days. Trump promised he would be “discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons. I think you’re going to find it very informative and very, very interesting.”

The Republican narrative has embraced the fantastical interpretation first that there is no public evidence of collusion, and the even more delusional offshoot belief that Mueller therefore has no private evidence of collusion. The intent of saying this, of course, is to enable Republican efforts to obstruct or eventually end the probe, which they can justify on the grounds that there was no evidence of collusion anyway. And they are advertising in advance their intent to declare Trump innocent of wrongdoing regardless of how damning the final indictment may be.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 12:47 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm
Posts: 19529
Location: Koloburbia
Dr. Shades wrote:
If one believes in the Trump/Russia collusion, is it reasonable to also believe in the Reagan/Iran collusion?

Or believing that John Wilkes Booth had anything to do with the Lincoln assassination?

_________________
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 7:18 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 6:50 am
Posts: 11169
Location: Your mother's purse
Hawkeye wrote:
What do we know about Manafort? We know heran the campaign of a pro-Russian candidate on behalf of Russia previously;

you are wholly unqualified to parade yourself as knowledgeable on this topic...at best you are naïve.

Yes, Manafort worked on Russia campaign and you behave as if this is some sort of smoking gun - but wait, the guys that ran Obama's campaign just so happen to run the Russia campaign for another candidate in the same Russia election that Manafort was working...because both gained so much notoriety from the American campaigns...funny how that works is it not?

Just look at all this evidence of collusion....just look at it!

In Kiev and Kharkiv and other cities in Ukraine, American political consultants who worked against one another in Iowa and New Hampshire and then in the general election are facing off again in a somewhat surreal Eastern European replay of the 2008 campaign.

The firm headed by Hillary Clinton’s former chief strategist, Mark Penn, is helping run incumbent President Victor Yushchenko’s campaign. Meanwhile Paul Manafort, whose firm worked on Republican John McCain’s losing effort, and Tad Devine, a top strategist on the Democratic presidential campaigns of Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004, are consulting for Victor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian frontrunner in the polls.
...
Chicago-based media consulting firm AKPD, the contract to help guide Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko’s campaign is part of a new, growth area of business that presented itself after the firm helped Barack Obama win the White House last fall.


https://www.politico.com/story/2009/11/ ... oad-029410

seriously, get you that education.

_________________
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 5:03 pm 
Bishop

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:45 pm
Posts: 487
1. Going for the lowest hanging fruit in a giant tree of evidence you cannot even begin to refute.
2. Pretending the two are equal when they're not. If you had the honesty to quote the entirety of this writer's comments you'd see they're not equivalent.

I'll highlight the part you ignored:

Quote:
What do we know about Manafort? We know he ran the campaign of a pro-Russian candidate on behalf of Russia previously; that he had taken on massive debt to a foreign patron, Oleg Deripaska; that Deripaska was working on behalf of the Russian government’s foreign policy; that Manafort accepted his position as Trump’s campaign manager for free; and that he hoped his work for Trump would help him “get whole” with Deripaska.

Does that prove Trump’s campaign manager was working with Russia? No, but it certainly counts as evidence.


You said there was no evidence of collusion. You're easily refuted. You just don't understand what constitutes evidence. You're too dumb.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 5:54 pm 
Founder & Visionary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 13078
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
Thanks for typing all that up, Hawkeye. I appreciate it.

_________________
"Imagine if the Honor Code Office resources were all syphoned to the Counseling Center instead."

--Meadowchik, 12-07-2018


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 7:25 pm 
God

Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 5:41 pm
Posts: 1327
Dr. Shades wrote:
Thanks for typing all that up, Hawkeye. I appreciate it.


Yes Shades. It was definitely long and no doubt took an investment of a lot of time.

Did you have a hard time following it also?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 7:36 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 6:50 am
Posts: 11169
Location: Your mother's purse
Hawkeye wrote:
1. Going for the lowest hanging fruit in a giant tree of evidence you cannot even begin to refute.
2. Pretending the two are equal when they're not. If you had the honesty to quote the entirety of this writer's comments you'd see they're not equivalent.

You just don't understand what constitutes evidence. You're too dumb.

1. No need to pick through all the rotten pieces. The example is to illustrate how you, to continue the fruit theme, cherry pick through facts. And there is no refutation required because it just simply isn't evidence of collusion...its evidence of a guy working in Russia...just like the other people noted to have been working there were also not "colluding".

2. Nope, your brain's inability to discern that the post was not a refutation but was an accentuation... an accentuation of how you misinterpret and misrepresent facts.

3. I get what evidence is, and you have certainly provided evidence for several things.....yet none of those things are actually "collusion". So, while my informal tone might have confused you, let me clarify that when I say "you have no evidence" - it is easily understood that the meaning is "you have no evidence of collusion"...see, spelled it out for ya.


oh, and I'm talking about the 2018 US Presidential election in case you're unclear on what the heck adults are talking about.

_________________
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 1:02 am 
God

Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 12:17 am
Posts: 4677
Location: California
subgenius wrote:
. . .oh, and I'm talking about the 2018 US Presidential election in case you're unclear on what the heck adults are talking about.

So, you think now that there will be another Presidential election this year? :wink: Maybe that would not be such a bad Idea, if it results in throwing out Trump and his whole, outrageously corrupt and incompetent regime. I doubt that there is any contitutional provision for having another Presdential election only two years after the last one, though. Maybe we ought to amend the constitution so that we can throw out a President and his regime on a no confidence vote as soon as they prove to be corrupt and/or incompetent, like in the British parlamentary system?

_________________
No precept or claim is more deservedly suspect or more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.

“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 5:31 am 
Bishop

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:45 pm
Posts: 487
subgenius wrote:
Hawkeye wrote:
1. Going for the lowest hanging fruit in a giant tree of evidence you cannot even begin to refute.
2. Pretending the two are equal when they're not. If you had the honesty to quote the entirety of this writer's comments you'd see they're not equivalent.

You just don't understand what constitutes evidence. You're too dumb.

1. No need to pick through all the rotten pieces. The example is to illustrate how you, to continue the fruit theme, cherry pick through facts. And there is no refutation required because it just simply isn't evidence of collusion...its evidence of a guy working in Russia...just like the other people noted to have been working there were also not "colluding".

2. Nope, your brain's inability to discern that the post was not a refutation but was an accentuation... an accentuation of how you misinterpret and misrepresent facts.

3. I get what evidence is, and you have certainly provided evidence for several things.....yet none of those things are actually "collusion". So, while my informal tone might have confused you, let me clarify that when I say "you have no evidence" - it is easily understood that the meaning is "you have no evidence of collusion"...see, spelled it out for ya.


oh, and I'm talking about the 2018 US Presidential election in case you're unclear on what the heck adults are talking about.



So basically you've already given up any kind of intellectual effort to salvage your argument because you're too dumb to understand what constitutes evidence. Basically, Manafort's creepy connections with Russia doesn't count as evidence because Hillary once hired a guy who also worked for a Russian company! Likewise, I guess OJ Simpson had nothing to do with his wife's murder because there are plenty of Heisman Trophy winners who handle knives but don't murder their wives.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 8:03 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 6:50 am
Posts: 11169
Location: Your mother's purse
Hawkeye wrote:
So basically you've already given up any kind of intellectual effort to salvage your argument

Nope, the intellectual effort is still there...its just a futile effort, given the adversary.


Hawkeye wrote:
because you're too dumb to understand what constitutes evidence.

Nope, apparently I am too dumb to explain how you have no evidence for collusion. You seem to believe that the more insistent you are with your fallacy the more likely it will become true. For example:
1. Hawkeye asserts that smart arguments are posted to this thread.
2. Hawkeye has posted to this thread.
3. Hawkeye now claims there is evidence that Hawkeye has posted a smart argument to this thread.


Hawkeye wrote:
Basically, Manafort's creepy connections with Russia doesn't count as evidence because Hillary once hired a guy who also worked for a Russian company!

Nope, the citation clearly illustrates that Manafort working (partnered with a Democrat by the way) on a Russian election campaign is not a suspicious situation, especially if we measure "suspicious" as being uncommon...at least as you define uncommon as the probability for hearing Spanish in Havre MT.

Hawkeye wrote:
Likewise, I guess OJ Simpson had nothing to do with his wife's murder because there are plenty of Heisman Trophy winners who handle knives but don't murder their wives.

Well, that turned racist and stupid pretty quick - even for you.
Perhaps it would be appropriate, and akin to your style of 'reasoning', to claim that the evidence for OJ having murdered his wife is OJ being known to be associated with white women.

_________________
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 11:16 am 
Founder & Visionary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 13078
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
Bach wrote:
Dr. Shades wrote:
Thanks for typing all that up, Hawkeye. I appreciate it.

Yes Shades. It was definitely long and no doubt took an investment of a lot of time.

Did you have a hard time following it also?

No, it was pretty straightforward.

_________________
"Imagine if the Honor Code Office resources were all syphoned to the Counseling Center instead."

--Meadowchik, 12-07-2018


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 11:45 am 
Bishop

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:45 pm
Posts: 487
subgenius wrote:
1. Hawkeye asserts that smart arguments are posted to this thread.
2. Hawkeye has posted to this thread.
3. Hawkeye now claims there is evidence that Hawkeye has posted a smart argument to this thread.


More like Hawkeye refutes your baseless assertion that evidence for collusion "doesn't exist" by detailing a list of clear evidence for collusion, not least of which is the fact that we already know that the Trump administration ATTEMPTED collusion with reps from three foreign countries. A fact you haven't even tried to touch upon because you know you have no chance in hell of refuting it.

subgenius wrote:
Nope, the citation clearly illustrates that Manafort working (partnered with a Democrat by the way) on a Russian election campaign is not a suspicious situation, especially if we measure "suspicious" as being uncommon...at least as you define uncommon as the probability for hearing Spanish in Havre MT.


It is a suspicious situation when members of the campaign have already been caught trying to collude with Russia in a meeting. Whether we can prove definitively that actual collusion happened is another question, and I'm guessing probably not without some kind of video or audio evidence. But we know the intent was there which is still criminal. That kind of evidence is what the Watergate investigation lucked into, otherwise idiots like you would still be talking about how there was no evidence against Nixon and the whole thing was a witch hunt.

Again, you're refusing to deal with the mountain of evidence and you keep going after the lowest hanging fruit to obtusely act as if this one piece of evidence by itself is what the argument rests upon.

From day one the Trump people denied having any affiliation with Russians. There have been 75+ documented contacts between members of the campaign and Russians, and they have denied (lied about) at least 20 of them. This is from Trump, Pence, Manafort, Don Jr., the entire lot of them are lying through their teeth and if there were just ONE instance of lying from anyone in the Obama administration that would be all the justification you and your ilk would need to start a huge conspiracy theory claiming the entire lot were corrupt and demand impeachment.

TRUMP’S RUSSIA COVER-UP BY THE NUMBERS – 75+ CONTACTS WITH RUSSIA-LINKED OPERATIVES


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 12:29 pm 
Bishop

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:45 pm
Posts: 487
JUNE 15, 2016: Guccifer 2.0 claims responsibility for the hack of the Democratic National Committee computer system and begins posting the stolen DNC documents online.

JULY 27, 2016: Donald Trump sent a message to Russia: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 [Hillary Clinton] emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

AUG. 5, 2016: Writing for Breitbart, Roger Stone, a former campaign advisor to Trump, asserts that Guccifer 2.0 has nothing to do with Russia. A few days later, Stone boasts that he is in contact with WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange.

AUG. 12, 2016: Guccifer 2.0 posts more stolen DNC documents.

AUG. 13-15, 2016: Stone communicates directly with Guccifer 2.0.

AUG. 15, 2016: Guccifer 2.0 posts more stolen DNC documents.

As he exchanges more direct messages with Guccifer 2.0, Stone continues to declare publicly that he is communicating with Assange. As summer turns to fall, Stone also issues prescient tweets about WikiLeaks’ ongoing dissemination of stolen DNC documents, including this one on Aug. 21, 2016: “Trust me, it will soon the Podesta’s time in the barrel. #CrookedHillary.” And another on Oct 2, 2016: “Wednesday@HillaryClinton is done. #Wikileaks.” WikiLeaks’ drip-drip-drip of DNC documents continues through the election, and so do Roger Stone’s direct communications with WikiLeaks.

BUSTED!

On JAN. 3, 2017, the CIA, FBI and NSA release their unclassified report, concluding unanimously, “Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election.” The three intelligence agencies agree that “the Russian government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible.”

The report also states that WikiLeaks had been Russia’s conduit for the effort, writing, “We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence (General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.”

MARCH 22, 2018: The Daily Beast reported how Guccifer 2.0 blew its cover to reveal the Russian behind the curtain.

===============

So during his campaign Trump publicly pleads with Russia to intervene by hacking Democrat's emails. Russia complied with the request or they were already doing it and Trump knew. Either way the coincidence is too much to ignore and constitutes evidence of collusion no matter how you slice it. Trump put himself out there in the public spectacle because he was too stupid to understand that this was illegal.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 12:13 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 6:50 am
Posts: 11169
Location: Your mother's purse
"We have found no evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians.
- House Intelligence Committee, Majority Staff

Every good joke has a setup and a punchline,
first the setup;

Hawkeye wrote:
You said there was no evidence of collusion. You're easily refuted.

Hawkeye wrote:
Hawkeye refutes ... by detailing a list of clear evidence for collusion ...

Hawkeye wrote:
the mountain of evidence


and then the inevitable, and hilarious sidestep punchline

Hawkeye wrote:
Whether we can prove definitively that actual collusion happened is another question

:lol: :lol: :lol:

If you have actual evidence of Trump colluding with Russia, then present it...to date you have only presented circumstances that are inconclusive (aka not evidence OF anything).
For example.
For example.


Truth is, nay, Reality is that you, and that embarrassed Schiff, burned all that hair for no good reason.
“We have found no evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians.”
(but the good news is that they absolved Hillary Clinton as well, so there ya go).


“The collusion issue, we found no evidence of it. The Democrats think they have. They’ve not shared that with us, if they have. I’ve shared all of my evidence we’ve got with them, but if they’ve got evidence of collusion, they haven’t shared it with us.”

maybe it is not just the simple notion of "evidence" that you are struggling with but also the more grown-up definition of "collusion".
Good luck with all of that there hop-along.

_________________
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Report: More Attempted Collusion
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2018 3:16 am 
Bishop

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 5:45 pm
Posts: 487
subgenius wrote:
"We have found no evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians.
- House Intelligence Committee, Majority Staff


Oh, so because the Republican Peanut Gallery said so...

A partisan report from Trump's biggest defenders? This coming from a group of Republican shills who in the same report said Russia didn't intervene to get Trump elected, contrary to what all our intelligence agencies concluded. So there goes any credibility out the window right there. This coming from David Nunes, the same despicable idiot who lied about FBI cell phone texts proving a deep state conspiracy, and the same idiot who is now lying about a spy in the Trump campaign and the same idiot who just forced the Justice dept to disclose to Trump and his attorney the details about the FBI's informant against him. And about that same committee:

Quote:
Democrats on the Republican-controlled committee will likely issue a competing report, CNN reported.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the highest-ranking Democrat on the committee, told reporters last month that there is “ample evidence” of Trump’s campaign colluding with Russia. He blasted the committee’s Republican majority for ending the investigation.

“The Majority was not willing to to pursue the facts wherever they would lead, would prove afraid to compel witnesses like [former White House chief strategist] Steve Bannon, [former White House communications director] Hope Hicks, [Attorney General] Jeff Sessions, Donald Trump Jr., [former campaign manager] Corey Lewandowski and so many others to answer questions relevant to our investigation,” Schiff said in a scathing response.


subgenius wrote:
and then the inevitable, and hilarious sidestep punchline


Again, you don't understand the difference between proof and evidence.

subgenius wrote:
If you have actual evidence of Trump colluding with Russia, then present it...to date you have only presented circumstances that are inconclusive (aka not evidence OF anything).


Again, you're too stupid to understand what evidence means.

Quote:


A piece from a Right Wing shill from over a year ago is the best you got? And another piece arguing the Clintons colluded with Russia? Seriously?

Yeah, just give up already. I mean, you already have really.

In more recent news, we discover that Roger Stone lied to the House Intelligence Committee last year when he testified that he only “wanted confirmation” that Assange had information about Hillary.

Quote:
But according to a series of emails The Wall Street Journal reviewed for its Thursday article, Stone did more than ask for confirmation. In September 2016, he apparently badgered radio personality Randy Credico to press Assange for emails related to Clinton’s alleged role in disrupting a purported Libyan peace deal while she was secretary of state.

Credico reportedly emailed back that Stone should check the WikiLeaks website for the information he wanted, since WikiLeaks had already posted the hacked DNC emails that July. According to the Journal, Stone responded: “Why do we assume WikiLeaks has released everything they have???”

Credico reportedly wrote to Stone that the Libya information would likely be in a “batch probably coming out in the next drop,” presumably meaning in the next set of hacked emails WikiLeaks published.

“I can’t ask them favors every other day,” Credico complained, according to the Journal. “I asked one of his lawyers ... they have major legal headaches ... relax.”

Stone became so insistent that Credico told the Journal that he “got tired” of Stone “bothering” him. Credico said he didn’t even pass along Stone’s message to Assange, whom he had interviewed for his radio program, but still told Stone that he had.

Stone tweeted during the election that he had a “back channel” to Assange, which could have meant Credico. He soon deleted the tweet.


So much lying to go along with so much innocence. Only in the world of the 100% duped does this constitute "no evidence."

So a quick run down:

1. We have Trump publicly encouraging Russia to engage in illegal espionage against the United States for the sole purpose of getting dirt on Hillary Clinton.

2. Shortly after we find out that Russia did that exact thing by hacking her emails.

3. Trump's advisor was in constant contact with the source leaking those emails to the public, knowing full well they derived from Russia.

4. Trump's campaign reps met with Russians and emails prove it was for the sole purpose of obtaining dirt on Hillary. This proves attempted collusion at the very least.

But to morons like you, there's no evidence of actual collusion.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group